内部控制对股权结构与盈余质量的传导效应

以2007～2009年我国深沪A股上市公司为研究样本,引入中介变量的研究方法,检验并揭示内部控制对股权结构影响盈余质量的中介传导作用。结果发现:第一大股东持股比例越高,内部控制水平越低,盈余质量水平越低;股权制衡能力越高,内部控制水平越高,更利于提高企业的盈余质量;机构投资者持股比例越高,企业的内部控制水平越高,但盈余质量越低。总体看,内部控制对股权结构与盈余质量具有传导效应,但是显著性存在差异,对股权结构中的第一大股东持股比例、机构投资者持股比例与盈余质量的中介传导效应要显著高于对股权制衡能力与盈余质量的中介传导效应。     

大股东控制、财务杠杆与公司价值——国有及民营上市公司治理的比较研究

本文以2002～2004年的上市公司为样本,研究了第一大股东持股比例、财务杠杆与公司价值之间的关系.研究发现,国有控制上市公司与民营控制上市公司公司价值并无显著差异;国有控制上市公司第一大股东持股比例与公司价值呈U形关系,民营控制上市公司第一大股东持股比例与公司价值则呈倒U形关系;国有控制上市公司财务杠杆比率与公司价值负相关,民营控制上市公司财务杠杆比率与公司价值则正相关.其政策含义是,政府应该继续贯彻"抓大放小"的战略方针;监管部门应该关注持股比例较高的民营上市公司第一大股东的资金来源及其行为特征,防止其对公司其他利益相关者的侵害行为;银行贷款应对国有及民营企业一视同仁,银行需要加强对国有控制上市公司贷款的监督.     

大股东控制权对股权激励效果的影响

本文分析了大股东控制权实现过程中对管理层股权激励的监督或冲突作用以及这种影响在不同股权性质和不同成长性公司中的不同表现。研究发现:大股东控制对管理层的作用显著影响股权激励效果;国有控股上市公司大股东对管理层的监督作用明显,随着第一大股东持股比例的增大,管理层股权激励效果增强;民营控股上市公司大股东控制权与管理层股权激励之间存在冲突,第一大股东持股比例越高,股权激励效果越差;高新技术企业大股东控制权与管理层股权激励之间存在冲突;非高新技术企业中第一大股东与管理层之间存在不明显的监督作用。本文的研究结论从股权激励的公司治理环境角度解答了我国股权激励效果不佳的困惑,为不同类型的上市公司启用管理层股权激励方案时考虑适宜的公司治理环境特别是大股东控制程度提供了经验证据。     

机构投资者持股、股权集中度与内部控制质量

内部控制是企业有效防御和应对各种风险的重要措施之一。本文选取了2012—2014年沪、深A股上市公司作为研究样本,检验机构投资者持股比例和第一大股东持股比例对内部控制质量的影响。研究结果表明：(1)机构投资者持股比例上升能够提升企业内部控制质量,但前提是机构投资者已具有一定的持股比例;(2)在企业处于非绝对控股的情况下,第一大股东持股比例上升对内部控制质量产生显著正向影响;(3)在企业处于绝对控股情况下,机构投资者对内部控制质量的提升作用会受到抑制。     

代理冲突与公司的内部控制审计需求

本文以沪市A股2007—2009年自愿披露内部控制审计报告的上市公司为样本,从委托代理理论出发,探讨公司产生内部控制审计需求的动因。研究结果表明,管理层持股比例越低,对内部控制审计的需求越高;第一大股东为绝对控股股东、公司规模、净资产收益率、国有股权性质与内部控制审计需求正相关。随着第二到第十大股东持股比例的增加,内部控制审计需求出现先上升后下降的趋势,支持了内部控制审计需求的代理假说。     

大股东交易与中国A股市场股价暴涨暴跌风险北大核心

本文以2008-2016年A股上市公司为样本,研究大股东增持或减持股票如何影响股价极端波动现象的发生。结果表明:大股东交易强度提升显著增加了股价暴涨暴跌风险,其影响主要来源于大股东减持而非大股东增持;上市公司的信息透明度越低、管理层持股比例越高、管理层权力越小,则大股东交易对股价极端波动风险的影响越显著;较高比例的机构投资者持股和独立董事设置能够有效加强对上市公司的监督,削弱大股东交易对股价极端波动风险的不利影响。为了进一步规范大股东交易行为、维护股票市场稳定运行,提出以下对策建议:第一,完善规制大股东交易行为的法律法规和监管规则,防范内幕交易,避免大股东集中、大幅、无序减持股票对市场稳定带来冲击;第二,强化上市公司信息披露要求,提高信息透明度;第三,推动上市公司吸引机构投资者持股、提高独立董事比例,优化公司内部制衡和外部监督机制,以实现对大股东行为的有效制衡和约束。     

代理成本、弹性信息披露对审计收费的影响

本文研究了大股东与中小股东间的代理成本及弹性信息披露对审计收费的影响。我们发现上市公司不存在两权分离的情况下,大股东持股比例较低时,大股东持股比例与审计收费负相关;大股东持股比例较高时,大股东持股比例与审计收费正相关;两权分离程度较低的情况下,大股东持股比例较低时,大股东持股比例与审计收费负相关;两权分离程度较高的情况下,大股东持股比例较高时,大股东持股比例与审计收费负相关。上市公司弹性信息披露程度越高,审计收费越低;两权分离的存在会削弱弹性信息披露程度与审计收费之间的负相关关系。     

保险公司持股偏好及持股对上市公司经营业绩影响的研究——来自中国A股市场的经验证据

2015年开始,保险公司在股票二级市场的频繁举牌成为保险业界、监管机构和社会公众普遍关注的热门现象,保险公司作为大股东持股上市公司,能否提升上市公司的经营业绩？保险公司是否是优质的机构投资者？本文选取中国A股市场2006～2015年上市公司的数据,采用Tobit模型对保险公司作为前十大股东持股的上市公司的特征进行了实证研究。研究发现：寿险公司作为大股东,其持股比例与上市公司的经营业绩、公司规模、发展能力、流通股比例、第一大股东持股比例、股票回报率显著正相关,与贝塔系数负相关;财险公司作为大股东,其持股比例与上市公司的经营业绩、公司规模、发展能力、流通股比例、股票回报率显著正相关。此外,本文进一步采用多元线性回归模型对保险公司作为大股东持股与上市公司经营业绩二者的关系进行了实证分析,结果显示：寿险公司持股可以显著提升上市公司下一期的经营业绩;财险公司持股对上市公司下一期经营业绩则无显著影响。     

大股东控制、市场化程度与公司现金持有水平

运用2003～2008年我国所有非金融类A股上市公司的样本数据,从大股东控制视角出发,重点关注第一大股东持股比例、实际控制人性质和公司所在地区市场化程度对于公司现金持有水平的共同作用。结果表明,第一大股东持股比例与公司现金持有量水平正相关,实际控制人为国有的比非国有的上市公司的现金持有量高;公司外部治理环境的改善,有助于减轻由第一大股东持股比例以及实际控制人性质对公司现金持有量造成的负面影响。     

股权结构对非经营性资金占用影响的实证研究——民营上市公司与国有上市公司的比较

本文以我国证券交易所公布的存在非经营性资金占用的上市公司为样本,研究股权结构对非经营性资金占用的影响。通过理论与实证分析,得出结论:民营上市公司的资金占用现象更为普遍;通过股权制衡作用可以抑制资金占用;当第一大股东持股比例在50%以下时,持股比例越大,资金占用率越高;当第一大股东持股比例大于50%时,民营上市公司表现为协同效应,而国有上市公司表现为壕沟效应。文章在分析过程中,提出“政府主导的壕沟效应”和“控股股东代理人的壕沟效应”的存在。     

Multiple blockholders and earnings management

This paper examines the impact of multiple blockholders on earnings management when the main conflict of interest is between controlling shareholder and other shareholders. Using a sample of Chinese listed firms from 2000 to 2017 and controlling for potential sample selection and endogeneity, we find that firms with multiple blockholders tend to have higher earnings management than firms with a single controlling shareholder. The positive impact of multiple blockholders on earnings management is more pronounced when those blockholders are the same type – state or private. Earnings management is also enhanced with more large shareholders and higher relative ownership of other large shareholders to the controlling shareholder. The results are consistent with the cost-sharing hypothesis, where the other large shareholders shoulder the costs of earnings management with the controlling shareholder proportionally, but not the private benefits of control. Further tests show that the positive relation between multiple large shareholders and earnings management is less pronounced in firms with stronger internal or external governance. Overall, our paper demonstrates a potential dark side of multiple blockholders from the angle of financial reporting quality.     

产权性质、CFO背景特征与内部控制质量

基于高层梯队理论和社会网络理论,以2008-2015年我国A股上市公司为样本,实证考察CFO背景特征对公司内部控制质量的影响。研究发现：CFO的年龄越大、任期越长,内部控制质量越低;CFO的学历越高,内部控制质量越高;女性CFO较男性CFO在内部控制建设方面存在相对劣势;CFO外部兼职有助于提升内部控制质量。进一步研究发现：在国有企业和非国有企业中,CFO背景特征对内部控制质量的影响存在显著的差异。     

MANAGERIAL INCENTIVES AND CORPORATE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGIES

Because the break-up of conglomerates typically produces substantial increases in shareholder wealth, many commentators have argued that the conglomerate form of organization is inefficient. This article reports the findings of a number of recent academic studies, including the authors' own, that examine the causes and consequences of corporate diversification. Although theoretical arguments suggest that corporate diversification can have benefits as well as costs, several studies have documented that diversified firms trade at a significant discount from their single-segment peers. Estimates of this discount range from 10–15% of firm value, and are larger for “unrelated” diversification than for “related” diversification. If corporate diversification has generally been a value-reducing managerial strategy, why do firms remain diversified? One possibility, which the authors label the “agency cost” hypothesis, is that top executives without substantial equity stakes may have incentives to maintain a diversification strategy even if doing so reduces shareholder wealth. But, as top managers' ownership stakes increase, they bear a greater fraction of the costs associated with value-reducing policies and are therefore less likely to take actions that reduce shareholder wealth. Also, to the extent that outside blockholders monitor managerial behavior, the agency cost hypothesis predicts that diversification will be less prevalent in firms with large outside blockholders. Consistent with this argument, the authors find that companies in which managers own a significant fraction of the firm's shares, and in which blockholders own a large fraction of shares, are significantly less likely to be diversified. If agency problems lead managers to maintain value-reducing diversification strategies, what is it that leads some of these same firms to refocus? The agency cost hypothesis predicts that managers will reduce diversification only if pressured to do so by internal or external mechanisms that reduce agency problems. Consistent with this argument, the authors find that decreases in diversification appear to be precipitated by market disciplinary forces such as block purchases, acquisition attempts, and management turnover.     

Ownership Concentration,Corporate Control Activity,and Firm Value: Evidence from the Death of Inside Blockholders

We analyze how ownership concentration affects firm value and control of public companies by examining effects of deaths of inside blockholders. We find shareholder wealth increases, ownership concentration falls, and extensive corporate control activity ensues. Share price responses are related to the deceased's equity stake. Control group holdings fall for two-thirds of the firms due to either the estate's dispersal or inheritors selling stock. A majority of firms become targets of control bids: three-quarters of bids are successful; one-third are hostile. Our evidence is broadly consistent with Stulz's (1988) model of the relationship between ownership concentration and firm value.     

Financial institutional blockholders and earnings quality: Do blockholders contestability and countries' institutions matter?

We examine the relationship between financial earnings quality and block ownership by institutional investors. This relation is vital given the tremendous growth of institutional ownership and the significant influence of large institutional blockholders on financial earnings quality. Our findings indicate that the presence of institutional blockholders drives higher financial earnings quality. Results from an instrumental variable (IV) approach suggest our documented effects are directional. Next, cross-sectional tests prove that the relationship is more pronounced among firms adopting IFRS and those in countries with minority shareholder protection. Moreover, our results reveal that property rights and the lack of contestability partially mitigate the positive association between institutional ownership and earnings quality. Our findings inform the ongoing debate on the influence of institutional ownership on earnings, which institutional and regulatory dimensions affect earnings, and through what channels these effects run. Overall, our results suggest that beyond corporate governance practices that enhance financial earnings quality, different countries' institutions and regulations settings influence the relation of institutional ownership to earnings quality.     

Multiple corporate governance attributes and the cost of capital – Evidence from Germany

This paper investigates the extent to which corporate governance affects the cost of debt and equity capital of German exchange-listed companies. I examine corporate governance along three dimensions: financial information quality, ownership structure and board structure. The results suggest that firms with high levels of financial transparency and bonus compensations face lower cost of equity. In addition, block ownership is negatively related to firms' cost of equity when the blockholders are other firms, managers or founding-family members. Consistent with the conjecture that agency costs increase with firm size, I find significant cost of debt effects only in the largest German companies. Here, the creditors demand lower cost of debt from firms with block ownerships held by corporations or banks. My findings demonstrate that a uniform set of governance attributes is unlikely to satisfy suppliers of debt and equity capital equally.     

Annual report readability and corporate agency costs

Annual reports are the main sources of information for outside investors’ investment decisions and enable shareholders to supervise the management. Difficulties with the readability of these reports may therefore have serious consequences. Using 19,221 firm-year observations of Chinese A-share listed firms from 2001 to 2015, we investigate the association between annual report readability and corporate agency costs, where readability is proxied by report file length and/or file size. We find that firms with better annual report readability experience lower agency costs, and the negative association between readability and agency costs is more pronounced in firms with higher external audit quality, internal control quality or analyst coverage. These results hold after several robustness checks. The positive effect of annual report readability is stronger in private firms than in state-owned enterprises, and becomes stronger after the implementation of new accounting standards in 2007. Readable annual reports can help in monitoring corporate insiders’ opportunistic behavior and thus reduce agency costs.     

Complex Ownership Structures and Corporate Valuations

The bulk of corporate governance theory examines the agencyproblems that arise from two extreme ownership structures: 100%small shareholders or one large, controlling owner combinedwith small shareholders. In this paper, we question the empiricalvalidity of this dichotomy. In fact, one-third of publicly listedfirms in Europe have multiple large owners, and the market valueof firms with multiple blockholders differs from firms witha single large owner and from widely held firms. Moreover, therelationship between corporate valuations and the distributionof cash-flow rights across multiple large owners is consistentwith the predictions of recent theoretical models.     

Do Large Blockholders Reduce Risk?

The conventional assumption in the asset pricing literature is that the identity of a company's owners is largely irrelevant, but studies of companies with “blockholders”—shareholders with large positions in a particular company—provide grounds for questioning this assumption. Unlike the well‐diversified investors of modern portfolio theory, blockholders have strong incentives to monitor corporate performance and, when necessary, to exert control over ineffective managements and boards. The findings of many studies support the idea that blockholders have a positive effect on rates of return. The authors of this article report the findings of their recent investigation of whether blockholders might also have a positive effect on shareholder value by reducing the risk of the companies in which their holdings are concentrated. After distinguishing between companies with individual as opposed to corporate blockholders, and those with one share, one vote as opposed to those with dual‐class shares, the authors find that ownership of large positions by individuals—but not corporations—was associated with lower systematic risk (when using both Fama‐French multiple factor and CAPM models). At the same time, they find that the firm‐specific risk of such companies was higher, but “biased” toward positive outcomes—that is, smaller downsides with larger upsides. What's more, this upward shift in performance and risk‐profile was achieved at least partly through increases in productivity as reflected in higher profit margins, profitability, profit per employee, and operating leverage, and lower costs of goods sold, SGA, and cash holdings. By contrast, in the case of blockholders in companies with dual‐class share structures, all of these positive associations with blockholders were either significantly weaker, or reversed. That is, whereas the presence of individual blockholders appears to increase productivity and value under a one share, one vote governance regime, blockholders in companies with dual‐class structures were associated with higher systematic risk and reduced productivity and value.     

Green credit policy and corporate access to bank loans in China: The role of environmental disclosure and green innovation

This research assesses the effectiveness of China's green credit policy. We explore whether firms with better external environmental disclosure and internal green innovation receive more bank loans because of green credit, and utilize a panel of 1086 listed Chinese manufacturing enterprises from 2012 to 2017 to test our hypotheses. The results suggest that firms with higher environmental disclosure quality do not obtain more loans, and only green innovation promotes access to corporate loans. We show that the underlying cause of this phenomenon is corporate green-washing, which is prevalent in soft environmental disclosure and hinders enterprises from obtaining more loans. Our findings contribute to the literature on green credit policy, corporate green innovation, environmental disclosure, and green-washing, and provide a reference for companies, banks, and governments to make decisions.