商业信用合同的履行概率,其外部性及现金需求——中国案例

本文测算了商业信用合同违约风险对商业贸易和现金需求的影响。结果显示,外国直接投资企业为其贸易伙伴提供了大量商业信用,而中国的企业,无论是私营,还是国有企业,他们交易实行货到即时付款的比例很高。外国直接投资企业之所以是经济交易中信贷的提供者,是因为他们具有较高的商业信用合同执行技术(contract enforcement technology)。我们还发现商业信用合同的执行技术主要包括贸易物品的竞争力、竞争幅度、与地方政府的关系以及公司治理的性质。一个企业具有较高的合同执行概率,就可能提供大量的商业信用,并获得更大的交易量。合同执行技术对贸易交易量的弹性估计约为2.2。模拟显示如果合同执行概率提高,分布在75%,贸易交易量可增加24%,商业信用规模可增加30%。由于商业信用合约的不完备而导致的经济损失则是巨大的。此外,我们证实,高的商业信用合同执行技术通过商业信用量和交易量的增加而在经济中产生正外部效应。     

Ownership Concentration in Privatized Firms: The Role of Disclosure Standards, Auditor Choice, and Auditing Infrastructure

We rely on a unique data set to estimate the impact of disclosure standards and auditor‐related characteristics on ownership concentration in 190 privatized firms from 31 countries. Accounting transparency can help alleviate the agency conflict between minority investors and controlling shareholders, which is evident in the extent of ownership concentration, since the expropriation of corporate resources hinges on these private benefits remaining hidden. After controlling for other country‐level and firm‐level determinants, we find weak (no) evidence that extensive disclosure standards (auditor choice) reduce ownership concentration. In contrast, we report strong, robust evidence that ownership concentration is lower in countries with securities laws that specify a lower burden of proof in civil and criminal litigation against auditors, consistent with Ball's [2001] predictions. Collectively, our research implies that minority investors worldwide value legal institutions that discipline auditors in the event of financial reporting failure over both the presence of a Big 5 auditor and better disclosure standards. Re‐estimating our regressions on a broad sample of western European public firms provides similar evidence on all of our predictions.     

Cross-border regulatory enforcement and corporate voluntary disclosure

In this study, we find that foreign firms cross-listed in the US issue significantly more and better-quality management earnings forecasts after their home countries sign the Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Consultation and Cooperation and the Exchange of Information (MMoU), a nonbinding arrangement established by the International Organization of Securities Commissions to enhance the cross-border enforcement of securities laws. Specifically, we find that after the MMoU, relative to their domestic counterparts in the US, foreign firms cross-listed in the US are not only more likely to issue management earnings forecasts but also issue them more frequently. They also tend to issue better-quality earnings forecasts, as measured by lower surprise, higher precision, greater timeliness, more disaggregation, lower optimism and fewer errors. We find that the observed effects of the MMoU signing are stronger for cross-listed firms from countries with weaker institutional environments, resulting in greater enforcement concerns after the MMoU, and for firms with less foreign institutional ownership before the MMoU. Collectively, our findings support the conjecture that after a US-listed foreign firm's home country enters the MMoU, the firm has more incentives to engage in voluntary disclosure due to greater concerns about regulatory enforcement and increased information demand from investors.     

Voluntary CSR disclosure,institutional environment,and independent audit demand

Using a sample of A-share listed companies on the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges, this study examines the impact of voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure on independent audit demand in different institutional environments. The sample covers the 2008–2016 period and excludes firms that are required to disclose CSR information. The findings show that compared with companies that choose to not disclose such information, companies that voluntarily disclose CSR information prefer to employ “small” accounting firms for auditing services, although the auditing fees are much higher. However, as the institutional environment improves, this preference is weakened. Further analyses show that this preference is stronger in enterprises where CSR disclosure is driven by strong political motivations and managerial self-interest motivations. Legitimate motivations and economic motivations do not significantly impact the preference for “small” audit firms. Furthermore, this preference is more obvious in enterprises with poor operational performance and low information disclosure quality, and it increases as CSR disclosure level decreases. The study enriches our understanding of the economic consequences of voluntary CSR disclosure and the factors that influence independent audit demand. The results also have implications for the construction and regulation of China’s system for supervising CSR information disclosure in the transitional phase.     

Corporate financing and anticipated credit rating changes

Firm circumstances change but rating agencies may not make timely revisions to their ratings, thereby increasing information asymmetry between firms and the market. We examine whether firms time the securities market before a credit rating agency publicly reveals its decision to change a firm’s credit rating. Using quarterly data, we show that firms adjust their financing structures before credit rating downgrades are publicly revealed. Specifically, firms on average increase their debt financing by 1.29 % before the disclosure of a rating downgrade, and this increase is due to the issuance of debt rather than the repurchase of equity. In contrast, firms do not take significant financing actions before credit rating upgrades.     

Disclosure Decisions by Firms and the Competition for Price Efficiency

This paper develops a model of the relationship between investment decisions by firms and the efficiency of the market prices of their securities. It is shown that more efficient security prices can lead to more efficient investment decisions. This provides firms with the incentive to increase price efficiency by voluntarily disclosing information about the firm. Disclosure decisions are studied. It is shown that firms may expend more resources on disclosure than is socially optimal. This is in contrast to the concern implicit in mandatory disclosure rules that firms will expend too few resources on disclosure.     

SEC product-line reporting and market efficiency

This study tests the efficiency of the securities market with respect to non-public segment earnings data for 1967–1969 which was first made public by many firms in 1970 SEC 10-K reports. Trading rule strategies are proposed in which segment-based earnings forecasts are compared to consolidated-based forecasts to anticipate ‘unexpected’ changes in earnings. Using the ‘market model’ to eliminate market related movements in security prices, average monthly abnormal returns conditional on this segment-based strategy are estimated for 1968, 1969, and 1970 for two groups of firms: (1) ‘Non-disclosure’ firms that did not publicly report either segment revenue or profit data prior to 1970, and (2) ‘partial disclosure’ firms that publicly reported segment revenue information, but no segment profits, prior to 1970.The results suggest that the market was not efficient with respect to the non-public segment revenue and profit data of non-disclosure firms for 1968–1969. However, this finding could not be replicated for 1970. The average monthly abnormal returns conditional on the segment-based trading rule strategy were found to be relatively small for the partial disclosure firms. This suggests that segment revenue data can be used to successfully anticipate changes in total entity earnings which would otherwise be ‘unexpected’ if only consolidated data were available.     

Escape from New York: The market impact of loosening disclosure requirements

We examine the first significant deregulation of U.S. disclosure requirements since the passage of the 1933/1934 Exchange and Securities Acts: the 2007 Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 12h-6. Rule 12h-6 has made it easier for foreign firms to deregister with the SEC and thereby terminate their U.S. disclosure obligations. We show that the market reacted negatively to the announcement by the SEC that firms from countries with weak disclosure and governance regimes could more easily opt out of the stringent U.S. reporting and legal environment. We also find that since the rule's passage, an unprecedented number of firms have deregistered, and these firms often had been previous targets of U.S. class action securities lawsuits or SEC enforcement actions. Our findings suggest that shareholders of non-U.S firms place significant value on U.S. securities regulations, especially when the home country investor protections are weak.     

The Costs, Wealth Effects, and Determinants of International Capital Raising: Evidence from Public Yankee Bonds

This paper examines the costs, wealth effects, and determinants of international capital raising for a sample of 260 public debt issues made by non-U.S. firms in the Yankee bond market. We find that investors demand economically significant premiums on bonds issued by firms that are located in countries that do not protect investors' rights and do not have a prior history of ongoing disclosure. The results provide support for the literature that suggests better legal protections and more detailed information disclosure increases the price investors will pay for financial assets. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: F3, G1.     

Disclosure,Liquidity, and the Cost of Capital

This paper shows that revealing public information to reduce information asymmetry can reduce a firm's cost of capital by attracting increased demand from large investors due to increased liquidity of its securities. Large firms will disclose more information since they benefit most. Disclosure also reduces the risk bearing capacity available through market makers. If initial information asymmetry is large, reducing it will increase the current price of the security. However, the maximum current price occurs with some asymmetry of information: further reduction of information asymmetry accentuates the undesirable effects of exit from market making.     

Disclosure Practices by Family Firms: Evidence from Swedish Publicly Listed Firms

Abstract

I investigate the effect of family ownership on firms’ disclosure practices in their annual reports. In specific, I study Swedish publicly listed firms, which are typically characterized by controlling owners that have a strong influence in the corporate governance decisions of the firm, including corporate disclosures. To measure disclosure, I construct a comprehensive disclosure index covering information on (1) corporate governance, (2) strategic and financial targets and (3) notes to the financial statements. The results reveal that overall, family firms provide less disclosure in annual reports than non-family firms do. The finding is consistent with the premise that through their management positions, family owners can directly monitor managers and avoid costly public disclosures. Overall, the results suggest that ownership structure of firms is important to consider in understanding firms’ disclosure incentives, particularly in settings where controlling owners play a significant role in the governance of the firm.     

Cross-border enforcement of securities laws and dividend payouts

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, numerous countries signed a special nonbinding arrangement to enhance cross-border enforcement of securities laws. This agreement is the Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Consultation and Cooperation and the Exchange of Information (MMoU). This study examines whether and how a country's MMoU entry affects firms' dividend payout policies. Relative to domestic US firms, foreign firms cross-listed in the US report a significant increase in dividend payouts after their home country entered the MMoU. Furthermore, the effect of MMoU on corporate dividend payouts is pronounced for (1) firms with high agency costs, (2) countries with low external governance quality, and (3) countries with poor disclosure environments. Furthermore, we find that MMoU significantly changes the corporate governance structure. Our findings collectively corroborate the prediction of the dividend outcome model and are consistent with the notion that strengthening cross-border regulatory enforcement of foreign firms improves protection for outside shareholders and increases dividend payouts.     

Shareholder Litigation and Corporate Disclosure: Evidence from Derivative Lawsuits

Using the staggered adoption of universal demand (UD) laws in the United States, we study the effect of shareholder litigation risk on corporate disclosure. We find that disclosure significantly increases after UD laws make it more difficult to file derivative lawsuits. Specifically, firms issue more earnings forecasts and voluntary 8‐K filings, and increase the length of management discussion and analysis (MD&A) in their 10‐K filings. We further assess the direct and indirect channels through which UD laws affect firms' disclosure policies. We find that the effect of UD laws on corporate disclosure is driven by firms facing relatively higher ex ante derivative litigation risk and higher operating uncertainty, as well as firms for which shareholder litigation is a more important mechanism to discipline managers.     

Do stock prices reflect undisclosed financial statement information? Evidence from the OTCBB

I exploit a regulatory change that mandated that Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) firms must comply with the reporting requirements of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act. I use this change to examine the association between equity values and financial statement data in voluntary and mandatory disclosure environments. Before the change, disclosure of financial statement information was voluntary for most of these firms. I study firms that initiate SEC filing after the change and classify them as disclosing and nondisclosing based on whether they voluntarily disclosed financial statement information before the regulatory change. In these firms’ initial SEC filings after the eligibility rule, they retroactively disclose financial statement information for the year prior to compliance with the rule. Thus I can observe previously withheld financial data. I find that the choice to voluntarily disclose is negatively associated with firm characteristics related to proprietary costs and with situations in which accounting information plays a less important role in resolving information asymmetry. For nondisclosing firms, I find evidence that equity values reflect financial statement data, even though this information was not publicly available, and that compliance with mandatory SEC disclosure requirements strengthens this association. For disclosing firms, I find evidence that suggests investors viewed their voluntary disclosure of financial statement data as credible and fail to find evidence that compliance with mandatory reporting requirements enhances this association.     

Bonding to the Improved Disclosure Environment in the US: Firms' Listing Choices and their Capital Market Consequences

We examine whether current disclosure requirements affect foreign firms' decisions to list on a US exchange. We document that (1) while firms from a weak disclosure environment are more likely to cross-list and either trade OTC or be placed privately, they are less likely to list on an exchange in which firms are required to comply with US GAAP, (2) exchange-listing firms receive a higher valuation than non-exchange-listing firms, and (3) exchange-listing firms domiciled in a higher disclosure regime, who incur lower costs of US GAAP compliance, generally receive a higher valuation than exchange-listing firms from a lower disclosure regime.     

Auditor liability and excess cash holdings: Evidence from audit fees of foreign incorporated firms

Auditors of foreign cross-listed firms face liability arising from the nature of the institutional monitoring framework of legal claims that can potentially be brought against the auditor in both the home country and the US. This paper is the first to document the relationship between auditor liability and auditor pricing of excess cash holdings for foreign firms cross-listed in the US. Our findings indicate that auditors demand a fee premium for foreign incorporated clients with greater excess cash holdings, consistent with auditors recognizing the potential for legal exposure to agency conflict arising from foreign listed US traded clients. Furthermore, we examine aspects of foreign capital market protections, such as disclosure requirements, the strength of legal enforcement, and the strength of shareholder rights to better understand auditor perception of the liability they incur due to the agency costs associated with excess cash holdings. We find that there is a significant positive association between audit fees and excess cash holdings for firms where the country of incorporation permits greater liability of auditors in criminal and civil litigation. In addition, auditors assign higher audit fees to firms holding greater excess cash incorporated in countries with greater required accounting disclosure, stronger legal enforcement and stronger shareholder rights.     

Performance peer groups in CEO compensation contracts

How do firms choose performance peer groups used in chief executive officer (CEO) relative performance evaluation contracts? We find that while firms, for the most part, choose performance peers to better identify their CEOs’ impact on firm performance, they also tend to select underperforming peers. Dynamically, we find that peers that are added and retained every year are weaker than ones that were not chosen. These findings suggest managers may have some influence on the choice of performance peers. Finally, using a quasi-natural experiment, we find that enhanced disclosure did not affect the tendency of firms to select underperforming peers.     

Political relationships,global financing,and corporate transparency: Evidence from Indonesia

This study examines the role of political connections in firms’ financing strategies and their long-run performance. We view political connections as an example for domestic arrangements which can reduce the benefits of global financing. Using data from Indonesia, we find that firms with strong political connections are less likely to have publicly traded foreign securities. As a result, estimates of the performance consequences of foreign financing are severely biased if value-creating domestic arrangements such as political relationships are ignored. Connections not only alter firms’ financing strategies, they also influence long-run performance. Tracking returns across several regimes, we show that firms have difficulty re-establishing connections with a new government when their patron falls from power, leading closely connected firms to underperform under the new regime and subsequently to increase their foreign financing.     

Accounting for government grants: Standard-setting and accounting choice

This paper provides evidence on several matters relating to accounting for government grants under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Focusing on grants related to assets, we trace the development of International Accounting Standard (IAS) 20, outline some of the problems of current accounting practice, and suggest why these have not been addressed by the standard-setter. Then, by hand-collecting data relating to 559 firms from 15 countries, we empirically analyze several issues. We show that asset grants are economically important for some firms and that the frequency of grants is significantly different across the countries. For the non-financial firms in our sample, we identify the grant-related accounting policy choice: a firm can either show the grant as deferred income or net it against the asset. The options are roughly equally popular overall but the firm’s country of domicile is strongly associated with the choice. Further, as a key element of disclosure quality for this topic, we investigate whether or not the balance sheet-related numbers relating to grants are disclosed, finding that many firms do not disclose them. Disclosure quality is better for firms which use the ‘deferred income’ option, and it is also better in countries where a higher proportion of firms has received government grants. International differences and poor disclosure are detrimental to international comparisons, so we conclude that the policy choice should be removed from the accounting standard.     

Home country bias: Does domestic experience help investors enter foreign markets?

This paper investigates the dynamics of individuals’ investments leading up to their decision to make the first investment abroad. We show that investors first invest in domestic securities and only some time later they invest abroad in foreign securities. We also show that investors who trade more often in the domestic market start to invest abroad earlier. Our findings suggest that the experience investors acquire while they trade in the domestic market is a key reason why active investors enter the foreign market earlier. A reason is that highly educated investors as well as investors with more financial knowledge, arguably those for whom learning by trading is the least important, do not need to trade as much in the domestic market before they start investing in foreign securities. Another reason is that investors who start investing in foreign securities are able to improve on their performance afterwards. This improvement in performance constitutes further evidence that the home country bias is costly.