Conservative Accounting and Linear Information Valuation Models*

Prior research using the residual income valuation model and linear information models has generally found that estimates of firm value are negatively biased. We argue that this could result from the way in which accounting conservatism effects are reflected in such models. We build on the conservative accounting model of Feltham and Ohlson 1995 and the Dechow, Hutton, and Sloan 1999 (DHS) methodology to propose a valuation model that includes a conservatism‐correction term, based on the properties of past realizations of residual income and “other information”. “Other information” is measured using analyst‐forecast‐based predictions of residual income. We use data comparable to the DHS sample to compare the bias and inaccuracy of value estimates from our model and from models similar to those used by DHS and Myers 1999. Valuation biases are substantially less negative for our model, but valuation inaccuracy is not markedly reduced.     

Impact of Partner Change on Audit Quality: An Analysis of Partner and Firm Specialisation Effects

This study investigates the impact of audit partner rotation on audit quality and whether industry specialisation moderates such a relationship. The results of this study show that audit partner rotation can enhance audit quality but only when both the incoming audit partner and the audit firm are industry specialists. The results of the study provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of audit partner rotation and auditor industry specialisation practices, and their impact on audit quality. The results have implications for the profession as well as regulators regarding audit partner and audit firm industry specialisation. This is the first study to examine the moderating effect of industry specialisation on the auditor rotation–audit quality relationship at the partner level. The introduction of industry specialisation as a moderating factor provides additional insights into the auditor rotation–audit quality relationship at the partner level.     

Do Campaign Contributions and Lobbying Expenditures by Firms Create “Political” Capital?

We examine the relation between a firm’s campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures and its Tobin’s q. We follow other studies that use q to measure the value of the firm’s intangible capital (e.g., the value of advertising, R&D, or environmental performance). Researchers have found a positive and significant relation between intangible assets and q. If political capital exists, it is an intangible asset. However, we find little relation between q and political contributions, suggesting that campaign contributions may not have long term effects on political markets. This is consistent with the view that contributions are done by firms as a response to a short term opportunity not as a way of building long-term political capital.

Detecting earnings management using cross-sectional abnormal accruals models

This paper examines specification and power issues in relation to three models used to estimate abnormal accruals. In contrast to the majority of prior work evaluating models estimated in time-series, we examine the performance of cross-sectionally estimated models. In addition to testing the standard-Jones (Jones, 1991) and modified-Jones (Dechow et al., 1995) models, we also develop and test a new specification, labelled the ‘margin model’. Consistent with prior US research employing time-series specifications of the two Jones models, our findings suggest that each of the three cross-sectional models are well specified when applied to a random sample of firm-years. However, the margin model appears to generate relatively better specified estimates of abnormal accruals when cash flow performance is extreme. Analysis of the models' ability to detect artificially induced earnings management indicates that all three procedures are capable of generating relatively powerful tests for economically plausible levels of accruals management (e.g., less than 10% of lagged total assets). Regarding their relative performance, the standard-Jones and modified-Jones models are found to be more powerful for revenue and bad debt manipulations. In contrast, the margin appears to be more powerful at detecting non-bad debt expense manipulations.     

DO “CAPITALIZATION EFFECTS” FOR PUBLIC GOODS REVEAL THE PUBLIC'S WILLINGNESS TO PAY?

This article develops a welfare theoretic framework for interpreting evidence on the impacts of public programs on housing markets. We extend Rosen's hedonic model to explain how housing prices capitalize exogenous shocks to public goods and externalities. The model predicts that trading between heterogeneous buyers and sellers will drive a wedge between these “capitalization effects” and welfare changes. We test this hypothesis in the context of changes in measures of school quality in five metropolitan areas. Results from boundary discontinuity designs suggest that capitalization effects understate parents’ willingness to pay for public school improvements by as much as 75%.     

Foreign Ownership and Non‐Life Insurer Efficiency in the Japanese Marketplace

Traditional shareholding patterns in Japan have experienced significant change beginning in the early 1990s. Since that time, foreign institutional shareholding has increased significantly largely at the expense of domestic financial institution ownership. This article examines whether these changes in ownership patterns share a relationship with insurer performance in the non‐life insurance market. Using data from 1992 to 2005, we assess performance in terms of efficiency measures using data envelopment analyses (DEA) techniques. Our results show that higher levels of domestic financial institution ownership in Japan are associated with insurer inefficiency. Relative to that relationship, the foreign ownership–insurer efficiency relationship is found to be positive. Additionally, we find that the disparity between those relationships has become more acute since 2001 when the Japanese non‐life insurance market experienced significant consolidation.     

Empirical linkages between good governance and national well-being

This paper brings together the largest available sets of national-level data, covering 157 countries over the years 2005–2012, to assess the extent to which governance quality contributes to life evaluations. Our most significant new finding is that changes in governance quality within a policy-relevant time horizon can lead to significant changes in the quality of life. For example, the ten most-improved countries, in terms of changes in government service delivery quality between 2005 and 2012, when compared to the ten most-worsened countries, are estimated to have average life evaluations higher by 0.4 points on a 0 to 10 scale. The results also confirm earlier findings that service delivery quality generally dominates democratic quality in supporting better lives until delivery quality has reached sufficient levels. The situation changes as development proceeds, with democratic quality showing a positive influence among countries that have already achieved higher quality of service delivery.     

Explaining university course grade gaps

This paper estimates the discrepancy in university mathematics and science course grades across races. Although there are significant Black–White and Hispanic–White grade discrepancies, or gaps, Black and Hispanic students who are equally prepared for university as White students do as well as White students. The grade gaps are explained after accounting for important factors such as a student’s academic capabilities and socioeconomic status. Varying behaviors of university students relative to high school across races are ruled out as a possible source of the grade gaps.     

Comparing Merger Policies in the European Union and the United States

We collect a sample of EU and US merger investigations, estimate models of the regulatory decisions, and use the models to compare merger policies. Our approach allows us to decompose observed differences into policy effects and case-mix effects. Focusing on dominance mergers, we find that the EU is tougher than the US on average, in particular for mergers resulting in moderate market shares. However, the US appears to be more aggressive for coordinated interaction and non-dominance unilateral effects cases. Overall, our analysis detects substantial differences in policies, but it does not classify one regime as being more aggressive than the other.