CEO inside debt,market structure and payout policy

Agency based studies provide conflicting predictions about the relation between CEO inside debt and corporate payout policy. This study argues that market structure provides an empirical setting to test when and how inside debt influences corporate payout policy. Using a large sample of US corporations for the period 2006–2016, it finds that CEO inside debt is positively related to the propensity and level of dividends and total payouts (dividends plus repurchases). The positive association between inside debt and payout variables is however significantly influenced by competition in product markets. Specifically, results indicate that inside debt exerts a positive impact on payout policy only in low competition markets and does not seem to have any significant effect on payout policy in high competition markets.     

Payout Policy with Legal Restrictions

We hypothesize that firms that face limitations on debt may use increased dividend payments to mitigate the free cash flow problem. Limitations on debt are implicit in state laws that restrict the firm from making payouts when the asset‐to‐liability ratio is low. We find that: 1) firms incorporated in states with stricter payout restrictions pay more dividends, 2) the probability of paying dividends or repurchasing shares decreases as firms approach a binding payout constraint, and 3) bonding with dividends is less prevalent with increased managerial equity holdings. In addition, antitakeover and director liability laws have a less consistent effect on payout policy.     

The Role of Dividends, Debt and Board Structure in the Governance of Family Controlled Firms

Abstract:  We investigate whether family controlled firms use dividends, debt and board structure to exacerbate or mitigate agency problems between controlling and minority shareholders in a capital market environment with high investor protection and private benefits of control. Results indicate family controlled firms employ higher dividend payout ratios, higher debt levels and lower levels of board independence compared to non-family firms. This suggests family controlled firms use either dividends or debt as a substitute for independent directors. We also find that dividends and debt are more effective governance mechanisms in mitigating the families' expropriation of minority shareholders' wealth. Independent directors are, in contrast, more effective in controlling owner-manager conflict in non-family firms.     

Corporate payout policy in Australia and a test of the life‐cycle theory

We provide evidence on the frequency and size of payouts by Australian firms, and test whether the life‐cycle theory explains Australian corporate payout policies. Regular dividends remain the most popular mechanism for distributing cash to shareholders, despite a slight decline in the proportion of dividend payers since the relaxation of buyback regulations in 1998. Off‐market share buybacks return the largest amount of cash to shareholders. Dividend paying firms are larger, more profitable and have less growth options that nondividend paying firms. Consistent with the life‐cycle theory, we observe a highly significant relation between the decision to pay regular dividends and the proportion of shareholders’ equity that is earned rather than contributed.     

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.     

Agency problems,product market competition and dividend policies in Japan

This study investigates whether product market competition reduces agency problems between controlling shareholders and minority shareholders in Japan. In particular, we examine firms’ dividend policies in competitive versus concentrated industries. In a large sample of Japanese firms, we find that firms in more competitive industries pay more dividends, are more likely to increase dividends and are less likely to omit dividends. Furthermore, the impact of firm‐level agency problems on dividend payouts is weaker in highly competitive industries. The results suggest that product market competition can be an effective industry‐level governance mechanism that can force managers to disgorge cash to outside investors.     

How corporate governance affects payout policy under agency problems and external financing constraints

This paper analyzes the effect of corporate governance on the payout policy when a firm has both agency problems and external financing constraints. We empirically test whether strong corporate governance would lead to higher payout to minimize agency problems (outcome hypothesis), or to lower payout to avoid costly external financing (substitute hypothesis). We find that firms with higher (lower) external financing constraints tend to decrease (increase) payout ratio with an improvement in their corporate governance. The results are consistent with our hypothesis that the relation between payout and corporate governance is reversed depending on the relative sizes of agency and external financing costs.     

The impact of family-CEOs and their demographic characteristics on dividend payouts: Evidence from Latin America

We investigate the effect of family-CEOs and CEO demographic characteristics on firms’ dividend policy in Latin America. We show that family-CEO firms pay less amount of dividends and invest more in capital expenditures than nonfamily-CEO firms do. Direct family ownership (ownership concentration) negatively (positively) affects dividend payouts. Among the CEO demographic characteristics, CEO tenure has a consistent and significant negative effect on the dividend payout. Firms in a strong corporate governance environment pay more dividends and are less likely to appoint family members as CEOs, suggesting that strong corporate governance forces firms to pay more dividends and restrains firms from appointing CEOs based on family ties.     

Reputation as a governance mechanism? Evidence from payout policy of insider‐controlled firms in Taiwan

This paper examines the effect of entrenched insiders’ reputational concerns on corporate payout policy in Taiwan, a market in which typical public firms are controlled by a single dominant shareholder who is subject to weak takeover threats and has incentives and abilities to extract private benefits by oppressing minority equity holders. The reputation‐building hypothesis predicts that firms with higher expropriation risk by a controlling shareholder make more payouts to credibly commit not to expropriate minority shareholders, thereby establishing reputation in the capital market for risk diversification and low‐cost external financing. I show that corporate payout intensity is significantly and positively correlated with measures related to the moral hazard of dominant owners. The reputation effect manifests in firms that most value it; the interaction analyses indicate that younger, smaller, or growth firms with higher controlling shareholder expropriation risk pay more cash dividends. Moreover, firms are less likely to omit dividends and more likely to resume dividends when their controlling shareholders are more entrenched. Finally, I show that the value of cash dividends is higher for firms with higher controlling shareholder expropriation risk and that expected dividend increases in these firms are value enhancing.     

Expropriation of minority shareholders and payout policy

This paper studies the payout policy of Italian firms controlled by large majority shareholders (controlled firms). The paper reports that a firm's share of dividends in total payout (dividends plus repurchases) is negatively related to the size of the cash flow stake of the firm's controlling shareholder and positively associated with the wedge between the controlling shareholder's control rights and cash flow rights. These findings are consistent with the substitute model of payout. One of the implications of this model is that controlled firms with weak corporate governance set-ups, in which controlling shareholders have strong incentives to expropriate minority shareholders, tend to prefer dividends over repurchases when disgorging cash.     

Growth,governance and corporate payout policy

We show that when growth opportunities decreased following the end of the Cold War, defence firms responded by increasing total payout. This change in policy was largely driven by increased stock buybacks as opposed to changes in cash dividends and primarily by firms that faced stronger external governance. On the other hand, firms with weaker internal governance that were more severely affected by the reduced growth chose to alter the mix of payout at the expense of repurchases. Overall, our findings (i) demonstrate a causal link where exogenous shocks to growth cause payout policy changes, (ii) support the role of internal governance in payout policy design where entrenched managers pre‐commit to higher dividends and (iii) emphasize the monitoring role of external governance in mitigating agency costs of free cash flow.     

Do dividend changes predict the future profitability of firms?

Many previous studies have been conducted to test whether corporate dividend changes predict the future profitability of firms. While the debate continues, we assess the information content of dividends (ICD) hypothesis in the Korean market as it provides an interesting experimental setting for testing the hypothesis in the context of corporate governance. We find that it is difficult to support the ICD hypothesis if one accepts nonlinear patterns in earnings. However, when we divide the sample in terms of Chaebol vs. non‐Chaebol and high‐growth vs. low‐growth firms, we find that the ICD hypothesis becomes valid, especially for non‐Chaebol firms and for low‐growth firms. Therefore, we suggest that the validity of the ICD hypothesis may be dependent on firm characteristics such as the corporate governance structure and growth stage.     

Corporate Payout Policy,Cash Savings,and the Cost of Consistency: Evidence from a Structural Estimation

We develop a dynamic structural model to better understand how corporate payout policy is determined in conjunction with other corporate decisions. In a first‐best model, a manager maximizes equity value by choosing the firm's optimal financing, investment, dividends, and cash holdings. By using simulated method of moments, we show that, on average, firms excessively smooth their payout while making corporate savings overly volatile and retaining excess cash. We then extend the model to capture the effect of a manager, who perceives a cost to cutting payouts. Estimating the model, we infer the magnitude of this cost. We find that a managerial preference for consistent payout explains the smooth payout and high volatility of cash holdings.     

Corporate Policy and Market Value: A q-Theory Approach

In this paper, we show that Tobin's q has a significant predictive power in explaining valuation consequences of major corporate policy variables. Our empirical results reveal that, depending upon whether a firm is overinvesting or underinvesting, financial markets respond quite differently to its capital structure, dividend payout, financial slack, and R & D decisions. Overall, the empirical results suggest that both high debt ratios and greater payouts are favorably viewed by the market when firms are overinvesting. For firms with growth opportunities, however, large debt is unfavorably viewed by the market. In addition, financial slack and R & D expenditures are favorably received by the market for growth firms but not for overinvesting firms.     

Free Cash Flow,Shareholder Value,and the Undistributed Profits Tax of 1936 and 1937

In 1936, the Federal Government unexpectedly imposed a tax on undistributed corporate profits. Despite the direct costs of the tax, its announcement produced a positive revaluation of corporate equity, particularly among lower-payout firms. We interpret this as evidence of a divergence between managerial and shareholder preferences regarding dividend payout policies, consistent with the presence of agency costs. We also find that despite the incentives created by the tax, the actual growth in dividends during 1936 was lower among firms judged more likely to be subject to higher agency costs after controlling for liquidity, debt, and the growth in earnings.     

CEO's managerial power,board committee memberships and idiosyncratic volatility

Based on Upper Echelons Theory and Agency Theory, we explore the effect of CEOs' power through their tenure, board committee membership and other corporate governance factors on idiosyncratic volatility. Our study addresses the gap in the literature to find the direct link between the source of corporate governance practices and idiosyncratic volatility in stock price. We use a generalised method of moments in a panel analysis of Australian firms for 2004–2013 and a robust model that controls for firm size, firm age, trading volume, market-to-book ratio, dividend payout, the global financial crisis, product market competition and financial intermediaries. We find that CEOs who have stronger managerial power are associated with lower idiosyncratic volatility. This determining factor remains significant with the inclusion of widely-researched firm characteristics and external factors on idiosyncratic volatility in our robust analysis.     

Corporate governance norms and practices

We evaluate the impact of corporate governance on the valuation of firms in a large cross-section of countries. Unlike previous work, we differentiate between minimally accepted governance attributes that are satisfied by all firms in a given country and governance attributes that are adopted at the firm level. This approach allows us to differentiate between firm-level and country-level corporate governance, thus contributing to an ongoing debate in the literature about whether governance attributes are largely determined by country factors or firm characteristics. Despite the costs associated with improving corporate governance at the firm level, we find that many firms choose to adopt governance provisions beyond those that are adopted by all firms in the country, and that these improvements in corporate governance are positively associated with firm valuation. Firms that choose not to adopt sound governance mechanisms tend to have concentrated ownership and sizeable free cash flow, consistent with agency theories based on self-interested managers and controlling shareholders. Our results indicate that the market rewards companies that are prepared to adopt governance attributes beyond those required by laws and common corporate practices in the home country.     

Corporate Governance and Dividend Payout Policy: A Test Using Antitakeover Legislation

Managers strongly prefer not to pay dividends as dividend payouts reduce the amount of cash subject to managerial discretion ( Easterbrook, 1984 ; Jensen, 1986 ). Previous empirical tests of the relationship between corporate governance and dividend payout policy employ endogenous measures of this agency problem. Using a relatively exogenous measure that incorporates state antitakeover laws and the differences‐in‐differences approach, our analysis indicates that dividend payout ratios and propensities fall when managers are insulated from takeovers. The impact of antitakeover laws on dividend payouts is more pronounced for firms with poor corporate governance and small firms.     

Corporate governance,capital structure and firm performance: Evidence from Thailand

We examine the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance for a panel sample of 493 firms of non-financial firms in Thailand during the period 2001–2014. We find that for the full sample, corporate governance is not associated with financial leverage and firm performance. Leverage has a positive effect on firm performance. When we split firms into small and large firm subsamples, we observe some influence of corporate governance. The negative effect of audit committee size on firm performance is evident for large firms while the effect of audit reputation on firm performance is evident for small firms only. Furthermore, financial leverage mediates the effect of audit committee size on firm performance for the large firms.     

The impact of corporate fraud on director‐interlocked firms: Evidence from bank loans

We examine the impact of corporate fraud committed by one firm (the “fraudulent firm”) on other firms with interlocking directors (the “interlocked firms”), focusing on the debtholder side. We argue that the revelation of a fraudulent firm's fraud can damage the reputation of the interlocked firms because corporate governance can propagate via director interlocks. Empirically, we find that the interlocked firms' cost of debt is higher and the loan covenants become stricter after the fraud cases of the fraudulent firms are revealed. Consistent with the corporate governance propagation explanation, our results are weaker (stronger) for interlocked firms that have better (worse) pre‐event corporate governance standards. Our findings suggest that corporate fraud of fraudulent firms can affect other firms through director‐interlocks beyond shareholder value.