Can material asset reorganizations affect acquirers’’ debt financing costs?——Evidence from the Chinese Merger and Acquisition Market

In this paper, we investigate whether material asset reorganizations (MARs), a special form of merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions, can affect the acquirers’ cost of debt financing. Further, we examine the effect of acquiring firms’ accounting information quality on the cost of debt and on the association between MARs and debt costs. We predict that compared to conventional M&As, large-scale acquisitions through MARs can generate a much greater influx of assets from target firms. This raises the acquirers’ asset collateral and thus reduces the cost of debt. Because the quality of accounting information is a key factor affecting the cost of debt, we suggest that it has a spillover effect on the debt-cost effect of MARs. Using M&A transactions by listed companies in the Chinese A-share market from 2008 to 2014 as our sample, we find that MARs are associated with a higher asset collateral and lower ex post cost of debt than conventional M&As. Furthermore, we show that the acquiring firms’ accounting information quality has a significant negative effect on debt costs, and the negative association between MARs and the cost of debt is more pronounced when accounting information quality is higher.     

The value of access to finance: Evidence from M&As

We examine synergies in mergers and acquisitions (M&As) generated by firms’ comparative advantages in access to bank finance. We find robust evidence that greater access to bank finance increases firms’ attractiveness as acquisition targets. Targets’ comparative advantage in bank finance improves bank credit supply and reduces financing costs for the merged firms. These effects are more pronounced for acquirers with greater frictions in accessing bank loans and acquirers with greater growth opportunities. Overall, this paper reveals that targets, not just acquirers, contribute to financial synergies in M&As.     

Do targets grab the cash in takeovers: The role of earnings management

Extant research on Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) provides evidence that acquirers underperform subsequent to the takeover completion. Such evidence is more unequivocal for acquirers that finance the acquisition by issuing equity relative to those that use cash. Current literature recognizes various reasons for this underperformance, most of which suggest overvaluation of the acquirers and/or overpayment for the targets at the time of acquisition announcement. Alternatively, this paper aims to investigate whether acquirers' post-takeover abnormal return is also attributed to target firms' real and/or accrual earnings management. Our results indicate that, on average, targets manage earnings upwards using real transactions rather than accruals, during the year preceding the takeover. More specifically, we find evidence of earnings management through sales among targets of cash acquisitions and that it is significantly and negatively related to the post-acquisition performance of the acquirers. These findings suggest that there is an association between the method of financing in acquisitions and earnings management in target firms, which could impact the post-takeover performance of acquirers.     

Heterogeneity in the information content of 8-K disclosures about private targets: Acquirer size and target significance

In this paper, we empirically analyze the disclosures required by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) for acquisitions of privately held target firms by public acquirers. We find that 8-K disclosures filed by public acquirers within a week after the announcement date of the takeover of a privately held target firm materially affect the pricing and the trading of the acquirers' shares around the event date, but only for large acquiring firms. This impact is economically significant even for targets classified as “insignificant” by the SEC, but again, only for large acquirers. Our results suggest that it may be optimal to further reduce the disclosure costs faced by smaller acquirers in acquisitions of private targets.     

Cross-border mergers and acquisitions and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from Chinese listed firms

This study examines the impact of cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) on acquirers’ corporate social responsibility (CSR). Based on a sample of Chinese listed firms, we find that firms with cross-border M&A activities experience an improvement in subsequent CSR performance. Specifically, the CSR rating is approximately 8.24% higher in firms with cross-border M&As than in those without such activities. We also find that this positive influence is more pronounced in firms with low initial CSR ratings than in those with high initial CSR ratings at the time when a cross-border M&A deal is completed. Additional analyses reveal that this positive effect is mainly driven by the target firms from countries with high social preference relative to China and that the enhancement in CSR driven by cross-border M&As translates into higher operating performance and easier access to finance. Overall, our findings demonstrate that cross-border M&As can serve as a critical channel for acquirers from a country with low institutional quality to build a better reputation through environmentally friendly behaviour and socially responsible engagement, and therefore gain capital market benefits.     

The market valuation of M&A announcements in the United Kingdom

This paper investigates the short-term market reaction to UK acquirers announcing domestic and foreign mergers and acquisitions (M&As) from 2000 to 2010. We define acquirers as value, moderate and glamour acquirers based on equally weighted market-to-book terciles. We find that value acquirers outperform glamour acquirers during and after the M&A announcement. We also focus on the impact of institutional ownership and find that higher domestic, foreign and total institutional ownership leads to lower market reaction to M&A announcements. We also find that long-term institutional investors lead to a higher post-announcement market performance. Finally, we find that greater domestic institutional ownership mitigates the typical poor short-term performance following M&A announcements of glamour acquirers.     

One way out of the share pledging quagmire: Evidence from mergers and acquisitions

Share pledging by controlling shareholders is accompanied with a risk of control transfer when stock price decline triggers a margin call. This situation motivates controlling shareholders and firms to initiate value-enhancing activities to manage the pledging quagmire. Using a sample of Chinese listed firms, we find that firms with pledging controlling shareholders are more likely to implement mergers and acquisitions (M&As) than other firms. Their M&As also perform better, regardless of whether using short- or long-term stock returns or operating income as the performance measure. Furthermore, the positive effect of share pledging on M&As is more pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises, firms with individual controlling shareholders (especially families), firms with better governance, and firms with higher financial capabilities. Additional analyses on deal types also show that firms with pledging controlling shareholders are more likely to engage in diversified, non-affiliated, and cash-financed acquisitions. These results consistently suggest that M&As may effectively eliminate firms' pledging risks and that share pledging mitigates shareholders' conflict of interest regarding M&A decisions.     

Governance through trading on acquisitions of public firms

We identify an important channel, acquisitions of public targets, via which the governance through trading (GTT) improves firm values. The disciplinary effect of GTT is more pronounced for firms with higher managerial wealth-performance sensitivity and moderate institutional ownership concentration. Firms with higher GTT also have higher subsequent ROA, ROE, Tobin's Q, analysts forecasted EPS growth rate, and lower expected default risk. The effect is stronger after Decimalization. We conduct several exercises to rule out alternative explanations, such as institutional superior information, investor activism, and momentum. Additional tests show that the disciplinary effect of GTT only exists for less financially-constrained firms and non-all-cash M&As where the agency problem is more likely to be prevalent.     

Going public to acquire? The acquisition motive in IPOs

Newly public firms make acquisitions at a torrid pace. Their large acquisition appetites reflect the concentration of initial public offerings (IPOs) in mergers and acquisitions-(M&A-) intensive industries, but acquisitions by IPO firms also outpace those by mature firms in the same industry. IPO firms’ acquisition activity is fueled by the initial capital infusion at the IPO and through the creation of an acquisition currency used to raise capital for both cash- and stock-financed acquisitions along with debt issuance subsequent to the IPO. IPO firms play a bigger role in the M&A process by participating as acquirers than they do as takeover targets, and acquisitions are as important to their growth as research and development (R&D) and capital expenditures (CAPEX). The pattern of acquisitions following an IPO shapes the evolution of ownership structure of newly public firms.     

Generalists vs. specialists: Who are better acquirers?

We examine the impact of lifetime work experience of top executives on mergers and acquisitions (M&As) behavior and outcome. Based on hand-collected data of top executives in a sample of Chinese firms during 2002–2018, we construct a generalist ability index of top executives to study the impact of generalist top executives (GTEs) vs. specialist top executives (STEs) on M&As. Our findings suggest that GTEs conduct more M&As than those of STEs. The results are robust to alternate specifications of M&A frequencies and after accounting for endogeneity issue. Furthermore, the M&A announcement and long-term returns are better for acquirers with GTEs than those with STEs. We attribute the findings to GTEs' ability of searching target ex ante, making the M&A process efficient, and fully leveraging their social networks post M&A. In addition, we find the increase in M&A activities in GTE firms are primarily due to GTEs' experience of M&As rather than their talents. Finally, the M&As from GTEs improve investment efficiency and are less likely to divest targets post M&As. In sum, GTEs conduct more M&As and they create value in the process.     

Debt Issues around Mergers & Acquisitions

We investigate firms’ debt financing choices among bank loans, public bonds and privately placed debt around mergers and acquisitions (M&As). We find that prior to M&As, firms with above-optimal leverage tend to pursue arm’s-length debt financing in lieu of bank debt. We find that three-day CARs for highly levered firms and acquirer’s long-run performance are negatively associated with non-bank financing. This supports a monitoring avoidance hypothesis for highly levered firms’ non-bank debt financing decisions in M&As. As a falsification test, we do not find the same debt financing considerations of acquirer firms during their post-M&A period.     

Are board monitoring and CEO incentives substitutes for each other? Evidence from Australian market reaction to acquisition announcements

We examine the hypotheses that board monitoring and CEO stock incentives are effective mechanisms and substitutes for each other using the Australian acquisition market as an experimental field. The results confirm that Australian firms use board monitoring and CEO incentives as substitutes for each other, but the effects of these mechanisms on the acquirers' return do not support the notion that each can substitute for the role of the other. We find the market reaction to acquisitions made by acquirers with low monitoring-high CEO incentives is significantly higher than the reaction to those made by acquirers with high monitoring-low CEO incentives. Further analyses confirm that monitoring level does not make a difference when the CEO is granted high or low incentives but reduces the gain from M&As when used as a substitute for CEO incentives. The latter, if high enough, effectively aligns the managers' interests with those of the shareholders. Our findings hold when we control for other variables and possible endogeneity in the main variables of interest. These results suggest that Australian firms, on average, focus on the board's monitoring role at the expense of its advisory role, a setting that reduces firm value if used as a substitute for CEO incentives.     

Bank mergers and acquisitions in emerging markets: evidence from Asia and Latin America

Following a global wave of consolidation in the banking industry, this study analyses 132 mergers and acquisitions (M&As) involving banks in emerging markets in Asia and Latin America between 1998 and 2009. An event study measures the change in shareholder value for acquirers and targets; and a multivariate regression identifies the drivers of the change in shareholder value for acquirers. On average M&As create shareholder value for target firms, while acquirer firms do not lose shareholder value. Geographical diversification creates shareholder value for acquirers. Acquirer shareholders benefit from the acquisition of underperforming targets; from transactions settled by cash rather than exchange of equity; and from government-instigated M&A transactions.     

The long-run performance of acquiring firms in mergers and acquisitions: Does managerial ability matter?

This paper examines the association between the managerial ability of acquiring firms and their long-term performance after mergers and acquisitions (M&As). Based on M&A data for U.S. firms from 2000 to 2012, we find that acquiring firms with higher managerial ability achieve better long-term operating performance and stock returns. We also find that the positive effect of managerial ability on long-term performance is more pronounced when acquirers and target firms belong to the same industry. The result suggests that managers who have higher ability to manage their firms, i.e., to generate higher revenues for given resources, are more capable of achieving higher synergy benefits and better post-acquisition performance in same-industry acquisitions than in cross-industry acquisitions.     

The informational consequences of good and bad mergers

We study the information production dynamics in financial markets in response to Mergers and Acquisitions (M&As) announcements. We find that acquirers with low levels of pre-announcement stock price informativeness experience a substantial increase in their corresponding post-announcement stock price informativeness in response to positive Cumulative Abnormal Returns (CAR). We show that this increase is due to the enhanced prospect of deal completion. By contrast, high levels of acquirer pre-announcement stock price informativeness limit traders' incentives to search for, and acquire, new information. We also find that similar dynamics apply to the changes in acquirers' analyst coverage. Emphasizing the important role of information acquisition costs in influencing informed trading, a positive acquirer CAR increases the acquiring firm's post-announcement stock price informativeness in M&As involving public rather than private and subsidiary targets. Overall, we show that M&As have important informational consequences beyond their immediate effects on stock prices.     

Debt covenants and asset versus equity acquisitions

We examine whether the presence of loan covenants leads firms to choose either an asset or equity acquisitions. Asset acquisitions involve the selective purchase of a target company's assets, and equity acquisitions involve acquisitions of common stocks. We document that firms with loan covenants are more likely to engage in asset acquisitions as opposed to equity acquisitions. Our results are robust to alternative measures of loan covenants and to endogeneity concerns. Furthermore, the association between loan covenants and asset acquisitions is stronger among firms with greater debt covenant intensity, more severe agency problems, and lower profitability. Acquirers facing more intense competition within their industries are also likely to choose asset acquisitions. Our findings suggest that acquirers' incentives to avoid wealth transfer at the expense of debtholders drive the relation between debt covenants and choice of acquisition structure.     

Banks and Corporate Decisions: Evidence from Business Groups

Banks who can influence clients' governance may steer those clients into mergers to reduce the banks' own risk. Empirical evidence based on Japan's mergers and acquisitions (M&As) during the country's 1990s banking crisis indicates that acquirers with stronger bank ties made acquisitions that they would not have normally made. These acquirers lost more shareholder value via mergers than acquirers with weaker bank ties. The banks' risk was reduced, while the banks' shareholders gained significant excess returns from their borrowers' mergers. This paper offers implications for corporate governance of firms with strong bank ties and advances the existing knowledge on business groups.     

An empirical investigation of mergers and acquisitions by Chinese listed companies, 1997–2007

We examine 136 M&A deals from 1997 to 2007 initiated by Chinese companies listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges, where the acquirer gains complete control of the target. Our data shows that the Chinese M&A market is dominated by domestic deals with unlisted targets that are either stand-alone private firms or wholly owned subsidiaries. Acquirers experience significant positive abnormal stock returns around the announcement date and over the three years after the acquisition. These results are largely driven by state-owned firms, cash acquirers and firms that acquire related targets. Cross-sectional tests show that announcement period returns are related to the acquirer's ownership status, industry relatedness of the acquirer and target, capital structure changes of the acquirer and the nature of the unlisted target. We find no change in operating performance from the pre to the post acquisition period for the acquirers.     

The hidden costs of being public: Evidence from multinational firms operating in an emerging market

I study how firms deal with business regulations that limit their operations. I first show that the ownership structure of a firm affects its degree of compliance with regulations, with publicly listed firms complying more than privately held ones. This differential compliance imposes a burden on listed firms that helps explain mergers and acquisitions patterns. When regulatory levels increase, private firms acquire listed ones and listed firms stop acquiring private ones. These results uncover an additional cost faced by listed companies, identify a new driver of M&A transactions, and show that high levels of regulation lead to opaque corporate structures.     

The power of control: the acquisition decisions of newly public dual-class firms

Many private firms that go public opt for a dual-class share structure which gives insiders stronger voting power, at the expense of shareholder democracy. We examine how the dual-class structure influences the merger decisions of newly public firms, which have a notable appetite for acquisitions. Specifically, we compare acquisition activity, method of payment choice, and the long-run value implications of acquisitions by newly public single-class and dual-class US companies. Our results show that dual-class IPO firms make relatively more acquisitions in innovative industries and are less likely to pay with stock as compared to single-class IPO firms. The reluctance of dual-class firms to pay with stock is positively related to the wedge between the insiders’ voting rights and cash-flow rights. We also find that newly-public dual-class acquirers perform better in the long-run than newly-public single-class acquirers, mainly due to dual-class acquisitions in innovative industries. Our multivariate analysis shows that these findings hold after controlling for relevant risk factors associated with industry, deal, and firm specific characteristics. These results suggest that the dual class structure may enable newly-public firms to make better M&A decisions after going public.