The MultiJurisdictional Disclosure System: Model for Future Cooperation?

This study investigates whether the MultiJurisdictional Disclosure System (MJDS) was successful in meeting its stated objectives, namely, facilitating cross-border offerings and reporting by Canadian firms. The MJDS is a bilateral agreement implemented in July 1991 between Canadian and US market regulators. It is hypothesized that facilitating crossborder offerings via the MJDS will lead to an increase in the number of US listings by Canadian firms and reduced costs of US listing for extant Canadian listers. Data evaluated include changes in US exchange listings from 1987 to 1995 and questionnaires to two subgroups of Canadian firms: (1) the population of Canadian firms listing their securities in US and Canadian markets and (2) a sample of Canadian firms listing only on Canadian exchanges. We conclude that for most Canadian firms, the MJDS provides no significant benefit. Further, few firms reported that the MJDS affected their decision to list in the United States. Our results suggest that the MJDS has not, overall, provided the benefits originally envisioned under it, and we question whether it is an appropriate model for future cooperation between national regulatory groups.     

Canadian Manager Perceptions of the US Exchange Listings: Recent Evidence

This study reports recent evidence of Canadian manager perceptions of the benefits and costs of listing in US markets, their attitudes toward listing in the US market, and their opinions regarding the importance of using alternative reporting and disclosure requirements, such as Canadian GAAP or international standards, in lieu of US GAAP for US listings. Manager perceptions of firms listing in the US ("listers") are compared to those of firms that have not listed in the US ("nonlisters") as well as to listers' perceptions collected prior to the implementation of the Multijurisdictional Disclosure System (MJDS). Our results do not unambiguously support expectations that implementation of the MJDS would result in cost savings for Canadian listers. We find strong similarities in the perceived benefits of listing as previously reported, but in a significantly higher proportion of our post–MJDS sample. Responses from listers and nonlisters reflect differences between the two populations. Listers appeared concerned with US GAAP reconciliations and disclosure requirements while non–listers are more concerned with the overall difficulty of listing, the costs of listing, and US litigation. Most strongly, however, nonlisters perceive it as unnecessary to list in the US market. Contrary to expectations, we find that US accounting disclosure and reporting requirements are not perceived to be barriers to US market entry for Canadian firms, but instead appear to be post–entry irritants. Finally, we also find evidence that perceptions of nonlisters differ between those firms that list on the Vancouver Stock Exchange and those that list on the Toronto Stock exchange. This suggests that future studies may require finer partitions than on a national basis.     

The Economic Consequences of Increased Disclosure: Evidence from Cross-Listings of Chinese Firms

In this paper, we investigate the impact of cross‐listings on information asymmetry risk, the cost of capital and firm value of a group of cross‐listed Chinese companies. Our paper is the first to examine the effect of cross‐listing on information asymmetry risk. Because cross‐listed firms are subject to increased disclosure requirements, increased regulatory scrutiny and increased legal liability, we propose that Chinese cross‐listed firms have lower information asymmetry risk, lower cost of capital and higher firm value than their non‐cross‐listed counterparts. We find in both univariate and multivariate tests that cross‐listed firms enjoyed lower information asymmetry risk in the domestic market compared with the non‐cross‐listed firms. We also find that cross‐listed firms have lower cost of capital in the cross‐listing market than non‐cross‐listed firms in the domestic markets. Finally, we find that cross‐listed firms are associated with higher firm value as measured by Tobin's Q. These results have implications for international investors and companies seeking cross‐listing opportunities.     

上市公司增长机会、增发数量与股价反应

以2007年至2009年成功增发的A股上市公司为样本,对我国上市公司增发数量与股价变动的相互关系进行研究,结果表明:上市公司的增发数量内生于其增长机会,增长机会越大的公司增发数量占发行前总股本的比率也越高;股市对上市公司的过度增发会做出显著的负面反应,但仅有微弱的证据表明谨慎增发会导致股价下跌;公开增发的上市公司较之于定向增发的上市公司具有更多的过度增发倾向,且股价反应也更剧烈。     

Mandated Recognition of Employee Stock Option Expense – The Case of Canada

On December 18, 2003 the Accounting Standards Board of Canada announced that all firms registered in Canada would be required to expense stock options‐based compensation effective January 1, 2004. While a few firms had voluntarily opted to expense stock options prior to this date, the vast majority of firms had not. This study investigates the market reaction to this announcement by listed firms in the Toronto Stock Exchange that continued to disclose option expense rather than report it in the financial statement. We find no average market reaction by our sample firms affected by this mandate around the announcement date, but a significantly negative market reaction during the 5‐day window around the issuance date of the exposure draft. However, in cross‐sectional tests around the mandated expense announcement date, we find a significant negative relationship between the cumulative abnormal returns and the Black–Scholes value (and number) of options outstanding and of options granted the previous year. These results suggest that the magnitude of the market reaction to the mandated expense announcement is related to the firm's usage of options. Our results provide further evidence that stock prices may not fully impound information disclosed in footnotes.     

配股融资过程中的利益转移行为分析——基于上海贝岭的关联交易

本文以上海贝岭为例，分析了上市公司配股过程中通过关联交易进行利益转移的行为。结果发现，关联交易成为上市公司与其关联方进行利益转移的手段。配股前关联方向上市公司进行利益输送，目的是为了提高上市公司的业绩指标，以达到配股资格线；而配股后的利益输出行为则是关联方从上市公司进行的实际利益转移。     

Global Market Segmentation and Patterns in Stock Market Reaction to US Earnings Announcements: Further Evidence

The purpose of this study is to investigate why the information content of US earnings announcements of non‐US firms cross‐listing in the US varies with the degree of capital market segmentation in the cross‐listing firms' countries of domicile. My evidence shows that indirect barriers to investing (i.e., accounting rules and liquidity differences) rather than direct investment barriers (i.e., investment restrictions) mainly account for this difference. After controlling for the level of accounting disclosure in a firm's country of domicile, I do not observe a systematic difference in the size of market's reaction to earnings announcements depending on the degree of market segmentation in the firm's country of domicile. This study contributes to the literature by providing evidence that accounting disclosure plays an important role in the integration of global capital markets.     

‘DUAL’ GRAVITY: USING SPATIAL ECONOMETRICS TO CONTROL FOR MULTILATERAL RESISTANCE

We derive a quantity‐based structural gravity equation system in which both trade flows and error terms are cross‐sectionally correlated. This system can be estimated using techniques borrowed from the spatial econometrics literature. To illustrate our methodology, we apply it to a well‐known Canada–US trade dataset. We find that border effects between the USA and Canada are smaller than suggested by previous studies: about 7.5 for Canadian provinces and about 1.3 for US states. Hence controlling directly for cross‐sectional interdependence among both trade flows and error terms reduces measured border effects by capturing ‘multilateral resistance’. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Why do firms cross-list? International evidence from the US market

Using a modified international asset-pricing model we find strong evidence that publicly quoted firms cross-list when exhibiting strong performance in their domestic market and wish to take advantage of this situation. After cross-listing, this advantage disappears. Our sample consists of daily data for 1165 firms from 47 countries that have cross-listed on the US equity markets over the period 1976–2007. Within the context of this model we provide tests of the validity of the main hypotheses of capital market segmentation and investor protection, which provide explanations for equity cross-listing and investigate whether the nature of the market (regulated or unregulated) and the accompanying legal framework (common or civil law) can account for the impact of cross-listing on returns. Supporting the segmentation hypothesis, we report a decrease in local market risk after cross-listing. However, we find that the magnitude of such a decrease is diminishing over time as international markets become more integrated. On the other hand, we do not find any change in the global market risk after cross-listing, except for firms that cross-listed between 2001 and 2007, where their exposure to international market risk decreases. Furthermore, we find no evidence to support the investor protection hypothesis.     

How Do Financial Constraints Relate to Financial Reporting Quality? Evidence from Seasoned Equity Offerings

This paper examines how constraints on firms’ financing capacity relate to managers’ discretionary accounting choices. Three hypotheses of earnings management – the opportunism hypothesis, the rational expectations hypothesis, and the signaling hypothesis – predict that constrained firms engage in greater upward earnings management than unconstrained firms when selling equity. Using a sample of seasoned equity offerings (SEOs) announced between 1983 and 2014, I find support for this prediction. The relation between financial constraints and earnings management is robust to including controls such as offer size, growth opportunities, analyst following, and chief executive officer equity holdings, as well as to using the instrumental variable approach. Investors’ reaction around and following the SEO announcement supports the rational expectations hypothesis. I find that aggressive earnings management by constrained issuers is associated with lower SEO announcement returns but is not followed by negative abnormal returns in the long run. The evidence suggests that constrained issuers’ aggressive use of income-increasing accruals is an outcome of managerial myopia caused by capital market pressure, not managerial opportunism intended to mislead investors.     

CEO compensation and the seasoned equity offering decision

Empirical research on seasoned equity offerings indicates that the decision to make an SEO typically engenders a decline in firm value, as investors interpret this decision as a signal of poor financial health or that the stock is overpriced. Here, we add to the literature by analyzing the short‐term market reaction to SEO announcements and the chief executive officer's link to firm performance (i.e. the proportion of CEO equity‐based compensation). Results support the hypothesis that investors are more likely to view the announcement of an SEO as a last resort source of capital when the proportion of CEO equity‐based compensation is high. In such cases of high equity‐based compensation, our findings indicate that the SEO announcement provides an incremental signal of financial distress above that provided by financial statements. We also find this relationship (last resort signal) to be stronger when large information asymmetries exist between management and investors. Thus, managers should consider the ramifications of executive compensation structure when considering whether to make an SEO. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Determinants and Valuation Implications of Compulsory Stock Option Disclosures in a Weak Regulatory Setting—The Case of France

Using a sample of listed French firms in 2005, the year of mandatory IFRS adoption in the European Union (EU), we investigate the determinants of disclosure compliance of stock option expenses under IFRS 2, Share‐based Payment. Stock options are a popular means of executive compensation in France relative to other EU countries. Prior to 2005, French accounting standards and corporate governance regulations did not require recognition of option expense amounts and required minimal supplementary disclosures. There was also a perception that enforcement was imperfect, in particular with respect to IFRS 2. Given this setting, we explore what factors influence the willingness of firms to follow compulsory IFRS requirements in a weak regulatory setting. We find that overall compliance with IFRS 2 disclosure requirements increases with U.S. and U.K. institutional ownership, U.S. cross‐listing, provision of English language statements, and decreases with CEO and family ownership of the firm. We also investigate how stock market prices are affected by the recognition and disclosure of stock option expenses according to IFRS 2 in this regulatory setting and find that investors value option expenses positively, particularly when accompanied by high‐disclosure compliance. Our findings have implications for other jurisdictions in the process of adopting or converging to IFRS.     

Disclosure quality,price efficiency,and expected returns

Using a composite disclosure quality measure, we examine the effect of disclosure quality on price delay and the effect of price delay determined by disclosure quality on expected returns in the Taiwan stock market. We find that higher disclosure quality can reduce stock price delay through more investor attention and higher stock liquidity after we control for accounting quality variables and consider the endogeneity issue. Furthermore, we show that disclosure quality reduces expected stock returns through the price efficiency channel associated with both investor attention and stock liquidity. Our results indicate that increasing a firm’s standardized information rating by one standard deviation can reduce its expected stock return by 0.63% annually. Taken together, our evidence suggests that regulatory activities enforced to improve public firms’ disclosure quality in the Taiwan stock market can make the stock market more efficient and therefore lower investors’ required return for stocks.     

Do voluntary disclosures of bad news improve liquidity?

Can managers improve market liquidity and lower the cost of capital by providing voluntary earnings guidance? This study examines the impact of profit warnings on market liquidity and finds that voluntary disclosure of bad news actually improves market liquidity. By conducting an empirical study over the period 1995–2010 on NYSE, NASDAQ and AMEX listed firms, we find that firms that issue profit warnings show enhanced market liquidity during the post-announcement period. We show that profit warnings reduce information asymmetry and lower bid-ask spreads and increase trading volumes. These results are invariant to daily (short run) and monthly (long run) data after controlling for firm specific attributes. The results have major corporate policy implications. By voluntarily disclosing negative earnings guidance by managers, firms will experience significant improvement in market liquidity, thereby lowering the cost of capital. Our results are even more profound for firms that release bad news with extremely negative stock market impact. In other words, voluntary disclosure of bad news is good for market liquidity.     

Financial materiality in the informativeness of sustainability reporting

This study examines whether financial materiality in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure benefits the stock market by increasing the amount of accessible and relevant firm-specific information. Based on the value relevance of information and the principle of financial materiality, we demonstrate that disclosing material ESG information increases stock price informativeness. We conduct an automated content analysis of 150,000 electronic documents filed by firms listed on the S&P/TSX Composite Index from 1999 to the end of 2014. Our findings show that ESG disclosure is indeed value relevant for investors and that financial materiality in ESG disclosure leads to more informative stock prices. In addition, the effect of ESG disclosure on stock price informativeness differs across the ESG components, being more sensitive to the social component. This study contributes to the literature on sustainability reporting, and in particular to the ongoing discussion about whether the financial materiality of ESG issues matters. This study also deepens the understanding of agency theory predictions about the economic effects of ESG disclosure.     

股价崩盘风险、信息环境与企业现金调整

以我国2009—2016年沪深上市公司数据为样本,探究了股价崩盘风险、信息环境对企业现金调整的影响。研究发现：股价崩盘风险越大,企业现金调整速度越快,且这种正相关关系对于分析师跟踪数量较少、机构投资者持股比例少的企业而言更为显著。进一步考察股权性质在企业现金调整速度中的影响,发现国有企业与民营企业面对股价崩盘风险的现金调整速度并不具有显著差异,但是对于民营企业而言,更多的分析师跟踪和机构投资者持股将显著降低企业应对股价崩盘风险的现金调整速度,信息环境对于国有企业的作用并不显著。     

The Value Relevance of Foreign Income: an Australian, Canadian, and British Comparison

In this paper we examine the value relevance of geographical earnings disclosures for firms listed and domiciled in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom. We find that foreign earnings in all three countries are valued differently than domestic earnings. The estimate of the association coefficient for foreign earnings changes with returns is positive in all three countries and statistically larger than the association coefficient for domestic earnings changes in Canada and the United Kingdom. Further tests show that this difference is related to relative growth opportunities of overseas operations to domestic operations. These findings are similar to results for foreign earnings association coefficients for American‐based multinationals found in Bodnar and Weintrop (1997). These results indicate that across countries the market perceives the results of foreign operations as value relevant and suggests that greater emphasis should be placed on the required disclosure of segmental data rather than on the concern that all countries prepare the segmental information using a common GAAP.     

The effect of carbon dissemination on cost of equity

This study examines whether firms can influence their cost of equity (COE) by broadly disseminating their carbon information over Twitter. We study firms' dissemination decisions of carbon information by developing a comprehensive measure of carbon information that a firm makes on Twitter, referred to as iCarbon. Using a sample of 1,737 firm‐year observations for 584 nonfinancial firms with a Twitter account and listed on the U.S. NASDAQ stock exchange over the period 2009–2015, we find that iCarbon is significantly and negatively associated with COE. Our results are consistent after determining the effect of Bloomberg's environmental and environmental, social, and governance disclosure. The findings also hold when using alternative measures of COE and iCarbon.     

On the differential market reaction to dividend initiations

The finance literature documents substantial positive stock price reaction to dividend initiations. Most dividend initiation studies focus on the average positive reaction; however, 40 percent of the firms that initiate dividends experience negative abnormal returns at announcement. This paper focuses on the apparent heterogeneity in the stock price reaction to dividend initiation. I find that the observed negative market reaction reflects the market’s economic assessment of the impact of the event on these firms, and that it is not caused by anticipation or confounding events. The result is also supported by the fact that the market reaction to dividend initiation for these firms is negatively related to initial dividend yield. Both the positive and negative observed reactions are consistent with conventional arguments regarding the information content of dividends, and their role in mitigating agency problems.     

Multinationals' Offshore Operations,Tax Avoidance,and Firm‐Specific Information Flows: International Evidence

Using a large sample of multinational enterprises (MNEs) over the period 1999–2009, this study investigates whether and how offshore operations via offshore financial centers (OFCs) impact the extent to which firm‐specific information is incorporated into stock price, relative to common information. Our analyses show that, irrespective of whether a firm is a Type I offshore firm (directly having headquarters registered in OFCs) or a Type II offshore firm (indirectly setting up subsidiaries in OFCs), the amount of firm‐specific information flowing into stock price is lower for offshore firms than for non‐offshore firms. We also find that as offshore firms become more aggressive in their tax avoidance strategies, their stock prices impound a lower amount of firm‐specific information relative to common information. Finally, we find that a strong offshore proclivity also deters firm‐specific information flows, thereby driving up stock price synchronicity. Our results suggest that the opaque and complex nature of business and financial transactions in OFCs, coupled with their institutional characteristics, that is, weak and flexible legal enforcement, zero or extremely low taxation, and low litigation risk, provide offshore firms with not only stronger incentives but also the opportunities and means to adopt opaque disclosure policies and aggressive earnings management.