Taxes,dividend yields and returns in the UK equity market

The higher rate of taxation on dividend income relative to capital gains has been offered as an explanation for the positive relation between stock returns and dividend yields among US firms. In the UK the relative tax rates are the reverse of those in the US. Thus, UK data provides an independent test of the tax-based approach to explaining the relation between stock returns and dividend yields. We find that high yielding stocks earn positive risk adjusted returns, whereas low yielding stocks earn negative risk adjusted returns. We also detect evidence of non-linearity in the performance of zero-dividend stocks. Controlling for firm size, seasonality and market risk we find a significant positive relation between dividend yields and returns. We conclude that the evidence is inconsistent with a tax-based explanation.     

Capital gains taxation and shareholder wealth in takeovers

Before December 1999, the capital gains of shareholders who sold their shares into Australian takeovers have been taxable irrespective of payment method. Subsequently, shareholders can elect to rollover capital gains in equity takeovers. We examine the effect of this change on the association between target shareholder capital gains and bidder and target firm shareholder wealth. The results indicate that prior to the regulatory change, cash consideration results in higher target shareholder returns for non‐taxation reasons. After the introduction of capital gains tax rollover relief, we find that target and acquiring firm shareholders earn lower returns when cash consideration is offered to shareholders with greater capital gains.     

Cross-sectional determinants of New Zealand share market returns

We present evidence of the cross-sectional relation between security returns, beta, firm size and book-to-market ratio over the period 1971 to 1993 on the New Zealand sharemarket. Our results suggest that the NZSE-40 market index is not a mean-variance efficient market proxy—the betas calculated with respect to it being of little use for explaining expected returns cross-sectionally. Also, there is a significant positive relation between book-to-market ratio and average return.     

IS THE BOOK‐TO‐MARKET RATIO A MEASURE OF RISK?

We develop a leverage‐based alternative to traditional asset pricing models to investigate whether the book‐to‐market ratio acts as a proxy for risk. We argue that the book‐to‐market ratio should act as a proxy because of the expected relations between (1) financial risk and measures of capital structure based on the market value of equity and (2) asset risk and measures of capital structure based on the book value of equity. We find no relation between average stock returns and the book‐to‐market ratio in all‐equity firms after controlling for firm size, and an inverse relation between average stock returns and the book‐to‐market ratio in firms with a negative book value of equity.     

Real Options,Volatility, and Stock Returns

We provide evidence that the positive relation between firm‐level stock returns and firm‐level return volatility is due to firms’ real options. Consistent with real option theory, we find that the positive volatility‐return relation is much stronger for firms with more real options and that the sensitivity of firm value to changes in volatility declines significantly after firms exercise their real options. We reconcile the evidence at the aggregate and firm levels by showing that the negative relation at the aggregate level may be due to aggregate market conditions that simultaneously affect both market returns and return volatility.     

Conditional conservatism and cost of capital

We empirically test the association between conditional conservatism and cost of equity capital. Conditional conservatism imposes stronger verification requirements for the recognition of economic gains than economic losses, resulting in earnings that reflect losses faster than gains. This asymmetric reporting of gains and losses is predicted to lower firm cost of equity capital by increasing bad news reporting precision, thereby reducing information uncertainty (Guay and Verrecchia 2007) and the volatility of future stock prices (Suijs 2008). Using standard asset-pricing tests, we find a significant negative relation between conditional conservatism and excess average stock returns over the period 1975–2003. This evidence is corroborated by further tests on the association between conditional conservatism and measures of implied cost of capital derived from analysts’ forecasts.     

On the relation between expected returns and implied cost of capital

We examine the relation between implied cost of capital and expected returns under an assumption that expected returns are stochastic, a property supported by theory and empirical evidence. We demonstrate that implied cost of capital differs from expected return, on average, by a function encompassing volatilities of, as well as correlation between, expected returns and cash flows, growth in cash flows, and leverage. These results provide alternative explanations for findings from empirical studies employing implied cost of capital on the magnitude of the market risk premium; predictability of future returns; and the relations between cost of capital and a host of firm characteristics, such as growth, leverage, idiosyncratic risk and the firm’s information environment.     

The Role of Beta and Size in the Cross-Section of European Stock Returns

This paper examines the ability of beta and size to explain cross-sectional variation in average returns in 12 European countries. We find that average stock returns are positively related to beta and negatively related to firm size. The beta premium is in part due to the fact that high beta countries outperform low beta countries. Within countries high beta stocks outperform low beta stocks only in January, not in other months. We reject the hypothesis that differences in average returns on size- and beta-sorted portfolios can be explained by market risk and exposure to the excess return of small over large stocks (SMB). Consistent with recent US evidence, we find that after controlling for size, there is no association between average returns and exposure to SMB.     

The impact of tax rate changes on intercorporate investment

We examine how tax rates impact investment by corporations in the stock market. We regress changes in intercorporate investment on changes in the various individual and corporate top statutory marginal tax rates (MTRs). We find a significant negative association between changes in individual capital gains MTRs and changes in intercorporate investment, while no such association is evident for changes in either individual ordinary or dividend MTRs. These results support the notion that corporations respond to the after-tax rate of return and/or market efficiency consequences brought about by a change in individual capital gains MTRs. We find a significant positive relation between changes in intercorporate investment and changes in corporate MTRs on ordinary income. These results are consistent with corporations scaling back expansion plans and instead investing free cash flows in equity securities as MTRs increase.     

Using Expectations to Test Asset Pricing Models

Asset pricing models generate predictions relating assets' expected rates of return and their risk attributes. Most tests of these models have employed realized rates of return as a proxy for expected return. We use analysts' expected rates of return to examine the relation between these expectations and firm attributes. By assuming that analysts' expectations are unbiased estimates of market-wide expected rates of return, we can circumvent the use of realized rates of return and provide evidence on the predictions emanating from traditional asset pricing models. We find a positive, robust relation between expected return and market beta and a negative relation between expected return and firm size, consistent with the notion that these are risk factors. We do not find that high book-to-market firms are expected to earn higher returns than low book-to-market firms, inconsistent with the notion that book-to-market is a risk factor.     

On the relationship between concentration of prospect theory/mental accounting investors,cointegration, and momentum

We examine the role of cointegration between stock prices and their estimated fundamental values in return momentum. We find that the positive relationship between capital gains overhang and future stock returns in Grinblatt and Han (2005) is significantly stronger among the “non-cointegrated” group of stocks as compared with the “cointegrated” group of stocks. Further, for the cointegrated stocks, the slower the speed of adjustment to the cointegrating equilibrium, the greater (smaller) is the future return of stocks with unrealized capital gains (losses). These findings are robust to various firm characteristics including firm size, book-to-market ratio, past returns, idiosyncratic volatility, dispersion in analysts’ earnings forecasts, turnover, individual investor ownership, and industry returns.     

Portfolio Returns,Market Volatility,and Seasonality

This paper examines three important issues related to the relationship between stock returns and volatility. First, are Duffee's (1995) findings of the relationship between individual stock returns and volatility valid at the portfolio level? Second, is there a seasonality of the market return volatility? Lastly, do size portfolio returns react symmetrically to the market volatility during business cycles? We find that the market volatility exhibits strong autocorrelation and small size portfolio returns exhibit seasonality. However, this phenomenon is not present in large size portfolios. For the entire sample period of 1962–1995, the highest average monthly volatility occurred in October, followed by November, and then January. Examining the two sub-sample periods, we find that the average market volatility increases by 15.4% in the second sample period of 1980–1995 compared to the first sample period of 1962–1979. During the contraction period, the average market volatility is 60.9% higher than that during the expansion period. Using a binary regression model, we find that size portfolio returns react asymmetrically with the market volatility during business cycles. This paper documents a strongly negative contemporaneous relationship between the size portfolio returns and the market volatility that is consistent with the previous findings at the aggregate level, but is inconsistent with the findings at the individual firm level. In contrast with the previous findings, however, we find an ambiguous relationship between the percentage change in the market volatility and the contemporaneous stock portfolio returns. This ambiguity is attributed to strongly negative contemporaneous and one-month ahead relationships between the market volatility and portfolio returns.

     

On interpreting security returns during the ex-dividend period

In this paper we examine the ex-dividend day returns of several taxable and non-taxable distributions. The ex-dividend day returns for the taxable common stocks are consistent with the hypothesis that dividends are taxed more heavily than capital gains. However, the ex-dividend day returns of preferred stocks suggest that preferred dividends are taxed at a lower rate than capital gains; non-taxable stock dividends and splits are priced on ex-dividend days as if they are fully taxable; and non-taxable cash distributions are priced as if investors receive a tax rebate with them. We also find that each of these distributions exhibits abnormal return behavior for several days surrounding the ex-dividend day. We investigate several possible explanations for this anomaly, but none is capable of explaining the phenomenon.     

Do investors care about corporate taxes?

This paper conducts a comprehensive examination of the link between corporation tax payment and financial performance in the UK. We find no discernible link between tax rates and stock returns for the UK, no matter how tax payment is measured. This is true throughout the sample period and for both customer-facing and non-customer-facing companies. However, allowing for industry norms and a host of firm characteristics, companies with lower effective tax rates have significantly higher levels of stock market risk. Firms that are reported in the newspapers in a negative way in relation to their level of corporation tax payment experience small negative stock returns, which are partially reversed within a month. However, the initial negative effects and subsequent rebound are both more pronounced for smaller companies. News announcements of the potential involvement of a firm in a corporate inversion (expatriation) result in steeper and much longer-lasting falls in share prices, whereas news stories of a more general nature relating to a firm's tax avoidance or tax payments have little noticeable effect.     

AN EMPIRICAL MODEL OF CAPITAL STRUCTURE: SOME NEW EVIDENCE

Using a general autoregressive distributed lag model, we estimate the longrun steady state determinants of corporate capital structure. We find that, in the long run, the leverage ratio is related positively to the corporate tax rate and firm size and negatively to future growth opportunities and stock returns. By contrast, there appears to be no relation between leverage and the corporate tax rate on a short-run year to year basis. Our results suggest that prior empirical evidence on capital structure is of questionable value precisely because of its failure to clearly separate the short-run relationship between leverage and its determinants from its long-run relationship.     

Dividend and capital gains taxation under incomplete markets

Motivated by the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act (JGTRRA) of 2003, the effects of capital income tax cuts are investigated in an economy with heterogeneous households and a representative, mature firm. Dividend tax cuts, contrary to capital gains tax cuts, lead to a decrease in investment and capital. This is because they increase the market value of existing capital and households require a higher return to hold this additional wealth. In line with empirical evidence, the model predicts substantial increases in dividends and stock prices. Overall, the tax cuts lead to a welfare reduction equivalent to a consumption drop of 0.5%.     

Idiosyncratic Risk Matters!

This paper takes a new look at the predictability of stock market returns with risk measures. We find a significant positive relation between average stock variance (largely idiosyncratic) and the return on the market. In contrast, the variance of the market has no forecasting power for the market return. These relations persist after we control for macroeconomic variables known to forecast the stock market. The evidence is consistent with models of time‐varying risk premia based on background risk and investor heterogeneity. Alternatively, our findings can be justified by the option value of equity in the capital structure of the firms.     

Firm-level return dispersion and the future volatility of aggregate stock market returns

We find a sizeable positive relation between firm return dispersion and future market-level volatility in U.S. monthly equity returns from 1927 to 1995. This intertemporal relation remains strong when controlling for return shocks in the aggregate stock market, widely used factor-mimicking portfolios, and government bonds. In contrast, the well-known positive relation between market-return shocks and future market-level volatility largely disappears when controlling for firm return dispersion. We also document how firm return dispersion moves with the contemporaneous market return and with economic conditions. Collectively, our evidence suggests that the time variation in firm return dispersion has important market-wide implications.     

Security price reactions around corporate spin-off announcements

We examine security price reactions around the announcements of 123 voluntary spin-offs by 116 firms between 1963 and 1981 involving a pro-rata distribution of the common stock of a subsidiary to the stockholders of the parent firm. The median spin-off in the sample is 6.6% of the original equity value and is associated with an abnormal return of 7.0% from 50 days prior to the announcement through completion of the spin-off. No evidence is found to indicate the gains to stockholders represent wealth transfers from senior securityholders. Over the entire event period we find positive gains for firms engaging in spin-offs to facilitate mergers or to separate diverse operating units but negative returns to firms responding to legal and/or regulatory difficulties. In the two-day interval surrounding the first press announcement we find positive average excess returns for all groups.     

Earnings Surprise "Materiality" as Measured by Stock Returns

Ranked earnings surprise portfolios formed from First Call files for 1992–97 are used to assess the annual earnings surprise magnitude for an individual firm sufficient to expect a "significant market reaction." We find that, for an individual firm, the maximum probability of a gain from trading on prior knowledge of any surprise magnitude is .622. The lack of probable trading gains is due to the S–shaped surprise/return relation and the large variance of returns for a given magnitude of surprise. In turn, we find that the S–shape is related empirically to the dispersion of analyst forecasts. Thus, factors underlying dispersion differences are related to the importance or "materiality" of earnings surprise as measured by stock returns and explain at least part of the S–shaped surprise/return relation.