Boards,takeover protection,and real earnings management

We investigate the effect of board governance and takeover protection on real earnings management. Four types of real earnings management are considered: sales manipulation, overproduction, the abnormal reduction of research and development (R&D) expenses, and the abnormal reduction of other discretionary expenditures. Using panel data from US public firms in the post-Sarbanes–Oxley Act period, we find that the level of real earnings management (sales manipulation, abnormal declines in R&D expenses, and other discretionary expenses) increases with better board governance and decreases with higher takeover protection. These two governance factors generally have no significant effect on overproduction. We further find that firms substitute accrual-based earnings management with sales manipulation and abnormal cuts in discretionary expenses, and the substitution effect is more pronounced in firms with stronger board governance. Overall, our findings indicate that the level of real earnings management is higher when a firm is faced with tough board monitoring, and that takeover protection may reduce managerial incentives for real earnings management.     

Pension return assumptions and shareholder-employee risk-shifting

Firm managers of defined-benefit (DB) pension plan sponsors reveal their primary motives — risk-shifting or risk-management — through their assumed expected rates of return (ERRs) on the plan assets. Managers with risk-shifting motives choose high ERRs to exploit flexible internal financing from employees via pension underfunding. Those with risk-management motives choose low ERRs to reduce future cash-flow uncertainty by improving the pension funding status. We examine if ERRs predict the firms’ future cash-flow allocation between pension funding and corporate investments, in a Japanese sample that mitigates the selection bias concern for US DB plan sponsors. Using dynamic panel regressions that control for lagged dependent variables, firms’ business prospects, and unobserved fixed effects, we show that higher ERRs precede higher capital investments, R&D expenses, and net pension obligations while revealing managerial aggression, especially among firms with high external financing costs. Higher ERRs predict higher market-to-book ratios for the firms with larger R&Ds and/or underfunding, suggesting that the risk-shifting channel of internal financing with high ERRs can help alleviate underinvestment problems.     

The effect of capital market pressures on the association between R&;D spending and CEO option compensation

We examine the effect of capital market pressures for meeting earnings benchmarks on the relationship between R&D spending and CEO option compensation. We consider a particular scenario when firms face small earnings declines but could opportunistically reduce R&D spending to increase reported earnings. We find that firms with income reporting concerns punish their CEOs with lower option compensation when R&D spending increases but reported earnings decreases. Further, for firms with income reporting concerns, we find that the penalty for increasing R&D is greater when the firms frequently miss quarterly earnings benchmarks in the year. Overall, our findings suggest that the adverse consequence on CEO options encourages short-run compensation-motivated actions to eliminate or postpone R&D projects with positive net present values.     

R&D investment and distress risk

This paper proposes that besides volatility, R&D can increase firms' distress risk through another channel. Unlike capital investment, R&D is more inflexible and subject to high adjustment costs. Moreover, R&D intensive firms face severe financial constraints and are more likely to suspend/discontinue R&D projects. Therefore, firms' distress risk increases with their R&D intensity. Using a large panel of US companies over the 1980 to 2011 period, I find a robust empirical relation between R&D and distress risk, primarily among financially constrained firms. Moreover, the effect of R&D on distress risk is magnified during economic downturns. I also find that firms that have been previously successful in R&D or firms with high analyst coverage can mitigate the relationship between R&D and distress risk.     

Non‐GAAP Earnings Disclosure in Loss Firms

This study examines the incremental information in loss firms’ non‐GAAP earnings disclosures relative to GAAP earnings. Using a large sample obtained through textual analysis and hand‐collection, we posit and find that loss firms’ non‐GAAP earnings exclusions offset the low informativeness of GAAP losses for forecasting and valuation. Loss firms’ non‐GAAP earnings are highly predictive of future performance and are valued by investors, while the expenses excluded from GAAP earnings are not. Additional tests suggest that loss firms disclosing non‐GAAP profits have significantly better future performance than GAAP‐only loss firms and are not overvalued by investors. Comparing non‐GAAP earnings of profitable firms to those of loss firms, we find that loss firms’ non‐GAAP metrics are significantly more predictive and less strategic. We conclude that non‐GAAP earnings disclosures are particularly informative about loss firms and help investors disaggregate losses into components that have differential implications for forecasting and valuation.     

The effects of firm-initiated clawback provisions on bank loan contracting

Although firm-initiated clawbacks reduce accounting manipulation, they also induce managers to engage in suboptimal activities (e.g., reduce research and development (R&D) expenses) to achieve earnings targets. To assess the effectiveness of clawback provisions, we examine their impact from debtholders' point of view. We find that banks use more financial covenants and performance pricing provisions in the loan contracts and decrease interest rates after firms initiate clawbacks. Moreover, we also find that loan maturity increases and loan collateral decreases subsequent to clawback adoption. Taken together, our findings indicate that firm-initiated clawback provisions enhance financial reporting quality, thereby reducing the information uncertainty that financing providers face.     

Development costs capitalization and debt financing

This study investigates debt market effects of research and development (R&D) costs capitalization, using a global sample of public bonds and private syndicated loans issued by public non‐financial firms. Firstly, we show that firms capitalize larger amounts of R&D in a year when they exhibit a propensity for issuing bonds, rather than borrowing funds privately from the syndicated loan market, in the subsequent year. Secondly, we provide evidence that capitalized R&D investments reduce the cost of debt. We infer that debt market participants are able to identify firms’ motives for R&D capitalization, as we find a reduction in the cost of debt only for those firms that do not show indications of employing R&D capitalization for earnings management reasons. Indeed, only for this sub‐sample of firms, the amount of capitalized R&D contributes positively to future earnings. We confirm that R&D capitalization is positively associated with audit fees and thus can be deemed to be a signaling device. Lastly, we find that it is the amount of R&D a firm is expected to capitalize and not the discretionary counterparts, which facilitates a firm's access to public debt markets, reduces bond and syndicated loan prices, and contributes to future benefits.     

Overvalued equity,benchmark beating and unexpected accruals

We investigate the extent to which the overvaluation hypothesis provides incentives for managers to beat earnings benchmarks, and whether this benchmark beating can be reliably interpreted as evidence of earnings management. We carefully identify firms immediately above earnings benchmarks that have a priori, overvaluation‐based incentives to achieve the benchmark. We therefore focus on benchmark‐beating observations where manipulation is most likely, providing a more powerful test of the existence of opportunistic financial reporting. Consistent with overvaluation‐related incentives encouraging earnings management, we find that overvalued firms that just exceed levels‐related earnings benchmarks have higher unexpected accruals than firms with less extreme valuations.     

A Comparative Analysis of Real and Accrual Earnings Management around Initial Public Offerings under Different Regulatory Environments

While earnings management around IPOs has been researched in a number of settings, there has been a relative absence of work that analyses the impact of the regulatory environment on such activities. We find that the regulatory environment does impact the real and accrual earnings management activities of IPO firms. Our results show that IPO firms listing on the lightly regulated UK Alternative Investment Market (AIM) have higher (lower) levels of accrual‐based and sales‐based (discretionary expenses‐based) earnings management around the IPO than firms listing on the more heavily regulated Main market in the UK.     

The relationship between R&D intensity,conservatism, and management earnings forecast issuance

R&D-intensive firms suffer from high information asymmetry and high proprietary costs and are prone to exhibit bottom-line losses given the unconditional conservative accounting treatment of R&D expenses. We examine how R&D intensity influences the issuance of management earnings forecasts (MEFs) across levels of accounting conservatism, controlling for proprietary costs and other earnings guidance determinants. We provide insights into how managers view the tradeoffs of using MEF disclosures to lower information asymmetry versus the costs of releasing proprietary information to competitors and the loss of reputational capital that could arise from providing inaccurate forecasts. We find that although R&D intensity and conditional conservatism are negatively related to the issuance of MEFs, as shown in prior research, at high levels of research intensity and the accompanying uncertainty about future payoffs, the negative association between conditional conservatism and MEF issuance is mitigated. These findings point to a role for conditional conservatism as a credibility enhancer for managers of R&D intense firms.     

Do Firms Use Time‐Vested Stock‐Based Pay to Keep Research and Development Investments Secret?

I find that executives’ unvested equity holdings are larger when executives are employed by R&D‐intensive firms in industries that rely more on secrecy to profit from R&D. Moreover, I find that this relation is more pronounced for executives with a greater ability to exploit R&D‐related information and also holds for nonexecutive employees. In addition, I find that these firms use option grants with longer vesting periods and that unvested equity holdings reduce the likelihood that their executives leave to find employment elsewhere. Overall, my findings are consistent with firms using time‐vested stock‐based pay to reduce the leakage of R&D‐related information to competitors through employee mobility.     

R&D capitalization and audit fees: Evidence from China

Our study investigates the association between capitalized R&D costs and audit fees and whether this association reflects the effect of earnings management. By exploring Chinese listed firms, we find that capitalized R&D costs are positively associated with audit fees, where such positive association holds for both the discretionary and nondiscretionary portions of capitalized R&D costs. Moreover, the positive association between the discretionary portion of capitalized R&D costs and audit fees is more pronounced for firms with stronger incentives to manipulate earnings. Overall, our findings imply that firms' reporting incentives affect how auditors react to clients' accounting choices. This in turn suggests that auditors believe some firms capitalize R&D to manipulate earnings, and the resulting earnings-management concerns lead them to charge higher fees.     

The Investment Opportunity Set and Capitalization versus Expensing Methods of Accounting Choice

This paper examines the effects of the investment opportunity set (IOS) on management's decision to capitalize or expense significant costs in two diverse settings: (1) in accounting for exploration and development (E&D) costs by firms in the oil-and-gas industry, and (2) in accounting for research and development (R&D) costs by firms (across industries) prior to 1974. We argue that the relation between the IOS and the decision to capitalize versus to expense is based upon managerial incentives to reduce the variance of accounting earnings. High-growth firms are more likely to have more variable earnings, which therefore creates greater incentives to reduce earnings variability. Because the capitalization method generally results in a lower variance of reported earnings than does the expensing method, high-growth firms are more likely to select capitalization. Our results show that, after controlling for firm size and for the indirect effects of the IOS mediated by debt contracts, high-growth firms (firms with fewer assets-in-place) are more likely than low-growth firms to select the capitalization method of accounting for E&D and R&D expenses.
JEL classification: M41; G31     

The smoothing of pension expenses: a panel analysis

The main purpose of this paper is to utilize recent developments in panel data techniques to evaluate whether the smoothing of pension expenses is neutral in its long-term effect on reported earnings. Adopting a long-term perspective, the empirical analysis also identifies sources of potential deviations. Results suggest that the current smoothing mechanism tends to induce significant biases in the recognized pension expenses. For a majority of the sample firms, the tendency is to overstate the sponsoring firms’ earnings in the long run. To a large extent, such biases reflect the combination of both ineffective amortization of the deferred gains and losses and questionable latitude in pension rate discretions.     

The impact of audit quality on real and accrual earnings management around IPOs

We examine the relation between audit quality and the earnings management activities of IPO firms. The impact of high quality auditors on real earnings management has been researched in a number of settings e.g. SEOs. However, to date, there has been no work on the effect of high quality auditors on real activities-based manipulation around IPOs. We examine UK IPOs between 1998 and 2008 and find evidence that high quality auditors constrain the use of real activities manipulation that occurs via the management of discretionary expenses. We also find evidence, consistent with prior research, that high quality auditors constrain the manipulation of discretionary accruals. Crucially, we find IPO firms audited by high quality auditors undertake sales-based manipulation in order to manage earnings upward at the end of the IPO year. The presence of high quality auditors is not, therefore, sufficient to constrain all forms of earnings management.     

Using real options theory to explain patterns in the valuation of research and development expenditures

Real options theory posits that the value of the firm is a combination of the value generated by the assets in place and the value of the option to invest in the future. It is based on the idea that many decisions are difficult to reverse, and valuing the outcome of these decisions is more complicated than estimating the present value of future cash flows. R&D activities often generate real options due to the nature of these activities, and examining the valuation of R&D expenditures through the lens of real options theory can help explain differing results documented in both the R&D and value relevance of earnings and book value literatures. Numerous studies have documented that the stock market positively values R&D expenditures; however, recent work has raised questions about whether this positive relation occurs across firms reporting both profits and losses. Consistent with real options theory, I find that the negative coefficient on the R&D expenditures of profitable firms documented by prior studies only exists for low growth firms. In addition, for all R&D firms experiencing high sales growth, the market places a lower value on assets in place and a higher value on R&D expenditures.     

R&D investments,capital expenditures,and earnings thresholds

Prior studies find that firms cut research and development (R&D) expense in response to earnings considerations. We extend this stream of research by documenting that firms narrowly achieving an earnings threshold also report unusually high capital expenditures. In addition, these firms’ total investments (R&D expense plus capital expenditures) do not vary in response to earnings thresholds, which suggests that, on average, reductions in R&D expense are offset by concurrent increases in capital expenditures. Lastly, our research design allows us to infer that the increased capital expenditures are largely R&D investments that are capitalized instead of non-R&D capital expenditures, suggesting that overall investments in R&D are relatively unchanged.     

Overvaluation and earnings management: Does the degree of overvaluation matter?

We examine whether the choice of earnings management strategies employed by managers of overvalued firms depends on the degree of market overvaluation. By distinguishing between substantially overvalued (SOV) and relatively overvalued (ROV) firms, we find that SOV firms significantly inflate earnings using both accruals-based and real earnings management. In contrast, managers of ROV firms do not engage in accruals-based earnings management and their firms’ accounts tend to report higher discretionary expenses. The reported higher discretionary expenses of ROV firms are comparable to the discretionary expenses of firms in the expanding stage of their business life cycle, a pattern consistent with ROV firms increasing discretionary expenses to finance growth and hence justify the high market valuation. Overall, we show that the existing evidence on income-increasing earnings management by overvalued firms is mainly driven by the pressure to sustain the high market valuation of firms that are substantially overvalued.     

The informativeness of analyst forecast revisions and the valuation of R&D-intensive firms

Prior studies (e.g., [McNichols and O’Brien, 1997] and [Diether et al., 2002]) find that analysts are less willing to disclose unfavorable earnings forecasts than to disclose favorable forecasts, and this tendency induces an optimistic bias in disclosed forecasts that increases with the degree of earnings uncertainty. Building on these findings, we predict that, in the context of R&D-intensive industries, there should be differential informativeness and asymmetric valuation roles for upward versus downward analyst forecast revisions. Consistent with our predictions, we find the following evidence: (i) analyst forecast revisions contain a downward bias, causing upward revisions to under-represent, whereas downward revisions to over-represent, changes in true earnings expectations, with the extent of over/under-representation greater for firms with higher R&D expenditures; (ii) upward revisions are associated with more rapid reductions in earnings uncertainties (proxied by forecast dispersions) than downward revisions, mainly for high R&D firms; and (iii) upward revisions are more effective in mitigating the return differentials between high and low R&D firms (as documented in Chan et al., 2001).     

The Association of R&D and Capital Expenditures with Subsequent Earnings Variability

Abstract:  We estimate the association of investments in R&D and in physical assets (CAPEX) with subsequent earnings variability. We estimate these relations in different time periods and across industries. We find that R&D contributes to subsequent earnings variability more than CAPEX only in relative R&D-intensive industries – industries in which R&D is relatively more intensive than physical capital. In physical assets-intensive industries, we do not find similar relations. The findings suggest that with respect to subsequent earnings variability, fundamental differences between investment information about R&D and CAPEX exist. However, they are mainly noticeable in firms that operate in relatively R&D-intensive industries. The evidence also suggests there was a shift in the relations between R&D and CAPEX over time. Our findings contribute to the debate on accounting for R&D expenditures.