Agency Problems at Dual-Class Companies

Using a sample of U.S. dual-class companies, we examine how divergence between insider voting and cash flow rights affects managerial extraction of private benefits of control. We find that as this divergence widens, corporate cash holdings are worth less to outside shareholders, CEOs receive higher compensation, managers make shareholder value-destroying acquisitions more often, and capital expenditures contribute less to shareholder value. These findings support the agency hypothesis that managers with greater excess control rights over cash flow rights are more prone to pursue private benefits at shareholders' expense, and help explain why firm value is decreasing in insider excess control rights.     

Shareholder governance, bondholder governance, and managerial risk-taking

We examine the relation between the overall corporate governance structure and managerial risk-taking behavior. We find that the overall governance structure has a significant impact on how managers make decisions on investment policy: strong bondholder governance motivates more low-risk investments such as capital expenditure and lower high-risk investments such as R&D expenditures, whereas weak shareholder governance (entrenched managers) leads to more R&D expenditures. Moreover, we find that the effects of governance on investment policy differ significantly between speculative and investment-grade firms. For speculative firms, strong bondholder or shareholder governance leads to more capital expenditures and low R&D investments. For investment-grade firms, strong bondholder or shareholder governance leads to low capital expenditures and an insignificant impact on R&D investments. Furthermore, financing and investment covenants exhibit strong binding power to deter risky investments. Finally, a more dependent (or a less independent) board is associated with low capital expenditures and high R&D investments.     

Are Multiple Directorships Beneficial in East Asia?

We posit that the benefits and costs of multiple directorships are conditional on firm characteristics. We find firm valuation is positively associated with multiple directorships in (i) firms with high advising needs and (ii) firms with high external financing needs. These beneficial effects of multiple directorships are generally stronger in countries with weak shareholder rights and in firms that are widely held. However, when controlling shareholder hold high voting‐rights to cash‐flow rights, multiple directorships reduce firm valuation, especially in countries with weak shareholder rights and in closely held firms. As multiple directorships increases, cash holdings (capital expenditures) contribute less to shareholder value. The negative association between value of cash (capital expenditure) and busy boards is mitigated in firms with (i) high advising needs, (ii) high external financing needs and (iii) less entrenched ownership structures.     

Deviation from the target capital structure and acquisition choices

This study finds that managers take deviations from their target capital structures into account when planning and structuring acquisitions. Specifically, firms that are overleveraged relative to their target debt ratios are less likely to make acquisitions and are less likely to use cash in their offers. Furthermore, they acquire smaller targets and pay lower premiums. Managers of overleveraged firms also actively rebalance their capital structures when they anticipate a high likelihood of making an acquisition. Finally, they pursue the most value-enhancing acquisitions. Collectively, these findings improve understanding of how firms choose their capital structures and shed light on the interdependence of capital structure and investment decisions in the presence of financial frictions.     

Matching Organizational Structure with Firm Attributes: A Study of Master Limited Partnerships

To create value and reduce agency costs, firms adopt available organizational structures that match their attributes. This paper studies the characteristics of firms that choose to become master limited partnerships (MLPs). The MLP sample is dominated by firms in low-growth industries that have highly focused operations and superior profitability compared to theirindustry peers. After becoming an MLP, sample firms reduce capital expenditures and increase cash distributions, taking advantage of their focus, profitability, and status as non-taxable entities. A subsample of MLPs subsequently change back to corporate form. After becomingcorporations, these firms reverse course by cutting cash distributions and increasing capital spending. This cycle demonstrates how firms restructure to adopt organizational forms that best fit their needs.     

Investment decisions and internal capital markets: Evidence from acquisitions

In this paper, we examine the workings of internal capital markets in diversified firms that engage in related and unrelated corporate acquisitions. Our evidence indicates that bidders invest outside their core business (diversify) when the cash flows of their core business fall behind those of their non-core lines of business. However, bidders invest inside their core business (i.e., undertake non-diversifying investments) when their core business experiences superior cash flows. We also find that bidders whose core business are in industries with low growth prospects engage in diversifying acquisitions while bidders whose core business are in high growth industries undertake non-diversifying acquisitions. The pre-acquisition evidence, then, suggests that firms tend to diversify when the cash flows and the growth opportunities of their core business are considerably lower than those of their non-core business. Subsequent to acquisitions we find that diversifying bidders continue to allocate financial resources from less profitable business segments (i.e., core business) to more profitable business segments (i.e., non-core business). Given the low profitability of diversifying bidders’ core business, this capital resource allocation suggests that diversification increases do not result in capital allocation inefficiencies. The evidence for non-diversifying bidders, however, supports the existence of “corporate socialism” in the sense that there is transfer of funds from the profitable (core) to the less profitable (non-core) business segments in multi-segment bidders. We find that the capital expenditures of bidders’ non-core business segments rely on both core and non-core cash flows.     

Corporate governance and cash holdings: Evidence from worldwide board reforms

Using staggered board reforms as a quasi-natural experiment and a difference-in-differences approach, this study examines the impact of corporate governance on cash holdings in 41 countries. We find that board reforms are followed by significant reductions in cash holdings. This effect is more pronounced for firms with weaker pre-reform corporate governance and for firms from countries with weaker institutional environments. Analysis of cash spending suggests that, following board reforms, firms are more likely to use cash to increase R&D expenditures, dividend payouts, and share repurchases, but not to increase capital or acquisition expenditures. Finally, the results indicate that enhanced corporate governance following board reforms leads to higher (lower) cash (dividend payouts) values, consistent with the view that board reforms strengthen corporate governance.     

Investor Protection,Investment Efficiency and Value: The Case of Cross‐Listed Firms

We examine the impact of improved investor protection due to cross‐listing on foreign firms’ investment decisions and firm value. While we find that cross‐listing increases firms’ capital expenditures and mergers and acquisitions activities, cross‐listed firms also invest more in research and development, make better acquisition decisions, and have higher profitability compared to non‐cross‐listed firms. Moreover, cross‐listing is associated with better cash utilization by foreign firms for investments. These improvements in investments and cash utilization are more pronounced for firms cross‐listed on US exchanges and for firms from countries with weak investor protection laws.     

Large shareholder diversification,corporate risk taking,and the benefits of changing to differential voting rights

We show how the change to differential voting rights allows dominant shareholders to retain control even after selling substantial economic ownership in the firm and diversifying their wealth. This unbundling of cash flow and control rights leads to more dispersed economic ownership and a closer alignment of dominant and dispersed shareholder interests. When insiders sell sizeable amounts of their economic interests, firms increase capital expenditures, strengthen corporate focus, divest non-core operations, and generate superior industry-adjusted performance. The change to differential voting rights both fosters corporate control activity and creates higher takeover premiums that are paid equally to all shareholders.     

How crosslisting affects merger and acquisition activity

Consistent with crosslisting decreasing the cost of capital, we find that firms which issue American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) are much more likely to undertake an acquisition than non-crosslisted firms. The results do not appear to be driven by self-selection, as the increase in acquisitions is robust to a Heckman correction as well as to a fixed-effect analysis. Adding the home country’s shareholder rights to the analysis, we find that crosslisted firms increase their takeover activity primarily if they are from weak shareholder rights countries. This evidence is consistent with crosslisting reducing the cost of capital of firms from weak governance countries significantly, and this reduction in cost of capital allows these firms to pursue more domestic and international takeovers.     

Determinants of corporate cash holdings: Evidence from spin-offs

We study the factors that influence the cash allocation decision around a spin-off, using variables suggested by the trade-off theory, and controlling for the possible endogeneity of leverage and cash ratios. Spin-offs provide an opportunity to examine the determinants of cash allocation at the margin at the time of creation of a new entity. Our results indicate that managers allocate higher cash ratios to smaller firms, and firms with high research and development expense ratio, low net working capital ratio, and low leverage. Thus, higher cash ratios are correlated with difficulty of raising external capital and reduced availability of cash from internal sources. In addition, managers also base the cash allocation on observable immediate growth opportunities instead of on long-term possible growth. An analysis of excess cash ratios, defined as the difference between the actual and predicted cash ratios, indicate that firms are, on average, allocated less cash than suggested by trade-off models, and this deviation in allocated cash from predicted levels is explained only by concurrent profitability of the firms (a pecking order theory implication).     

Corporate governance and capital allocations of diversified firms

We examine how various aspects of corporate governance structures affect the capital allocation inefficiency that drives the value discounts of diversified firms. Diversified firms with more effective internal or external governance mechanisms experience more efficient investment allocations at both the firm and segment levels and show less of a diversification discount. The efficiency of the investment allocation process is better for diversified firms with high board independence, low board busyness, high institutional ownership, high outside director ownership, high CEO equity-based pay, high audit quality, and strong shareholder rights. The results hold after controlling for other potential influences. Our evidence suggests that corporate governance considerations are important in assessing the relation between investment efficiency and firm value for diversified firms.     

Changes in cash holdings around the S&P 500 additions

We analyze the changes in cash holding policies of S&P 500 firms from before to after their inclusion in the index. One year after inclusion, their mean industry-adjusted cash holdings decline by nearly 32% from the year before inclusion. Several factors explain this decline. The precautionary motive for cash subsides due to these firms becoming more visible, less uncertain, and less constrained to raise cheap external capital. Corporate governance deteriorates after inclusion due to increased managerial entrenchment, which leads to a reduction in cash as suggested by the free cash flow hypothesis. Most index firms face diminishing investment opportunities and decreasing capital expenditures, which implies a lesser need for cash holdings related to the transaction motive.     

Investor protection and convertible debt design

An important issue that firms consider when designing convertible debt is to specify security features such as conversion ratio, maturity date and call period. Following Lewis et al. [Lewis, M., Rogalski, R., Seward, J., 2003. Industry conditions, growth opportunities and market reactions to convertible debt financing decisions. Journal of Banking and Finance 27, 153–181], we employ a single measure that simultaneously considers all of these features: the expected probability (measured at issue date) that the convertible will be converted to equity at maturity. We find that firms in countries with stronger shareholder rights issue convertible debt with a higher expected probability of converting to equity. The positive association between the expected probability of conversion and shareholder rights is less pronounced in firms for which ownership structures create potentially high managerial agency costs. Specifically, in countries with stronger shareholder rights, firms with higher separation of control rights and cash flow rights tend to issue convertibles with lower probability of conversion. Furthermore, we find that large non-management block ownership strengthens the likelihood of issuing convertible debt with higher probability of conversion in countries with stronger shareholder rights. In contrast, firms in countries with stronger creditor rights issue convertibles with lower probability of conversion. We also document that the negative association between creditor rights and probability of conversion is more pronounced in firms with higher separation of control rights and cash flow rights.     

Form versus substance: The effect of ownership structure and corporate governance on firm value in Thailand

We examine the relation between the quality of corporate governance practices and firm value for Thai firms, which often have complex ownership structures. We develop a comprehensive measure of corporate governance and show that, in contrast to conventional measures of corporate governance, our measurement, on average, is positively associated with Tobin’s q. Furthermore, we find that q values are lower for firms that exhibit deviations between cash flow rights and voting rights. We also find that the value benefits of complying with “good” corporate governance practices are nullified in the presence of pyramidal ownership structures, raising doubts on the effectiveness of governance measures when ownership structures are not transparent. We conclude that family control of firms through pyramidal ownership structures can allow firms to seemingly comply with preferred governance practices but also use the control to their advantage.     

Do analyst recommendations reflect shareholder rights?

We examine whether sell-side analyst recommendations reflect shareholder rights. Our rationale is that analysts should be influenced by external governance only if market participants do not efficiently price its value. We find that stronger shareholder rights are associated with more favorable recommendations. Further analysis reveals that analysts favor firms with strong shareholder rights only when strong rights appear to be warranted, but do not penalize firms for having strong rights when not needed. These findings occupy middle ground in the debate on the pricing efficiency of shareholder rights. Moreover, we find that firm value is positively associated with the strength of shareholder rights regardless of the expected external governance structure. The latter result is consistent with a “one-size-fits-all” interpretation, and implies that firms across the board could increase share value by reducing their number of anti-takeover provisions.     

Corporate cash holdings,foreign direct investment,and corporate governance

The determinants of corporate cash holdings in the context of corporate governance theories have recently been analyzed in the literature. In the present study, the behavior of corporate managers in countries with poor shareholder rights protection is more in conformity with the agency problem theory than other corporate governance theories. Also, smaller firms tend to hold larger cash balances relative to their total assets than their larger counterparts. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) inflows in today's highly integrated capital markets act as substitutes for corporate cash holdings. When firms in G-7 countries are separated from the ones in other countries, FDI inflows demonstrate different effects on international corporate cash holdings: They are substitutes for cash holdings in the former group of countries but become complements for cash holdings by firms in the latter one.     

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.     

Shareholder litigation rights and corporate acquisitions

We examine the effect of shareholder litigation rights on managers' acquisition decisions. Our experimental design exploits a U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on July 2, 1999 that resulted in a reduction in shareholder class actions. We find that, since the ruling, firms in Ninth Circuit states acquire larger targets. Furthermore, acquirers' returns are lower in these states, especially for those with weaker corporate governance. Further analysis shows that value destruction is the result of managers' freedom to conduct empire-building acquisitions using overvalued equity. Overall, our findings indicate the importance of shareholder litigation as an external governance mechanism.     

Excess cash holdings and shareholder value

We examine the determinants of corporate cash holdings in Australia and the impact on shareholder wealth of holding excess cash. Our results show that a trade‐off model best explains the level of a firm’s cash holdings in Australia. We find that ‘transitory’ excess cash firms earn significantly higher risk‐adjusted returns compared to ‘persistent’ excess cash firms, suggesting that the market penalises firms that hoard cash. The marginal value of cash also declines with larger cash balances, and the longer firms hold on to excess cash. The results are consistent with agency costs associated with persistence in excess cash holdings.