DISAPPEARING DIVIDENDS: CHANGING FIRM CHARACTERISTICS OR LOWER PROPENSITY TO PAY?

The proportion of U.S. firms paying dividends drops sharply during the 1980s and 1990s. Among NYSE, AMEX, and Nasdaq firms, the proportion of dividend payers falls from 66.5% in 1978 to only 20.8% in 1999. The decline is due in part to an avalanche of new listings that tilts the population of publicly traded firms toward small firms with low profitability and strong growth opportunities—the timeworn characteristics of firms that typically do not pay dividends. But this is not the whole story. The authors' more striking finding is that, no matter what their characteristics, firms in general have become less likely to pay dividends.
The authors use two different methods to disentangle the effects of changing firm characteristics and changing propensity to pay on the percent of dividend payers. They find that, of the total decline in the proportion of dividend payers since 1978, roughly one-third is due to the changing characteristics of publicly traded firms and two-thirds is due to a reduced propensity to pay dividends. This lower propensity to pay is quite general—dividends have become less common among even large, profitable firms.
Share repurchases jump in the 1980s, and the authors investigate whether repurchases contribute to the declining incidence of dividend payments. It turns out that repurchases are mainly the province of dividend payers, thus leaving the decline in the percent of payers largely unexplained. Instead, the primary effect of repurchases is to increase the already high payouts of cash dividend payers.     

Dividends and share repurchases in the European Union

We examine cash dividends and share repurchases from 1989 to 2005 in the 15 nations that were members of the European Union before May 2004. As in the United States, the fraction of European firms paying dividends declines, while total real dividends paid increase and share repurchases surge. We also show that financial reporting frequency is associated with higher payout, and that privatized companies account for almost one-quarter of total cash dividends and share repurchases. Our regression analyses indicate that increasing fractions of retained earnings to equity do not increase the likelihood of cash payouts, whereas company age does.     

Dividends, Share Repurchases, and the Substitution Hypothesis

We show that repurchases have not only became an important form of payout for U.S. corporations, but also that firms finance their share repurchases with funds that otherwise would have been used to increase dividends. We find that young firms have a higher propensity to pay cash through repurchases than they did in the past and that repurchases have become the preferred form of initiating a cash payout. Although large, established firms have generally not cut their dividends, they also show a higher propensity to pay out cash through repurchases. These findings indicate that firms have gradually substituted repurchases for dividends. Our results also suggest that before 1983, regulatory constraints inhibited firms from aggressively repurchasing shares.     

Payout flexibility and capital expenditure

Over the past two decades or so, repurchases have become an appealing method for disbursing cash to shareholders compared to the traditional dividends. Managerial perception as well as empirical evidence suggests that repurchases are inherently more flexible than dividends, which may account for their increasing popularity. The rigidity of dividends and the apparent flexibility of share repurchases could impact firm investments. Firms may forego profitable investment opportunities to maintain their dividend levels, while repurchases could be easily scaled back to fund profitable investment projects without fear of an adverse market reaction. We test the flexibility hypothesis of repurchases by regressing capital expenditures on repurchases and dividends in addition to other control variables. Consistent with our hypotheses, we find an inverse relationship between capital expenditures and repurchases but an insignificant relationship with dividends. Further, we find that the flexibility associated with repurchases is especially evident for firms that are financially constrained, and during the recent financial crisis period when external capital constraints were severe. Finally, we find that flexibility of repurchases with respect to capital expenditures is stronger in the more recent time period during which regulatory changes made repurchases more attractive as a mechanism to disburse cash back to shareholders.     

What do dividends tell us about earnings quality?

Over the past 30 years, there have been significant changes in the distribution of earnings—cross-sectional variation has increased, with increasing left skewness—as well as in corporate payout policy, with many fewer firms paying dividends and the emergence of stock repurchases. We investigate whether the informativeness of payout policy with respect to earnings quality changes over this period. We find that the reported earnings of dividend-paying firms are more persistent than those of other firms and that this relation is remarkably stable over time. We also find that dividend payers are less likely to report losses and those losses that they do report tend to be transitory losses driven by special items. These results do not hold as strongly for stock repurchases, consistent with them representing less of a commitment than dividends.     

The Dividend Substitution Hypothesis: Australian Evidence

In a perfect capital market firms are indifferent to either dividends or repurchases as payout mechanisms, suggesting that the two payout methods should be perfect substitutes. Empirical research at the single country level, as well as cross country studies, provide evidence that dividends and repurchases act as substitutes (the dividend substitution hypothesis), and that the tax treatment of dividends versus capital gains affects this relation. Australia, which operates under a full dividend imputation system, has two types of repurchases: on‐ and off‐market. On‐market repurchases are taxed as capital gains while off‐market repurchases comprise a large dividend component carrying valuable tax credits. Australia thus provides a natural setting to investigate how the tax treatment of proceeds affects the dividend substitution hypothesis. Dividend substitution is found to exist for on‐market repurchases but not for off‐market repurchases, thus providing further support for the idea that the tax treatment of proceeds affects the substitutability of repurchases and dividends.     

Repurchase premia as a reason for dividends: a dynamic model of corporate payout policies

We propose that it is precisely because firms' repurchases oftheir own stock through tender offers are associated with largestock-price increases that repurchases are unattractive as ameans o distributing cash. As a result, firms distribute somecash in the form of dividends - despite the tax disadvantage- and carry the rest to future periods. However, when theirstock is sufficiently undervalued, firms distribute all accumulatedcash through stock repurchases. We show that dividends are smoothedand are positively related both to earnings innovations andto previous period's dividends. Also, the stock-price reactionto a repurchase announcement, of a given size, is increasingin the previous period's dividends.     

Institutional Holdings and Payout Policy

We examine the relation between institutional holdings and payout policy in U.S. public firms. We find that payout policy affects institutional holdings. Institutions avoid firms that do not pay dividends. However, among dividend‐paying firms they prefer firms that pay fewer dividends. Our evidence indicates that institutions prefer firms that repurchase shares, and regular repurchasers over nonregular repurchasers. Higher institutional holdings or a concentration of holdings do not cause firms to increase their dividends, their repurchases, or their total payout. Our results do not support models that predict that high dividends attract institutional clientele, or models that predict that institutions cause firms to increase payout.     

Why companies do not pay cash dividends: The Turkish experience

This study uses a survey approach to examine the views of corporate managers of non-dividend-paying firms listed on the Borsa Istanbul (BIST) in order to identify the factors leading to the decision not to pay cash dividends in Turkey. Our survey results show that cash constraints, growth opportunities, low profitability and earnings, and the cost of raising external funds (debt) are the major reasons inducing BIST firms not to pay dividends. Additionally, non-dividend-paying firms consider their shareholder preferences when setting a policy of paying no cash dividends. Yet, they neither view taxes as an important factor for paying no dividends nor perceive that stock repurchases are substitutes for cash dividends. Statistical analysis using secondary data of publicly-traded BIST firms reveals whether the actual corporate actions are consistent with the managerial views revealed by our survey research. These tests show that growth opportunities and debt level have a negative effect on the dividend payment decisions of BIST firms. Also, large blockholders and the existence of multiple large shareholders reduce the likelihood and intensity of paying a cash dividend in the Turkish market. Overall, the evidence suggests that non-dividend-paying companies are likely to be smaller in size, relatively younger (in the earlier stage of their life cycle) with high-growth opportunities or with a low level of profitability (or even loss) and small (negative) earnings. By contrast, highly-profitable, mature and large-size corporations are more likely to pay cash dividends.     

The evolving relation between earnings,dividends, and stock repurchases

This paper examines how the relation between earnings and payout policy has evolved over the last three decades. Three principal groups of payers have emerged: firms that pay dividends and make regular repurchases, firms that make regular repurchases, and firms that make occasional repurchases. Firms that only pay dividends are largely extinct. Repurchases are increasingly used in place of dividends, even for firms that continue to pay dividends. While other factors help explain the timing of repurchases, the overall level of repurchases is fundamentally determined by earnings. The results suggest that repurchases are now the dominant form of payout.     

Share repurchases,catering, and dividend substitution

We first extend Baker and Wurgler's (2004a) catering theory of dividends to share repurchases. Consistent with the notion that firms cater to investor demand for share repurchases, we report evidence that the market's time-varying repurchase premium positively affects firms' choice to repurchase shares. Next, we use the catering behavior as a novel framework for testing the dividend substitution hypothesis. Consistent with the notion that managers consider dividends and share repurchases to be substitute payout mechanisms, we find that the dividend premium negatively affects the repurchase choice, whereas the repurchase premium negatively affects the choice to pay dividends.     

Controlling shareholders’ opportunistic use of share repurchases

This study examines how share repurchase and dividend policies are influenced by controlling shareholders in an emerging market. We maintain that the controlling shareholders can utilize share repurchase opportunistically, particularly when they exercise voting rights in excess of cash-flow rights. The evidence of Korean firms suggests that the wedge between the voting rights and cash-flow rights positively affects share repurchases but negatively affects cash dividends. We also find that share repurchases are not always supported by operating performances. The results indicate that firms may utilize share repurchases as a means to pursue private benefits of the controlling shareholders. We also document that share repurchases do not substitute for cash dividends, suggesting that share repurchases are not genuine distributions. Furthermore, we find that the wedge of share repurchases reduces firm value. Overall, our results indicate that the controlling shareholders of Korean firms use share repurchases opportunistically rather than strategically.     

Valuation with share repurchases and personal taxes

We derive a consistent valuation approach that integrates the interdependent effects of cash dividends, share repurchases and active debt management while considering personal taxes. The valuation approach is based on the assumption that a predetermined proportion of the flow to equity is used for share repurchases instead of cash dividends. Additionally, we examine the effects of share repurchases on the cost of equity by deriving appropriate adjustment formulae. Furthermore, we run simulations to investigate the valuation differences caused by the distribution of excess cash via cash dividends or share repurchases. The results show that share repurchases have a significant positive effect on equity market value.     

Dividends and share repurchases during the COVID-19 economic crisis

In this article, we examine dividends and share repurchases of S&P 1500 firms during the COVID-19 crisis characterized by the stock market crash and a relatively quick stock price recovery propelled by technology stocks. We find that the great majority of firms either maintain or increase the level of dividends during the crisis period. Yet, the relation between the dividend payout and reported earnings is negative and significant. This relation also holds for other types of payouts, including share repurchases and special dividends. Moreover, we find that both forecasted and realized earnings of up to 1 year into the future are negatively associated with current dividends, implying that existing payout policies are unsustainable in the longer term. Surprisingly, the difference-in-differences test shows that firms strongly affected by the COVID-19 crisis have higher dividend payouts (relative to net earnings) compared to unaffected firms. The same test indicates that strongly affected firms significantly reduce repurchases.     

Cost Structure and Payout Policy

I investigate the effects of firms’ proportion of fixed and variable costs on their payout policy and find that firms with higher fixed costs have significantly higher volatility in their future cash flows and more variable future operating incomes. These firms pay a lower fraction of their operating income in dividends and share repurchases. Finally, these firms return higher fractions of their payouts via share repurchases because this method offers greater flexibility. The results are robust to several alternate specifications and firm‐level controls, and show that firms’ cost structures play a significant role in payout policy choices.     

Corporate payout policy in dual-class firms

We examine corporate payout policy in dual-class firms. The expropriation hypothesis predicts that dual-class firms pay out less to shareholders because entrenched managers want to maximize the value of assets under control and the associated private benefits. The pre-commitment hypothesis predicts that dual-class firms pay out more to shareholders because firms use corporate payouts as a pre-commitment device to mitigate agency costs. Our results support the pre-commitment hypothesis. Dual-class firms have higher cash dividend payments and total payouts, and they use more regular cash dividends rather than special dividends or repurchases, compared to their propensity-matched single-class firms. Dual-class firms with severe free cash flow-related agency problems and few growth opportunities rely even more on corporate payouts as a pre-commitment mechanism. We also rule out the alternative explanation that dual-class firms pay out more because super-voting shareholders lack the ability to generate home-made dividends by selling shares since super-voting shares are often non-tradable or very illiquid.     

Managerial motivation and timing of open market share repurchases

There are two major mechanisms by which managers distribute cash to shareholders: through dividends and share repurchases. Historically, dividends have been the preferred method, but in recent years, share repurchases have become more popular, with more firms using repurchases than dividends to distribute cash. During the sample period of 2004–2006, 6.5 billion shares were repurchased for a total dollar volume amount of $222 billion. Using a unique dataset on actual monthly share repurchases, this paper investigates when and why managers repurchase shares in the open market. The paper finds evidence that firms which make repurchases are jointly timing their repurchases to perceived undervaluation and the presence of discretionary cash flow. In addition, the paper finds evidence which supports that (1) firms in competitive industries tend to repurchase less, (2) firms tend to substitute repurchases for anti-takeover provision adoption, and (3) firms attempt to manage earnings upward through the use of repurchases.     

Patterns in payout policy and payout channel choice

We study the decision to distribute funds as well as the choice of the payout channel (i.e. dividends, repurchases, or both). Our analysis of the payout policy of UK firms demonstrates that the importance of share repurchases is increasing, but dividends still constitute a vast proportion of the total payout. We document that there is a relation between the presence of blockholders and the choice of the payout channel. We find that payout decisions are influenced by directors’ liquidity needs but are not consistent with the agency theory of payout. We also reject the tax-clientele explanation for payout choices.     

Yes, dividends are disappearing: Worldwide evidence

This study examines the patterns in payout policies worldwide. Utilizing data from a sample of more than 17,000 companies from 33 different countries, we find evidence in support of a significant worldwide decline in the propensity to pay dividends. Most of the decline is due to the payout policies of smaller and less profitable firms with comparatively more investment opportunities. We find that larger firms, those with higher profitability, and firms with low growth opportunities have a greater propensity to pay dividends. The proportion of dividend payers varies substantially across industries as well. However, the proportion of firms paying dividends has declined over time, even after firms’ characteristics have been controlled for. Moreover, aggregate dividends are highly concentrated in that they are paid only by a small group of firms. Our findings indicate that there has been a significant decline in the average dividend payout ratios over the years. The decline in the mean dividend payout ratios as well as the proportion of payers is much more pronounced in civil law countries.