Peer effects in R&D investment based on interlock network: Evidence from China

Different from extant literature on peer effects within industries or locations, this study aims to investigate whether and why the R&D investment of a focal firm is influenced by that of interlocked peer firms. Using instruments based on intransitivity, we identify positive interlock-based peer effects in R&D investment. Firm-pair evidence corroborates the existence of peer effects by showing that interlocks render similar R&D policies and exogenous policy-induced fractures of interlocks lead to diverging R&D investments. Further analysis indicates that the interactive effects are more salient among firms with access to greater peer information and more severe information asymmetry, suggesting that peer effects are consistent with the information theory. Moreover, peers from different industries/places and focal firms with orientation to the differentiation strategy, embodying greater supply and demand of heterogeneous information, are associated with stronger peer effects. Finally, corporate patent outcomes and Tobin's Q positively react to peers' R&D investment, a sign that the interlock-based peer effects are beneficial to the performance of the focal firm.     

Innovation quality of firms with the research and development tax credit

This paper examines innovation quality of U.S. research tax credit users (i.e., firms with currently earned research tax credits). Prior literature reports that the research tax credit is effective in increasing research and development (R&D) expenditures and reducing managers’ myopic behavior. However, little is known about the real (or economic) effect of R&D tax credits, as most of these findings have been based on estimated R&D tax credits rather than actual R&D tax credits. Additionally, some researchers and the government still have concerns about the real effect of R&D tax credits by criticizing the ambiguity and complexity of the tax codes (IRC Section 41). Therefore, I use actual R&D tax credits identified in firms’ 10-K and state R&D tax credits as identification tests to reduce endogeneity issues. My results indicate that research generating R&D tax credits contributes to better innovation quality and higher return volatility but lower pre-tax profitability. Overall, these findings imply that enacting the R&D tax credit provisions would trigger better innovation.     

Government R&D spending,fiscal instruments and corporate technological innovation

Using panel data from 242 cities in China, we examine the impact of government research and development (R&D) spending on corporate technological innovation. We find that listed firms located in cities with higher government R&D expenditures are more innovative than firms in other cities. Further, the positive effect of government R&D spending depends on fiscal instruments and factor allocation. Through subsidies and tax incentives, government R&D spending enhances firm innovation by alleviating financing constraints, improving employee creativity and ensuring efficient operations. We demonstrate that subsidies are more effective than taxes in spurring corporate technological innovation. We also show that the impact of government R&D spending is stronger for state-owned and high-tech enterprises than for other enterprises. Overall, our findings suggest that government R&D spending can substantially improve corporate technological innovation through fiscal instruments.     

Peer R&D disclosure and corporate innovation: Evidence from American depositary receipt firms

In this paper, we examine the effect of peer research and development (R&D) disclosures on corporate innovation. R&D disclosures can generate externalities for related firms, enabling those firms to better infer a project's likely payoffs and thus prioritize projects with higher net present values. We use a sample of foreign firms cross-listed on U.S. exchanges to investigate whether U.S. peer firms experience externalities from the cross-listing firm's R&D disclosures. We find that R&D disclosures by cross-listing firms are associated with greater innovation for industry peers in the U.S. market, especially when product market competition is high. The effect also varies with the home country's legal protection systems, disclosure environments, and accounting reporting rules. Cross-sectional analyses indicate that the externalities are more pronounced in industries or firms that rely more on external financing and firms subject to higher financial constraints; disclosures of higher quality appear to promote innovation by ameliorating financing frictions. Overall, this study provides evidence of R&D disclosure as an industry-wide determinant of innovation, thereby contributing to literature on the real effects of peer disclosures.     

Anti-Mafia Police Actions,Criminal Firms,and Peer Firm Tax Avoidance

Mafia firms introduce distortions in the markets in which they operate, increasing the cost of doing business for peer firms. We investigate whether peers respond by increasing their tax avoidance and thus increasing funds available to compete with the Mafia firms. Using a sample of Italian anti-Mafia police actions that resulted in the removal of Mafia firms and a difference-in-differences approach, we find that peers reduce their tax avoidance following these actions. We further show that, following anti-Mafia police actions, peer firms improve their performance and increase capital investment while enjoying a reduction in the cost of raw materials. Overall, our results highlight the microlevel channels through which Mafia can affect firm outcomes and local economies.     

What is the After‐Tax Price of R&D? An Interstate Comparison*

As of 2005, 31 US states offered corporate income tax credits on research and development (R&D) expenses in order to encourage more in‐state innovation activities. Empirical questions about the efficacy of such tax breaks at the state level persist, in part because the complexity of the tax laws means that simple credit‐rate comparisons across states do not fully capture the differential variation in effective after‐tax price incentives firms face in choosing where to locate R&D activities. We are unaware of any research analysing and comparing the effective prices of R&D faced by firms, across all US states and utilising micro‐level data. Using data extracted from detailed reading of individual firms' 10‐K and S‐1 filings and of state‐level tax credit rules, we estimate the effective after‐tax price of basic and qualified research expenditure each firm would have faced in each of the 50 states had they been located there. Our methodology simulates the effective tax price of each firm's marginal dollar of research expenditure, assuming the firm chose to move all of its R&D operations to each of the 49 other states. Through Monte Carlo techniques, we consider the sensitivity of our interstate comparative results to several modelling assumptions. We find significant variation in after‐tax R&D prices across states with quite different R&D tax laws. Prices range from $0.176 to $0.520 on a marginal dollar of R&D in Virginia and Washington State, respectively. We also find that the interstate variability is generally more important – indeed, much wider than we had anticipated before investigating state‐by‐state regulations – than the inter‐firm variability within states.     

Corporate taxation and the quality of research and development

This paper examines the impact of tax incentives on corporate research and development (R&D) activity. R&D tax incentives are commonly provided as special tax allowances or tax credits. In recent years, several countries also reduced their income tax rates on R&D output with the purpose to foster R&D activity. Previous papers have shown that all three tax instruments are effective in raising the quantity of R&D related activity. We in turn assess the impact of corporate tax incentives on the quality of R&D projects, i.e., their innovativeness and earnings potential. Using rich data on corporate patent applications to the European patent office, we find that a low tax rate on patent income raises the average profitability and innovation level of the projects undertaken in a country. The effect is statistically significant and economically relevant and prevails in a number of sensitivity checks. Generous R&D tax credits and tax allowances are in contrast found to exert a negative impact on project quality.     

Corporate R&D Investments Following Competitors’ Voluntary Disclosures: Evidence from the Drug Development Process

This paper examines the role of peer firm disclosures in shaping corporate research and development (R&D) investments. Drawing on models of two-stage R&D races, I hypothesize that a firm could be either deterred or encouraged by peer disclosure of interim R&D success, depending on peer firms’ R&D strength in the race. Using granular, project-level data on clinical trials in the drug development process, I find that a firm's R&D investments in a specific therapeutic area are deterred by disclosures of early-phase trial initiation from strong rivals in the same area but encouraged by disclosures from weak rivals. Cross-sectional analyses show that focal firm strength and disclosure relevance moderate the effects of peer firm disclosure. Overall, my evidence suggests that peer firms’ R&D disclosures can have both proprietary costs and deterrence benefits.     

The effect of R&D on future returns and earnings forecasts

Prior studies attribute the future excess returns of research and development activity (R&D) firms to either compensation for increased risk or to mispricing. We suggest a third explanation and show that neither the level of R&D investment nor the change in R&D investment explains future returns. Rather, the positive future returns that prior studies attribute to R&D investment are actually due to the component of the R&D firm??s realized return that is unrelated to R&D investment but present in R&D firms. Our results suggest that the excess returns of R&D firms are part of the larger value/growth anomaly. In addition, we show that while future earnings are positively associated with current R&D, errors in earnings expectations by investors and analysts are not related to R&D investment.     

The size,concentration and evolution of corporate R&D spending in U.S. firms from 1976 to 2010: Evidence and implications

The use of research and development (R&D) spending as an empirical proxy for managerial discretion, information asymmetry and growth opportunities, is pervasive in empirical corporate finance research. Underlying this is the implicit assumption that firms choose levels of R&D to maximize value, given firm and industry characteristics. An alternative framework views the level of R&D spending as subject to idiosyncratic behavior as managers myopically manipulate R&D expenditures to meet short-term earnings goals. Using aggregate firm and industry level data, we find evidence consistent with the view that R&D is determined by firm and industry characteristics. Time invariant firm and industry fixed effects explain most of the cross-sectional variation in observed R&D spending, while time-varying factors like size, profitability, or market-to-book explain little of the cross-sectional variation. We find that R&D spending continues to grow faster than advertising and capital expenditures. We also find no evidence of managerial myopia as corporate aggregate R&D expenditures are growing faster than aggregate profitability and the number of firms that undertake R&D has increased over the period from 1976 to 2010.     

The information content of R&D reductions

An extensive literature shows that R&D intensities and increases are positively related to firm performance, but little research examines the valuation of R&D reductions. This paper fills the void by studying long-term performance following R&D reductions. We find that, contrary to conventional wisdom, large R&D cuts are associated with positive future stock returns. This return drift cannot be explained by asset pricing factors, including R&D intensities and R&D increases. We explore two potential economic motives behind R&D reductions: R&D spillover and firm life cycle. We show that operating performance deteriorates immediately before R&D reductions but exhibits no abnormal pattern afterward. While firm growth falls substantially and variability in profitability reduces, firms with low or declining investment opportunities and mature firms outperform. These findings are inconsistent with the spillover hypothesis, but support the life cycle story that firms attempt to resolve overinvestment in R&D that arises over the course of firm life cycle.     

R&D tax incentives: a reappraisal

This paper examines R&D tax incentives in oligopolistic markets. We characterize the conditions under which tax incentives reach the socially desirable level of firm-financed R&D spending. The outcome of the market depends not only on the level of technological spillover in the industry but also on the degree of strategic interaction between the firms. One major result emerges from the model: The socially desirable level of R&D investment is not necessarily reached by subsidizing R&D. When the technological spillover is sufficiently low, the government might want to tax R&D investments, and this result does not necessarily arise because firms are overinvesting in R&D. There are also cases in which an R&D tax is desirable even though firms are underinvesting in R&D compared with the first-best optimum. In practice, this theoretical finding calls for a lower sales tax combined with an R&D subsidy in oligopolistic industries with high technological spillovers, and a lower sales tax combined with an R&D tax in oligopolistic industries with low technological spillovers.     

Limits of tax regulation: Evidence from strategic R&D classification and the R&D tax credit

We investigate a tax avoidance strategy where firms use the ambiguity inherent in tax reporting to classify indirect costs as research and development (R&D) expenditures to take advantage of the R&D tax credit. We label this tax practice “strategic R&D classification”. We find a one standard deviation increase in strategic R&D classification leads, on average, to a 1.7% (1.5%) reduction in GAAP (cash) effective tax rates, suggesting this practice provides significant tax savings. However, we also find strategic R&D classification is related to both the level and changes in uncertain tax benefit liabilities required to be recognized under FIN 48, suggesting this practice comes with financial reporting costs. Our study contributes to the literature by documenting some of the costs and benefits associated with a previously unexplored tax strategy, and highlights the limitations faced by tax authorities in monitoring firms’ R&D tax credit.     

Innovation,financial reporting quality,and audit quality

We examine the relation between innovation and financial reporting quality (FRQ) and the implications of audit quality for this relation. We first document a negative relation between innovation and FRQ. This result is consistent with greater earnings management at higher innovation firms, likely because of the more opaque information environment that gives managers the opportunity to act opportunistically. We then examine whether audit quality moderates the observed negative relation between innovation and FRQ because audit quality constrains managers’ opportunities to manage earnings. We find results consistent with the predicted moderating effect. Lastly, we verify that these findings hold in a difference-in-differences test designed around an exogenous event, state R&D tax credits.     

The Informativeness of Dividends and Associated Tax Credits

This paper investigates the informativeness of dividends and the associated tax credits with respect to earnings persistence. After confirming that dividend‐paying firms have more persistent earnings than non‐dividend‐paying firms, we show that the taxation status of the dividend is also important. Firms that pay dividends with a full tax credit attached have significantly more persistent earnings than firms that pay dividends which carry no associated tax credit. Consistent with higher levels of tax credits identifying more mature firms, those paying dividends with full tax credits have significantly less persistent losses than firms that pay dividends with only partial tax credits. Further, market pricing tests confirm that the incremental information in dividends and tax credits contributes to reductions in market mispricing of the persistence of earnings and earnings components. Our results are robust to alternative model specifications and controlling for dividend size and firm age.     

Technology spillovers,asset redeployability and corporate financial policies

Prior research shows that technology spillovers across firms increase innovation, productivity and value. We study how firms finance their own growth stimulated by technology spillovers from their technological peer firms. We find that greater technology spillovers lead to higher leverage. This is the result of technology spillovers increasing asset redeployability, as evidenced by more collateralized borrowing and asset transactions. Borrowing costs also decrease. Exogenous variation in the research and development tax credits of other firms allows us to identify the causal effect of technology spillovers on a given firm.     

Accounting choice and future performance: The case of R&D accounting in France

We examine whether managers’ decisions to capitalize or expense R&D expenditures convey information about the future performance of the firm. Focusing on a French setting where managers can choose to capitalize R&D expenditures under certain circumstances, we find that, after controlling for industry effects, firms that capitalize R&D expenditures spend less on R&D, have more volatile R&D efforts, and are smaller and more leveraged than firms that expense R&D expenditures. We also find that capitalizers capitalize R&D outlays when they need to meet or beat thresholds. Finally, we show that the decision to capitalize R&D is generally associated with a negative or neutral impact on future performance, even after controlling for self-selection. Our results also show that when firms both capitalize and expense R&D expenditures, the expensed portion exhibits a stronger (and negative) relationship with future performance. Market-based tests corroborate these findings. While we cannot unambiguously establish whether our findings imply that management uses R&D capitalization to manage earnings or because it is unable to estimate the earning power of R&D projects, our results suggest that management is unable to truthfully convey information about future performance through its decision to capitalize R&D. Our findings, based on real data as opposed to simulated data, therefore contrast with previous supportive evidence in favor of capitalization in the literature.     

Mispricing of Research and Development Investments in a Rapidly Emerging and Electronics-Dominated Market

This paper documents prevailing mispricing of research and development (R&D) investments in the Taiwan stock market, a rapidly emerging and electronics-dominated market. Applying stock return data from July 1988 to June 2005, we observe that R&D-intensive stocks tend to outperform stocks with little or no R&D. The R&D-intensity effect cannot be attributed fully to firm size and seasonal effects. The R&D-associated anomaly not only exists but also persists for up to three years. The market apparently undervalues R&D-intensive firms and overvalues non-R&D-intensive firms. Finally, the R&D anomaly is clearer for firms in the electronics industry after 1996.     

Will the real R&D employees please stand up? Effects of tax breaks on firm-level outcomes

This paper evaluates the effect of tax incentives for research and development (R&D) on R&D spending and employment of R&D staff in a quasi-experimental setting. To do this, I exploit an exogenous reform in UK R&D tax policy, which changed the definition of an SME from firms with fewer than 250 employees to those with fewer than 500 employees. I use the UK Business Enterprise Research and Development Survey (BERD), for which companies do not have an incentive to relabel their ordinary employees or spending as R&D. I find that R&D tax incentives help to increase R&D spending at the company level; this translates to a user cost elasticity between ?0.88 and ?1.18. Further, the additional R&D generated through the tax relief can be attributed entirely to an increase in the number of R&D employees in the companies’ workforce. Together, these results challenge a common narrative on the role of R&D tax incentives.     

Strategic reaction and tax avoidance: Evidence from the effect of large IPOs on peers

We examine whether and how industry peers use tax avoidance as a strategic mechanism to maintain their relative competitive positions. We exploit a unique setting where a relatively large private firm obtains capital, visibility, and creditability by going public (i.e., an IPO), imposing significant competitive pressure on its industry peers. We find that peer firms increase tax avoidance after large IPOs. Further analysis shows that the increase of tax avoidance is driven by firms with high growth needs and firms with high operating uncertainty, suggesting that tax aggressiveness is aligned with other strategic risk-taking changes to improve industry competitiveness. We rule out two alternative explanations: 1) existing peers use relative product market power to hedge against tax risk and engage in tax avoidance; 2) peers mimic the tax avoidance behavior of IPO firms. The main finding is supported by the difference-in-differences test with coarsened exact matching and a battery of robustness tests, including alternative measures and alternative large IPO selection criteria.