市场景气、融资约束与制造业投资 ——基于带有预期效应的新古典投资理论的再检验

本文在新古典投资理论基础上,将市场景气状态、预期偏差、融资约束纳入投资行为的理论分析框架,并利用我国31个省(自治区、直辖市)制造业上市企业微观数据进行了实证检验.研究表明:企业合意投资水平与市场景气水平密切相关,当市场处于扩张期时,企业合意投资规模提高,反之合意投资规模下降.受预期偏差和融资约束的影响,企业实际投资规模偏离合意投资水平,形成非效率投资.融资约束不是越低越好,当市场处于扩张期,企业对未来预期过于乐观时,适度的融资约束有助于企业合理控制投资规模,避免投资过度;当市场处于收缩期,且企业对未来预期过于悲观时,降低融资约束有利于提高企业投资规模;国有企业和民营企业由于融资能力和投资动力不同,其投资水平也有所不同,相对于民营企业,国有企业更容易产生过度投资问题.     

薪酬-职务倒挂是否具有“黑色嫉妒”效应?——基于国有企业薪酬激励对企业行为的影响研究

合理的薪酬契约是管理层激励的重要机制之一。本文以2007-2016年A股国有企业为样本,研究薪酬激励中薪酬-职务倒挂安排对企业投资行为和社会责任行为的影响。结果表明,由于我国A股国有企业的隐性激励机制的存在,薪酬-职务倒挂并未导致"黑色嫉妒"效应,虽然薪酬-职务倒挂短期内抑制了企业投资水平,但降低的部分主要来自于抑制企业过度投资;同时,薪酬-职务倒挂企业会通过提供就业岗位的形式承担更多的社会责任。进一步研究表明:(1)薪酬-职务倒挂对投资水平的抑制主要存在于地方国企;(2)当CEO任期较短时,薪酬-职务倒挂的企业增加投资的意愿较弱。本文结论为国有企业制定合理的薪酬契约提供了一定的借鉴意义。     

高管团队背景特征视角下的会计稳健性与投资效率关系研究

本文以2008-2011年沪深A股上市公司为研究对象,区分产权性质,实证检验了会计稳健性对投资效率的影响,以及高管团队背景特征对二者关系的影响。研究发现,会计稳健性会抑制投资过度,加剧投资不足;国有企业的会计稳健性加剧投资不足和抑制投资过度的程度要弱于非国有企业。进一步研究发现,国有企业高管团队的平均年龄、任期异质性、教育背景及其异质性显著影响会计稳健性与非效率投资的关系,非国有企业高管团队的任期及其异质性、教育背景及其异质性显著影响会计稳健性与非效率投资关系。     

管理者任期、晋升激励与研发投资研究

本文在委托代理理论的分析框架下,着重运用高层梯队理论和心理契约理论,以我国2008—2012年上市公司为样本,考察了在晋升激励的作用下,管理者的既有任期和预期任期对研发投资的影响。结果发现:管理者既有任期与研发投资呈倒U型关系;管理者预期任期与研发投资正相关;晋升激励在既有任期影响研发投资中起到了正向调节作用,但在非国有公司中强于国有公司;晋升激励在预期任期影响研发投资中尚未起到调节作用,但在非国有公司中却起到了负向调节作用。这些研究结论对于深入理解企业的研发投资行为,以及完善管理者晋升激励机制和加强人力资源管理都具有一定的启示意义。     

非控股股东参与决策积极性与企业投资效率

选取2008-2019年A股上市公司股东大会投票数据,研究非控股股东参与决策积极性对企业投资效率的影响.研究表明:第一,非控股股东参与决策积极性与投资效率存在反向因果关系.非控股股东参与决策的积极性越高,企业非效率投资现象越严重,主要表现为投资过度;相较于国有企业,非国有企业投资过度现象更为显著.第二,非控股股东通过高...     

政治关联、过度自信与非效率投资

通过运用2006～2010年上市公司的管理者个人背景数据以及投资数据样本,对不同政治关联形式对管理者过度自信心理形成的影响,以及在不同产权性质下,政治关联所导致的过度自信心理同企业非效率投资之间的相关关系进行实证研究。结果表明,对于管理者而言,具有政府部门工作背景比担任人大或政协代表更易引发其过度自信心理的形成。同时,在政治关联所引起的管理者过度自信心理的作用下,企业会加剧其过度投资水平,而缓解其投资不足状况。     

管理者能力影响企业短贷长投吗？

以2012—2016年沪深主板上市公司为样本,利用"投资—短期贷款敏感性"模型证实了我国企业"短贷长投"的客观存在性,发现管理者能力不仅能缓解短贷长投现象,而且能降低短贷长投对企业业绩产生的负面效应;进一步分析发现:管理者能力通过缓解制度缺陷导致的融资约束和非理性引起的过度投资来抑制短贷长投;管理者能力对短贷长投及其经济后果的缓解效应在非国有企业中更显著。     

管理者过度自信、 会计稳健性与制造业投资效率 ——基于我国制造业上市企业异质性研究

本文以2010—2020年沪深两市制造业上市企业为样本,建立动态面板模型,实证检验了制造业企业管理者过度自信、会计稳健性与企业投资的关系.研究发现:当企业存在过度投资时,管理者过度自信将会进一步加剧过度投资程度;当企业存在投资不足时,管理者过度自信将会凭借积极的负债策略,一定程度上缓解投资不足.调节效应检验发现会计稳健性可以抑制制造业企业过度投资行为,缓解投资不足,降低管理者过度自信对制造业过度投资的推动作用,增强其对制造业投资不足的缓解效应.异质性检验发现会计稳健性的调节效应在非国有企业、东部地区、小规模企业表现更明显.     

管理者过度自信、现金流量与投资决策

随着投资行为的多元化和复杂化,关于人类理性的严格假设在实践中遭到质疑。过度自信是基于非理性的一种主观心理行为。投资决策是公司在给定资本约束情况下对可能的投资项目进行有效选择,以实现投资收益最大化。在针对公司管理者的研究中发现,管理者在进行投资项目决策时,往往会表现出过度自信,同时管理者的自信度也可以在特定投资机会下改变企业现金流的成本和收益。本文研究了在资金充裕的情况下,管理者过度自信对投资决策的影响。本文在以管理层持股数变化作为衡量过度自信的标准,在对管理者过度自信、现金流量和企业投资决策的关系进行实证分析的基础上,得出了管理者过度自信与公司的投资水平呈正相关关系。即管理者过度自信会带来投资过度,损害企业价值。本文假设现金流量在一定程度上会影响投资支出,但是经过严格的实证检验,发现结果并不显著,所以出于尊重数据的考虑,本文认为在特殊时期(金融危机),且样本量有限的情况下,现金流量不会对投资决策产生显著影响。     

CEO金融背景能提高企业投资效率吗?

中国上市公司具有金融背景的CEO呈现出鲜明的个人特征,其特征必然会反映到企业投资决策中,这为研究投资效率影响因素提供了新的切入点。在此背景下,基于“烙印理论”和“高层梯队理论”,本文考察了CEO金融背景对企业投资效率的影响和作用机制。研究发现,CEO金融背景会导致企业过度投资进而降低企业投资效率,且银行背景CEO产生的负向作用更为显著。渠道检验发现,CEO金融背景通过提高管理者过度自信程度、降低企业融资约束来抑制企业投资效率。进一步分析发现,CEO金融背景对企业投资效率的负向作用在非国有企业中更为显著。本文在丰富高管金融背景与投资效率相关研究的同时,也为公司治理和经济高质量发展提供了新思考。     

Association Between Borrower and Lender State Ownership and Accounting Conservatism

We examine the association between borrower (firm) and lender (bank) state ownership and accounting conservatism for a sample of Chinese firms. We hypothesize that state‐owned enterprises (SOEs) adopt less conservative accounting than non‐state‐owned enterprises (NSOEs) because lenders are less concerned with downside risk for SOEs than for NSOEs. We also hypothesize a negative relation between conservatism and the fraction of total loans a firm borrows from state‐owned banks (SBs) because SBs have weaker demand for assurance of sufficient net assets to cover loan repayments than non‐state‐owned banks (NSBs). We find support for both hypotheses. Further analyses reveal that: (1) firms that borrow from commercial SBs exhibit more conservative accounting than firms that borrow from policy SBs and (2) firms adopt more conservative accounting as they get more loans from banks with foreign ownership or exclusively foreign banks. However, the results of these additional analyses are to some extent sensitive to alternative measures of accounting conservatism.     

Mandatory CSR disclosure,monitoring and investment efficiency: evidence from China

This study investigates the effect of mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure on firms’ investment efficiency in China. Using the CSR regulation that mandates a group of listed firms to disclose stand‐alone CSR reports after 2008 as a natural experiment, we find that firms subject to the mandatory CSR regulation have decreased investment inefficiency subsequent to the mandate, especially in cases of overinvestment. This effect is more pronounced for firms with a control‐ownership wedge, state‐owned enterprises (SOEs), and firms having lower institutional ownership. Further analyses find that the reduction of overinvestment is much more significant in industries with high pollution and that the reduction in investment is not due to the CSR spending siphoning off capital used in other projects. We argue that mandatory corporate social responsibility disclosure improves monitoring over firms in China, especially when firms are characterised as having severe agency problems.     

Investment efficiency,state-owned enterprises and privatisation: Evidence from Viet Nam in Transition

Our research firstly tests the difference in investment efficiency between state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and private firms and secondly evaluates the effect of privatisation and equitisation policies on the investment efficiency of former state owned enterprises (SOEs). We use a novel dataset from Viet Nam which covers large and non-listed SMEs across construction, manufacturing, and service sectors. Our methodology uses a structural model to test the relationship between Tobin's Q and capital spending. While evident differences in investment efficiency are found across heterogeneous groups of private firms (size, industry, financially constrained and location), we find no evidence of investment spending being linked to marginal returns by SOEs across all sectors and size classes. However, former SOEs that have been privatised and equitized with a minority state shareholding display positive links between Q and investment. In fact, the link is stronger for these firms than for private firms. Differences are also evident across size and sector highlighting that the method of divestment chosen by government shareholders has a differential impact on efficiency across groups of firms and industries.     

The Impact of Government Intervention on Corporate Investment Allocations and Efficiency: Evidence from China

We examine whether government intervention plays an important role in determining corporate investment allocations and efficiency in China. We find the government tends to intervene to promote corporate investment in fixed assets, equity in other state‐owned enterprises (SOEs), and natural resources including oil, natural gas, and mines, but reduces research and development (R&D) investment. However, the effects of government intervention on these investment allocations are primarily found in local SOEs rather than in central SOEs or in private enterprise. Government intervention also induces a crowding‐out effect in natural resource investments of private firms, suggesting that government intervention distorts investment allocations and reduces investment efficiency.     

Do company visits by institutional investors mitigate managerial myopia in R&D investment? Evidence from China

This study investigates the effects of company visits by institutional investors on managerial myopia about investment in research and development (R&D) in China. We find that company visits increase R&D spending. We also find that this increase is more pronounced for companies that have an entrenched chief executive officer (CEO), as indicated by longer CEO tenure and CEO duality, and for companies that face less intense market competition. The results further show that the increase in R&D spending is more pronounced for companies that have larger institutional ownership, are invested by long-term oriented institutions, are in the high-tech industry, and are state owned. These findings attest to the governance role of institutional investors.     

Local fiscal distress and investment efficiency of local SOEs

In this paper, we use A-share listed firms between 2002 and 2010 to investigate the relationship between local fiscal distress and the investment efficiency of local SOEs, along with the effect of corporate tax payments on this relationship. We find a positive relationship between the extent of local SOEs' overinvestment and the fiscal distress of the corresponding local government where the enterprise and this relationship become stronger for firms that pay fewer taxes. The pattern of underinvestment among local SOEs was in contrast,and these relationships do not exist for non-SOEs or central SOEs. Moreover,we find that expanding a firm's investment scale leads to an increase in total taxes paid, including income and turnover taxes, which further result in more local fiscal revenue. Overall, we conclude that local governments have an incentive to increase fiscal revenue when faced with fiscal distress by raising the investment scale of local SOEs and that the incentives and effects of such interventions appear to be stronger among firms that contribute less to local fiscal revenue.ó 2013 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of China Journal of Accounting Research. Founded by Sun Yat-sen University and City University of Hong Kong.     

Political connections,tax benefits and firm performance: Evidence from China

This paper investigates the different effects of political connections on the firm performance of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and privately owned enterprises. Using data on Chinese listed firms from 1999 to 2007, we find that private firms with politically connected managers outperform those without such managers, whereas local SOEs with connected managers underperform those without such managers. Moreover, we find that private firms with politically connected managers enjoy tax benefits, whereas local SOEs with politically connected managers are prone to more severe over-investment problems. Our study reconciles the mixed findings of previous studies on the effect of political connections on firm performance.     

Managerial ownership and firm performance: Evidence from China's privatizations

We examine the relationship between managerial ownership and firm performance for a sample of Chinese State-owned enterprises (SOEs) privatized over the period 1992-2000. The results indicate that managerial ownership has a positive effect on firm performance. Although return on assets (ROA) and return on sales (ROS) decline post-privatization, firms with high managerial ownership and, specially, high CEO ownership, exhibit a smaller performance decline. The difference is highly significant, with or without controlling for residual state ownership and changes in the firm's operating environment. We also find that the influence on firm performance becomes less significant at higher levels of CEO ownership. In contrast, performance continues to increase with managerial ownership. This finding suggests that, beyond a certain point, the distribution of shares would be more effective if extended to the whole management team instead of being limited to the chief executive.     

Agency costs and tax planning when the government is a major Shareholder

In state owned enterprises (SOEs), taxes are a dividend to the controlling shareholder, the state, but a cost to other shareholders. We examine publicly traded firms in China and find significantly lower tax avoidance by SOEs relative to non-SOEs. The differences are pronounced for locally versus centrally-owned SOEs and during the year of SOE term performance evaluations. We link our results to managerial incentives through promotion tests, finding that higher SOE tax rates are associated with higher promotion frequencies of SOE managers. Our results suggest managerial incentives and tax reporting are conditional on the ownership structure of the firm.     

Ownership–efficiency relationship and the measurement selection bias

This study analyses the bias in the selection of performance measures for ownership comparisons, which depends on the specific objectives of the firms being compared. Our sample includes 13 Canadian state‐owned enterprises (SOEs), commercialized and/or privatized between 1976 and 2001. To replace profitability measures and reduce biases, we propose the use of technical efficiency, which provides for SOEs’ specificities. Overall, the results clearly support the view that privatization has no impact on a firm's technical efficiency, the only positive impact being related to a change in the objectives of the firm while using profitability measures. The results of this study raise the question of the validity of comparisons between SOEs and private firms when using profitability indicators. The potential bias in favour of the private firms contributes to a misleading image of the public sector being presented as inferior and inefficient. The use of more sophisticated measures, such as data envelopment analysis, suggests conflicting conclusions. This study also casts doubt on the legitimacy of the privatization program initiated around the world and more specifically in Canada in which the main justification for such a reform has been to increase the performance of SOEs.