Managerial Stock Ownership and the Maturity Structure of Corporate Debt

This study documents that managerial stock ownership plays an important role in determining corporate debt maturity. Controlling for previously identified determinants of debt maturity and modeling leverage and debt maturity as jointly endogenous, we document a significant and robust inverse relation between managerial stock ownership and corporate debt maturity. We also show that managerial stock ownership influences the relation between credit quality and debt maturity and between growth opportunities and debt maturity.     

Labor protection and corporate Debt maturity: International evidence

This paper investigates the impact of labor protection on corporate debt maturity structure. We hypothesize that stronger labor protection is conducive to a greater use of short-term debt maturity by firms. Using various country-level indicators as measures of labor protection, and a sample of 114,594 firm-years from 43 countries over the 1990–2010 period, we document robust evidence that firms located in countries where labor enjoys a strong protection tend to borrow more short-term. Our analysis suggests that labor protection is an important institutional factor that plays a role in determining the maturity structure of corporate debt over-and-above economic, legal, and political factors identified in prior research.     

Tax avoidance, cost of debt and shareholder activism: Evidence from Korea

This paper examines the impact of tax avoidance on the cost of debt and its interaction effect with shareholder activism. Using Korean firms, I find a negative relationship between tax avoidance and the cost of debt, supporting the trade-off theory. Further tests reveal that the negative relationship becomes stronger when the level of institutional ownership is high. It becomes even stronger after 1998, when the shareholder rights of institutional investors were strengthened. It suggests that the managerial opportunism theory has an additional explanation for tax avoidance activities. My findings indicate that tax avoidance reduces the cost of debt through trade-offs and creates a managerial rent diversion, which is mitigated in firms with larger institutional holdings.     

Who monitors opaque borrowers? Debt specialisation,institutional ownership,and information opacity

In this study, we suggest that the level of information opaqueness determines the propensity of publicly listed firms to have debt financing from only a few debt types (i.e., debt specialisation). Using accruals quality as a proxy for information opaqueness, we find that the degree of debt specialisation is lower for firms with high-quality accruals. This result is consistent with the notion that information collection and monitoring costs are higher for firms that have higher informational opacity, explaining the tendency towards debt specialisation. We further argue that creditors need not monitor borrowers so closely when they are monitored by institutional owners. The empirical findings support this argument and show that firms with more stable institutional ownership are likely to have less specialised debt types. The empirical evidence is also consistent with the expectation that stable institutional ownership is likely to reduce the demand for monitoring over accruals management. Using S&P 500 membership as an exogenous event driving institutional ownership changes, we further document that debt specialisation is decreasing in accruals quality when institutional investors are expected to have an influence.     

Institutional ownership and credit spreads: An information asymmetry perspective

Recent literature has documented a link between institutional equity ownership (IO) and cost of debt capital, and interpreted it as a corporate governance effect. However, institutional equity investors may also affect cost of debt through their influence on information asymmetry condition of firms. To distinguish between the two effects, we break down institutional investors into different groups: transient institutional investors (TRA who are sensitive to information asymmetry but unlikely to participate in corporate governance, and the dedicated ones (DED) who act oppositely. Based on a most up-to-date and comprehensive bond data spanning the past 20 years, we find that credit spreads narrow (widen) with an increase in equity ownership by TRA (DED). The effects are most prominent among short-term bonds, bonds with lower ratings, higher leverage and higher volatilities. The results persist after controlling for potential endogeneity and other information asymmetry measures, and are unlikely due to an asset substitution effect. Overall, our findings provide strong support for the effect of information asymmetry on credit spread, and highlight the importance of distinguishing various types of institutional investors.     

REIT Debt Pricing and Ownership Structure

The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics - We show that ownership by institutional investors with increased incentives to monitor decreases the cost of both public and private debt in the...     

Board quality and the cost of debt capital: The case of bank loans

We analyze the relation between comprehensive measures of board quality and the cost as well as the non-price terms of bank loans. We show that firms that have higher quality boards with a greater advisory presence borrow at lower interest rates. This relation exists even after controlling for ownership structure, CEO compensation policy, and shareholder protection, as well as the size and financial characteristics of the borrower and of the loan. We also show evidence that board quality and other governance characteristics influence the likelihood that loans have covenant requirements, but the relations differ by covenant type. When we combine the direct and indirect costs of bank loans we find that firms with large, independent, experienced, and diverse boards and lower institutional ownership borrow more cheaply. Overall, the evidence indicates that board quality impacts the cost of bank debt.     

Does institutional ownership increase stock return volatility? Evidence from Vietnam

The literature on institutional ownership and stock return volatility often ignores small emerging countries. However, this issue is more profound, due to the large size of institutional investors and small stock market size, in emerging equity markets. This paper examines the effects of the institutional ownership on the firm-level volatility of stock returns in Vietnam. Our data cover most of non-financial firms listed on the Ho Chi Minh City stock exchange for the period 2006–2012. Employing different analysis techniques for panel data and controlling for possible endogeneity problems, our empirical results suggest that institutional investors stabilize the stock return volatility. Moreover, we document that: i) the stabilizing effect of institutional investor ownership is higher in dividend paying firms, and ii) if firms are paying out more dividends, this stabilizing effect is greater. Our results outline the important role of institutional investors in maintaining the stability in emerging stock markets.     

Capital market pressure,real earnings management,and institutional ownership stability - Evidence from Poland

This study investigates whether and how institutional ownership stability influences real earnings management. We find that institutional investors holding stable equity stakes play an important monitoring role in reducing real earnings management by managers pressured by capital market forces to “meet or beat” earnings targets. We also document no relationship between institutional ownership stability and real earnings management in companies with entrenched managers protected from capital market pressure by a dual-class ownership structure. Our findings of the negative association between real earnings management and institutional ownership stability also indicate that firms with more stable ownership are engaged in lesser sales manipulation and overproduction. In addition, we reveal that pressureresistant institutions (pension funds and mutual funds) that reduce real earnings management are an essential part of the external governance mechanism in an emerging economy.     

State ownership and the cost of debt: Evidence from corporate bond issuances in China

Corporate credit risk can be reduced through implicit government guarantees. State-owned enterprises (SOEs) in China provide a distinctive setting to investigate government roles in corporate debt financing. We find that non-SOEs’ corporate bond issuance costs are significantly higher than those of SOEs. We also observe relatively lower bond issuance costs for firms controlled by the central government (CSOEs) than those controlled by local governments (LSOEs). In addition, we demonstrate that compared with SOEs, non-SOEs’ financial constraints are mitigated to a larger extent after the bond issuances. Overall, we show that state ownership plays an important role in determining corporate bond issuance costs.     

Distribution of institutional ownership and corporate firm performance

We investigate the association between corporate firm performance and the level and stability of institutional ownership within a simultaneous equation model. Our main ownership stability measures include ownership persistence and the time-lengths over which investors hold non-zero shares or maintain their shareholding. We find that there is a positive relationship between firm performance and institutional ownership stability, accounting for the shareholding proportion. This relationship is robust to the employment of ownership turnover measures used in the literature and consistent with the view that stable institutional investors play an effective role in monitoring. When we disaggregate institutional investors into pressure-insensitive and pressure-sensitive categories, we find that stable shareholding of each group has a positive impact on performance, with the first group exerting a larger effect. The channels of the effect include, but are not limited to, decreased information asymmetry and increased incentive-based compensation.     

The Effects of Relative Changes in CEO Equity Incentives on the Cost of Corporate Debt

We examine how effort and risk incentives embedded in CEO equity incentives are related to the cost of debt and the role credit worthiness plays in this relationship. Our empirical approach addresses a number of unanswered questions in the literature by examining the sources and effects of co‐movements in CEO incentives, whether the proportionality of these movements is rationally priced, and whether the effects are concentrated among bonds with greater likelihood of default. Our findings confirm that effort and risk incentives are rationally priced by bond market participants. We also show that significant cross‐sectional effects are more pronounced for speculative bonds, implying that previously documented links between equity incentives and the cost of debt may not be generalizable to all debt issues.     

Founding family ownership and the agency cost of debt

We investigate the impact of founding family ownership structure on the agency cost of debt. We find that founding family ownership is common in large, publicly traded firms and is related, both statistically and economically, to a lower cost of debt financing. Our results are consistent with the idea that founding family firms have incentive structures that result in fewer agency conflicts between equity and debt claimants. This suggests that bond holders view founding family ownership as an organizational structure that better protects their interests.     

Institutional ownership and commonality in liquidity

We investigate the relation between institutional ownership and commonality in liquidity and whether this relation differs across country-level institutional and information environments. Using a comprehensive dataset for firms across 40 countries for the period between 2000 and 2016, we find that institutional ownership is negatively associated with stock liquidity commonality. In addition, a firm’s information environment plays the moderating role in the relation between institutional ownership and commonality in stock liquidity. Importantly, we document that the negative association between institutional ownership and liquidity commonality is stronger for firms in countries with weak institutional characteristics or less transparent information environments. Our findings provide additional insights into the role of institutional investors as a demand-side factor of liquidity commonality in international financial markets.     

Leverage-based index revisions: The case of Dow Jones Islamic Market World Index

US firms added to the Dow Jones Islamic Market World Index, a leverage-based index, witness permanent positive price and liquidity effects, whereas excluded firms sustain negative price and liquidity effects but no decrease in the investor awareness. Included/excluded firms experience a significant drop/no change in the cost of equity. Among the deleted firms, those with an increase in debt level bear a more severe decrease in liquidity and institutional ownership, and an increased cost of equity than those firms without an increase in debt use. Conveying private information on changes in a firm's corporate strategy and operating environment, revisions by a leverage-based index are different from those by size-based indexes.     

Corporate social responsibility and inside debt: The long game

We examine the effect of CEO inside debt on corporate social responsibility (CSR). We document a positive relation between CEO inside debt and CSR. This positive relation is attenuated not only when firms face high risk, but also when firms have high short-term institutional ownership. Our evidence supports the view that CEOs with large inside debt holdings are more concerned about firm sustainability and, are therefore more likely to prefer CSR for long-term firm benefits, i.e., the long game. We also find that CSR and CEO inside debt jointly exert a significantly positive impact on long-run stock performance, particularly in the presence of a low level of short-term institutional holdings. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of aligning institutional investor preferences with CEO incentives in order to maximize shareholder benefits from CSR investment.     

Do shareholder protection and creditor rights have distinct effects on the association between debt maturity and ownership structure?

This study examines the effects of the firm's ownership concentration and its institutional environment on corporate debt maturity choices. As ownership concentration and debt maturity are alternative governance mechanisms, we theorize and investigate whether their association is influenced by country-level governance factors that enhance outside monitoring by minority shareholders and debtholders. Our investigation is based on a dataset of 50,599 firm-year observations from 38 countries. We use a propensity-score matching approach and find that the effect of ownership concentration on debt maturity is conditional to country-level governance attributes. Ownership concentration has a negative effect on debt maturity in countries where both shareholder protection and creditor rights are weak. Ownership concentration, however, tends to lengthen debt maturity as protection increases, and this positive effect on the length of debt maturity is stronger in countries enhancing protection towards debtholders (instead of shareholders). We also explore other characteristics of ownership structure, such as the identity and presence of controlling shareholders. These results corroborate the view that entrenched shareholders may use debt maturity opportunistically. Our study provides new insights into the interplay between firm- and country-level governance mechanisms and a deeper understanding of cross-country differences in the association between ownership structure and debt financing.     

Group Affiliation and Ownership Concentration as Determinants of Capital Structure Decisions: Contextualizing the Facts for an Emerging Economy

This study considers the firm’s affiliation with business groups and the ownership structure as determinants of leverage decisions in Chilean firms. The major findings show that group-affiliated firms take advantage of internal capital markets and transactions with related parties (e.g., low transference price or loans at competitive interest rates) that reduces the demand for external debt. Majority shareholders in affiliated firms behave as controllers of managers, on the one hand, and avoid the supervisory role of debt, on the other hand. In stand-alone firms, supervision led by majority shareholders is complemented by the monitoring role of debt through higher levels of leverage. We conclude that further developments in capital structure theories adjusted to the particularities of the different institutional contexts are needed.     

Institutional Ownership,Diversification, and Riskiness of Bank Holding Companies

We examine the relationship among the level and stability of institutional ownership, diversification, and riskiness of publicly traded bank holding companies. We find that large and stable institutional ownership is associated with a higher (lower) level of geographic, revenue, and nontraditional banking (asset) diversification and lower risk, suggesting that institutional investors are prudent and favor risk‐reducing diversification strategies. The association between institutional ownership level and diversification is more pronounced under deregulation and during the crisis, suggesting a substitution effect between regulation and market discipline, and a greater level of monitoring and/or advising by institutional investors during the crisis, respectively.     

Managerial Ownership and Agency Conflicts: A Nonlinear Simultaneous Equation Analysis of Managerial Ownership, Risk Taking, Debt Policy, and Dividend Policy

This paper uses a nonlinear simultaneous equation methodology to examine how managerial ownership relates to risk taking, debt policy, and dividend policy. The results have implications for our understanding of agency costs. We find risk to be a significant and positive determinant of the level of managerial ownership while managerial ownership is also a significant and positive determinant of the level of risk. The result supports the argument that managerial ownership helps to resolve the agency conflicts between external stockholders and managers but at the expense of exacerbating the agency conflict between stockholders and bondholders. We further observe evidence of substitution-monitoring effects between managerial ownership and debt policy, between managerial ownership and dividend policy, and between managerial ownership and institutional ownership.