Equilibrium earnings management and managerial compensation in a multiperiod agency setting

To investigate how the possibility of earnings manipulation affects managerial compensation contracts, we study a two-period agency setting in which a firm’s manager can engage in window-dressing activities to manipulate reported accounting earnings. Earnings manipulation boosts the reported earnings in one period at the expense of the reported earnings in the other period. We find that the optimal pay-performance sensitivity may increase and expected managerial compensation may decrease as the manager’s cost of earnings management decreases. When the manager is privately informed about the payoff of an investment project to the firm, we identify plausible conditions under which prohibiting earnings management can result in a less efficient investment decision for the firm and more rents for the manager.     

Disclosure strategies for management earnings forecasts: The role of managerial compensation structures,overoptimism, and effort

Management earnings forecasts have received significant attention as an important source for setting firm expectations. Our paper argues that how these forecasts are presented to the public is important for managing these expectations. We present both analytical and empirical analyses demonstrating that managers’ disclosure framing choices will depend on the information type, managerial overoptimism, and managerial compensation structures. We also provide evidence showing that disclosure framing choices can dampen stock return volatility. Finally, we indicate that disclosure strategies alter the misreporting results found in Guttman et al. (2006).     

Earnings co-movements and earnings manipulation

This study develops a theory that predicts the lower the degree to which firms’ earnings are correlated with the industry the greater the probability a firm will issue a biased signal of firm performance. The theory provides for causal predictions in our empirical tests in which we examine the probability a firm will be subject to an Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Release (AAER). The empirical findings provide support for the theory, even after controlling for various predictive variables from the literature, indicating the degree of earnings co-movements with the industry is in fact a causal factor in managers decisions to bias earnings reports. We further illustrate that low co-movement firms are less conservative than high co-movement firms, which provides an application of our theory to a broader setting. Overall, we provide both a theory and an empirical validation of the theory helping to discipline the thinking about earnings management and allowing for causal relations to be uncovered.     

Firm-supplier relations and managerial compensation

In this paper we examine customer firms’ managerial compensation policies when they have important supplier relations. We show that firms with greater reliance on their suppliers tend to offer higher total- and equity-based pay but lower risking-taking incentives to its top executives. Our results are consistent with the argument that suppliers making firm-specific investments are concerned about the customer firm’s prospects. Therefore, firms with important supplier relations use the compensation policies of their top executives (more equity-based and less risk-taking) to signal their commitment to a stable and promising performance in the future. To address endogeneity issues arising out of time-varying omitted variables, we exploit a 2SLS procedure to supplement our baseline OLS findings. Our results are robust alternate measures of suppliers’ relationship-specific investments and econometric models. Overall, our results indicate that some of the heterogeneity in managerial compensation can be attributed to characteristics of the firm’s supply-chain relations.     

Bank stability and managerial compensation

We investigate the relationship between insolvency risk and executive compensation for BHCs over the 1992–2008 period. We employ CEO compensation sensitivity to risk (vega) and pay-share inequality between the CEO and other executives as measures of compensation and employ a system model to account for the endogeneity problem between vega and risk. Five main results are obtained. First, CEO compensation sensitivity to risk of BHCs has risen in response to deregulation to resemble those of the industrial firms. Second, higher vegas lead to greater bank instability. Third, the association between bank stability and managerial compensation is bi-directional; higher vegas induce greater risk and vice versa. Fourth, BHCs in the next to the largest-size group increase CEO vegas the most and have the strongest potential to create instability. Fifth, increased pay-share inequality has effects opposite to those of the increase in vega; greater pay-share inequality is associated with greater stability.     

Corporate managerial ability,earnings smoothing,and acquisitions

This paper examines whether high-ability managers’ earnings smoothing is motivated by the need to mitigate the adverse effects of heightened information asymmetry triggered by mergers and acquisitions (M&As) on managers’ reputation capital (job loss) and firm value. We document that acquirers led by high-ability managers engage in more pre-acquisition earnings smoothing and experience more significant announcement abnormal returns and operating performance in post-M&A periods than their low-ability counterparts. This result is consistent with the theory of managerial response to asymmetric information, amplified by M&As, where high-ability managers use earnings smoothing as a signaling device to ensure that the market quickly discovers their superior abilities, to increase acquirers’ future growth prospects and avoid the adverse effects of information asymmetry on managers’ job security and career prospects in a competitive executive labor market.     

对遏制利润操纵行为的一些思考

监管部门与上市公司之间围绕利润操纵的博弈一直在不断地进行,而关联交易一直是上市公司实施利润操纵的一件法宝.有些上市公司不断利用关联交易来操纵"每股收益"和"净资产收益率"等指标,在各种指标的"排行榜"中先把水搅浑,再混水摸鱼,企图在证券市场中不断地"圈钱".     

Independent director cash compensation and earnings management

This study examines the impact of independent directors’ cash compensation on firms’ financial reporting quality using a sample of Chinese listed companies from 2002 to 2008. Unlike in the U.S. where most listed firms provide stock-related compensations to outside directors, Chinese listed companies compensate independent directors with cash only. This context offers a cleaner setting for examining the effects of independent director cash pay on earnings management. Our study documents a positive association between independent director cash compensation and the magnitude of earnings management. This suggests that compensating independent directors with higher cash pay compromises their independence and reduces their effectiveness in financial reporting oversight. Our results are robust to an array of sensitivity checks. These findings have important implications for both investors and policy makers by showing that independent directors’ cash compensation is also a significant determinant of financial reporting quality.     

The executive compensation implications of the tax component of earnings

We extend prior research by examining the weight applied to earnings generated by changes in ETRs (i.e., the tax component of earnings) in determining CEO and CFO compensation. We examine both bonus and total compensation and find that the predicted relationships between compensation and the tax component of earnings are largely limited to bonus compensation. This is not surprising since bonus compensation represents an unambiguous link between contemporaneous performance and compensation, while equity compensation is in part determined by agency considerations. Our evidence suggests that both CEOs and CFOs are compensated for the tax component of earnings. We find that CEOs are rewarded equally for the tax component of earnings relative to other components of earnings, while CFOs are rewarded more for the tax component of earnings relative to other components of earnings. Additionally, the weight applied to the tax component of earnings when determining CFO bonus compensation is greater when; (1) the tax component of earnings does not appear to be related to earnings management; (2) ETRs decrease rather than increase, (3) the firm pays bonus based on after-tax earnings rather than pre-tax earnings, and (4) the firm is tax aggressive rather than non-tax aggressive. The variations in the weighting of the tax component of earnings for CFO bonus compensation noted above in combination with evidence that CEO bonus compensation is indifferent to ETR-related earnings versus other components of earnings, suggests that the tax component of earnings is a contractual component of CFO bonus compensation.     

CEO excess compensation: The impact of firm size and managerial power

Chief executive officer (CEO) compensation has received a great deal of attention over the past several decades. Critics assert that CEO compensation is “excessive” because it is only weakly linked to firm performance (i.e., managerial rent-extraction). On the other hand, defenders suggest that CEO compensation is “justified” given the incremental shareholder wealth created by CEOs, or that large CEO compensation packages merely reflect labor market forces. Prior research documents that CEO power and firm size are associated with larger compensation, but providing evidence that the larger compensation is excessive (i.e., not economically justified) has proven difficult. For each test firm we identify a potential replacement CEO (i.e., an executive-specific, within-country (US) compensation benchmark) and create an empirical test of excess compensation. We also examine the possibility that excess compensation is conditional upon firm size or CEO power. In spite of an inherent bias against finding excess compensation, the results suggest that the most powerful CEOs receive compensation that is not economically justified. We find no evidence of CEO excess compensation in the largest firms.     

Takeover protection and managerial myopia: Evidence from real earnings management

We examine whether takeover protection exacerbates or mitigates real earnings management (i.e., using abnormal real activities to meet near-term earnings targets). Consistent with Stein’s (1988) prediction that takeover pressure induces managerial myopia, we find that less-protected firms are associated with higher levels of real earnings management. We further disentangle the value-destroying and signaling effects of real earnings management by finding that although abnormal real activities in general are associated with lower future performance, abnormal real activities intended to just meet earnings targets are associated with higher future performance, consistent with real earnings management conveying a signal of superior future performance in addition to a general value-destroying effect. Taken together, our evidence suggests that takeover protection reduces managers’ pressure to resort to real earnings management as a costly means of signaling better future performance.     

Executive compensation,earnings management and shareholder litigation

This paper examines the effects of executive compensation and potential for earnings management on the incidence of shareholder class action lawsuits and their outcomes. Although damage measurement factors, managerial option intensity, and earnings management all significantly affect the probability of lawsuits, they differ in their influence on the likelihood of positive settlement and on settlement amount: Damage factors do not affect the likelihood of settlement versus dismissal. High option intensity raises the probability of positive settlement, but does not affect its amount. High earnings management, on the other hand, does not affect the likelihood of settlement, but does increase settlement amount. These findings suggest that factors typically used to explain shareholder lawsuits should be interpreted with care.     

Past managerial guidance and returns to variance trading around earnings announcements

I investigate the relationship between past managerial guidance and realized variance risk premiums (VRPs) – i.e., the difference between implied and realized variance – in equity options around earnings announcements. I find that implied variances are lower before earnings announcements but VRPs are higher when firms provide guidance. I also find higher option-implied jump risk when firms issue surprising guidance. Further tests suggest a portion of the higher VRPs are due to changes in perceived higher-order risks, but traders also underreact to the precision of information in short-term guidance. These results are attenuated for firms with a better information environment.     

GDP manipulation,political incentives,and earnings management

Political decisions often affect macroeconomic activity, which triggers effects on corporate decisions. Using satellite night light data to proxy for economic activity, we show that manipulation of GDP figures is associated with earnings management by local companies, especially when local politicians face more promotion pressure. We show that local politicians seeking career advancement exchange favors with local companies and pressure them to inflate earnings to increase local GDP numbers. Our findings illustrate how the macro-level political agenda and GDP manipulation can affect micro-level corporate earnings management.     

Value creation around merger waves: The role of managerial compensation

This paper examines the relation between executive compensation and value creation in merger waves. The sensitivity of CEO wealth to firm risk increases the likelihood of out-of-wave merger transactions but has no influence on in-wave merger frequency. CEOs with compensation linked to firm risk have better out-of-wave merger performance in comparison to in-wave mergers. We also present evidence that cross-sectional acquirer return dispersion is greater for in-wave acquisitions. Our results suggest that the underperformance of acquiring firms during merger waves can be attributed in part to ineffective compensation incentives, and appropriate managerial incentives can create value, particularly in non-wave periods.     

Corporate risk-taking,firm value and high levels of managerial earnings forecasts

We examine the impact of high levels of managerial earnings forecasts, an important form of voluntary disclosure, on corporate risk-taking and firm value. Theory and anecdotal evidence suggest that a policy of high disclosure may reduce managers' willingness to invest in higher-risk, higher-return projects. We first verify, as in prior research, that corporate risk-taking is associated with higher future firm value. We then document a negative relation between firms with high levels of forecasting and corporate risk-taking. Finally, we provide evidence suggesting that high levels of managerial earnings forecasts reduce the positive association between corporate risk-taking and future firm value. Our results are robust to alternative measures of corporate risk-taking and future firm value, and alternative definitions of high levels of managerial earnings forecasts. Our results may be of importance to varying interests as they highlight the potential for high levels of earnings forecasts to inhibit corporate risk-taking and lower firm value.     

Technological change and the growing inequality in managerial compensation

Three of the most fundamental changes in US corporations since the early 1970s have been (1) the increased importance of organizational capital in production, (2) the increase in managerial income inequality and pay-performance sensitivity, and (3) the secular decrease in labor market reallocation. Our paper develops a simple explanation for these changes: a shift in the composition of productivity growth away from vintage-specific to general growth. This shift has stimulated the accumulation of organizational capital in existing firms and reduced the need for reallocating workers to new firms. We characterize the optimal managerial compensation contract when firms accumulate organizational capital but risk-averse managers cannot commit to staying with the firm. A calibrated version of the model reproduces the increase in managerial compensation inequality and the increased sensitivity of pay to performance in the data over the last three decades. This increased sensitivity of compensation to performance provides large, successful firms with the glue to retain their managers and the organizational capital embedded in them.     

Market efficiency,managerial compensation,and real efficiency

We examine how an exogenous improvement in market efficiency, which allows the stock market to obtain more precise information about the firm's intrinsic value, affects the shareholder–manager contracting problem, managerial incentives, and shareholder value. A key assumption in the model is that stock market investors do not observe the manager's pay-performance sensitivity ex ante. We show that an increase in market efficiency weakens managerial incentives by making the firm's stock price less sensitive to the firm's current performance. The impact on real efficiency and shareholder value varies depending on the composition of the firm's intrinsic value.