控股股东股权质押、社会责任与上市公司财务风险

为探究控股股东股权质押对上市公司财务风险的影响机理,本文选取2012—2020年我国A股上市公司作为研究样本,运用固定效应模型实证检验控股股东股权质押对上市公司财务风险的影响、不同产权性质下控股股东股权质押对上市公司财务风险的影响差异,以及企业社会责任在二者关系中的调节效应。研究结果表明：控股股东股权质押会增加上市公司的财务风险;相对于国有上市公司而言,非国有上市公司控股股东股权质押对财务风险的正向影响会更加强烈;控股股东股权质押对上市公司财务风险的影响效应在社会责任表现较差的企业中更为明显。本研究为上市公司防范财务风险,为政府与监管机构监督股权质押行为提供了新的视角和理论依据。     

控股股东股权质押同群效应对财务重述的影响研究

随着股权质押规模的不断扩大，控股股东股权质押对公司治理的影响也越来越显著。财务重述能反映公司的治理问题，因此控股股东股权质押很可能会加剧上市公司的财务重述。本文以2018―2020年沪深A股上市公司为样本，验证了同地区上市公司控股股东股权质押存在正向的同群效应，并进一步验证了控股股东股权质押及其同群效应与公司财务重述之间的正相关关系。同时，还发现上市公司的融资约束程度和盈利水平也会在一定程度上影响控股股东股权质押，及其同群效应与财务重述之间的正相关关系。     

控股股东股权质押与企业创新投入

近年来,上市公司控股股东股权质押已经成为中国资本市场的一种普遍现象。与此同时,国家大力鼓励创新,企业创新已成为中国经济转型升级的必然选择。本文利用2011-2015年中国A股上市公司,实证分析了控股股东股权质押与企业创新投入之间的关系。研究发现:(1)控股股东股权质押会抑制企业创新投入,且这种作用在控股股东持股比例较低和两职合一的公司中会更加显著;(2)进一步研究发现,控股股东股权质押对企业创新投入的负面影响只有在股权质押率较高和距离平仓线越近时才会发挥作用。     

控股股东股权质押、高送转与股价崩盘风险

本文以2009-2018年沪深A股上市公司为样本,探讨控股股东股权质押对高送转、公司股价崩盘风险的影响。实证分析发现:控股股东进行股权质押后,会显著增加上市公司未来的股价崩盘风险;随着质押比例的升高,股价崩盘风险也增大。同时,股权质押后,上市公司会更倾向于推行高送转,持续正向增加股价崩盘风险。进一步研究发现,在民营企业以及控股股东持股比例较低的上市公司中,控股股东股权质押对股价崩盘风险的正向作用更强。     

企业创新效率研究——来自股权质押的影响

本文结合我国实施创新驱动发展战略及股权质押频繁的现实背景,利用2006—2015年A股上市公司的数据,探讨控股股东的股权质押行为是否以及如何对企业的创新效率产生影响。研究表明,控股股东的股权质押行为会显著降低企业的创新效率。进一步地研究发现:(1)当第二类代理问题越严重,或质押风险越大时,控股股东股权质押行为抑制企业创新效率的作用越明显,表明控股股东股权质押伴随的掏空效应及短视效应,是导致二者负向关系的重要原因;(2)掏空效应和短视效应在影响控股股东股权质押与企业创新效率的关系上存在显著的替代效应;(3)研发投入强度下降时,控股股东股权质押对企业创新效率产生的负面效应更强。本文的研究不仅丰富了企业创新效率影响因素及控股股东股权质押经济后果的相关文献,对于规范控股股东股权质押行为,提高企业创新能力,实现创新驱动发展战略,也具有重要的启示意义。     

控股股东股权质押与实体企业金融化——基于"掏空"与控制权转移的视角

本文从股权质押的视角切入,基于2007-2016年A股上市公司的经验数据,探究控股股东股权质押对实体企业金融化的影响.研究发现:控股股东股权质押比例与实体企业金融化呈倒U型关系,即随着股权质押比例的增加,企业持有金融资产的比例先增后减.该结论在进行一系列稳健性检验后依然成立.此外,进一步识别了在股权质押下控股股东的"掏空"动机与规避控制权转移风险动机.在金融化偏好检验中发现,控股股东股权质押后更可能促使企业配置具有投机性的、容易变现的短期金融资产,从而规避金融资产价格波动风险.在经济后果检验中发现,股权质押比例较高时,企业会持有更多现金以预防不利情况.本文研究结论对于政府部门加强监管、控股股东专注于企业长远发展和投资者做出合理投资决策均有一定的启示意义.     

控股股东股权质押与商业信用融资——基于内部控制质量和审计质量的考量

以2007-2014年我国A股上市公司为样本,研究控股股东股权质押对商业信用融资的影响.研究表明:相比于非控股股东股权质押的公司,控股股东股权质押的公司获得的商业信用融资更低,即供应商可以感知客户的控股股东股权质押风险.进一步地,以上关系只存在于审计质量和内部控制质量低的公司中;在审计质量高和内部控制质量高的公司中不显著.采用倾向匹配得分法(PSM)、工具变量法(IV)以及固定效应模型(FE)等稳健性测试后,主要结论依然存在.     

控股股东股权质押与上市公司股利政策选择

本文基于2003-2017年间A股上市公司的相关数据研究控股股东股权质押对上市公司在“高送转”与现金股利之间如何选择的影响。本文发现,当控股股东进行了股权质押时,上市公司更可能推出“高送转”的利润分配方案,回避或降低现金股利的倾向更高,这与我国资本市场投资者对“高送转”与现金股利之间偏好差异一致;这一关系在控股股东质押股份比例越高、质押股权面临的平仓风险越高时更为显著。本文的研究揭示了控股股东股权质押在公司股利政策选择方面的经济后果,并为市场投资者对“高送转”以及现金股利的不同偏好提供了增量证据。     

控股股东股权质押与高杠杆公司杠杆操纵——基于我国A股上市公司的经验证据

关于股东股权质押对会计信息质量的影响,已有研究主要聚焦于利润表信息质量(尤其是盈余信息质量),鲜有研究涉及资产负债表信息质量.本文以我国A股非金融类高杠杆上市公司为研究对象,实证检验了控股股东股权质押对公司杠杆操纵的影响.研究发现,与未有控股股东股权质押的高杠杆公司相比,具有控股股东股权质押的高杠杆公司进行杠杆操纵的可能性更大,且控股股东股权质押比例越高,高杠杆公司杠杆操纵程度越大;以上效应在成长性更差、短期偿债压力更大、媒体关注程度更高和股价崩盘风险更大的高杠杆公司中更为显著.     

控股股东股权质押行为和资金流向以及对公司业绩的影响——基于对乐视网的案例分析

近年来,股权质押融资模式越来越受到上市公司控股股东的青睐,这也加剧了代理问题,并为股东的"掏空"行为提供了新的温床,然而是否所有的股权质押行为皆出于这一目的?本文通过对一家上市公司的股权质押行为进行具体的案例研究,分析其所获融资资金的流向及使用状况,以及对其公司业绩的影响来探讨大股东的这一融资行为是否一味为了"利益掏空"。     

Does insiders share pledging stifle innovation? Evidence from China

We examine the relation between insiders share pledging activities for personal loans and firm innovation. Firstly, we find a negative effect of both the existence of pledging and the intensity of pledging activities on firm innovation, measured by R&D and patent application. Pledging by insiders with decision rights is associated with a 4.6% decline in R&D activities and 0.5% decline in patent applications, respectively, which accounts for 4.0% and 10.6% of the mean of each variable. This result holds using a propensity-score matched sample. In addition, we instrument pledging activities by financing constraints faced by other firms controlled by the same controlling insiders who pledge shares. IV estimation yield similar results. Secondly, we find share pledge activities have more pronounced effect on firm innovations when firms are located in areas with strong property rights protection, when firms are non-SOEs, or when pledging insiders serve on corporate boards. Lastly, we also find a negative effect of share pledging of other firms with common shareholders on firm innovations of interest. Overall, our findings suggest that pledging shares by insiders stifle firm innovation because share pledging reduce insiders' preference for risk taking.     

Share pledging,payout policy,and the value of cash holdings

Share pledging for insiders’ personal bank loans is associated with the agency problems of insider risk aversion and stock price crash risk. We examine the relation between insider share pledging and the value of cash holdings using the pledging data of listed firms in Taiwan. We find that the value of cash holdings is lower for pledging firms, especially for those that are relatively more risk averse. Pledging firms that repurchase shares have a higher marginal value of cash than those with other payout methods, likely due to the role of repurchases in reducing the stock price crash risk. Our results show how insiders’ personal financing incentives arising from share pledging would affect the value of cash holdings from the perspective of agency problems and payout policy.     

Relationship Between Controlling Shareholders’ Participation in Share Pledging and Accounting Conservatism in China

This study examines the relationship between controlling shareholders’ participation in share pledging and accounting conservatism in the Chinese stock market. Share pledging introduces risks to controlling shareholders and leads to severe information asymmetry between controlling shareholders and outside minority shareholders. This, in turn, results in competing incentives with regard to financial reporting. We find that controlling shareholders’ participation in share pledging negatively affects accounting conservatism, especially for firms located in regions with weak legal enforcement and poor investor protection. Our study shows that controlling shareholders’ share‐pledging behaviour negatively influences firms’ reporting quality, especially in areas with weak legal systems.     

Impact of share pledging by controlling shareholders on firm value in the context of China's tightened regulatory reforms

This study investigates the effect of the 2018 regulatory reforms of share pledging by a controlling shareholder on firm value in China. Using a dataset spanning the period 2015 to 2020, we provide robust results suggesting that tighter regulations effectively reduce firms' crash risk, relax financial constraints, reduce bankruptcy risk, and mitigate the controlling shareholder expropriation of minority shareholders' wealth via tunnelling. Additionally, controlling shareholders, by investing more pledged funds in the listed firm after reforms, foster capital investment and R&D expenditure, which benefit firm growth and competitiveness and ultimately increase firm long-term value.     

Financing constraints and share pledges: Evidence from the share pledge reform in China

Financing constraints are important to triggering controlling shareholders' share pledges. However, the related literature faces two major challenges: the endogeneity problem and the lack of direct evidence of why and how individual share pledges can ease corporate financing constraints. Based on China's Share Pledge Reform (SPR) in Q4 2012 and the phenomenon that private firms face discrimination when obtaining bank loans, this paper studies the impact of financing constraints on share pledging behavior and its mechanisms by building a difference-in-differences (DID) model. The SPR makes it more convenient for shareholders to raise money through share pledges, and shareholders of private firms facing stronger financing constraints are more vulnerable to this reform than are state-owned enterprises (SOEs). After the SPR, the probability of share pledging by controlling shareholders of private firms is approximately 23.04% higher than that of controlling shareholders of SOEs, and the pledge ratio is approximately 16.53% higher. Further tests reveal that, after the SPR, controlling shareholders of private firms are more inclined than those of SOEs to provide loans to the company to alleviate its financing constraints. Heterogeneity tests further corroborate the finding that this effect is more significant in private firms that are smaller and do not have shareholders of banking and institutional firms among their top ten shareholders.     

Controlling shareholder share pledging and the cost of equity capital: Evidence from China

We propose and test the incentive view—that the margin call pressure and ownership-control discrepancy associated with insider share pledging increase investors’ perceived risk, and thus also the cost of equity capital, in an emerging market. Using a controlling shareholder share pledging sample for Chinese listed firms, we find that firms with share pledging have a cost of equity capital that is 23.7 basis points higher than firms without share pledging. Further, share pledging increases the cost of equity capital through the information risks and agency conflicts channels. Cross-sectional analyses show that share pledging has a stronger effect on the cost of equity capital in non-state-owned enterprises, firms without monitoring of multiple large shareholders, firms with controlling shareholders assuming the position of chairperson, and firms with a weak institutional environment. In addition, using the global financial crisis and the outbreak of the coronavirus (COVID-19) as quasi-natural experiments, we disentangle the potential confounding effect of firm fundamentals and show that share pledging is positively associated with the cost of equity capital. Overall, the results are consistent with our incentive view that share pledging increases the cost of equity capital in an emerging market.     

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.     

Share‐pledging and the cost of debt

We examine how corporate insiders pledging their equity stakes to collateralise personal loans influences firm cost of debt. Pledging enables managers to diversify personal holdings, potentially increasing risk‐taking incentives. However, exposure to contingent risks creates potentially stronger risk‐reducing incentives. Using hand‐collected data with OLS, difference‐in‐differences, and instrumental variables models, we find significant decreases in yield spreads associated with executive share‐pledging. Reductions in spreads surrounding share‐pledge disclosures suggest investors update their risk assessment to reflect pledging managers’ risk‐taking incentives. Consistent with risk‐reducing incentives, firms with share‐pledging executives subsequently reduce leverage.     

The Cost of Multiple Large Shareholders

Previous research argues that large noncontrolling shareholders enhance firm value because they deter expropriation by the controlling shareholder. We propose that the conflicting incentives faced by large shareholders may induce a nonlinear relationship between the relative size of large shareholdings and firm value. Consistent with this prediction, we present evidence that there are costs to having a second (and third) largest shareholder, especially when the largest shareholdings are similar in size. Our results are robust to various relative size proxies, firm performance measures, model specifications, and potential endogeneity issues.