Corporate Payout Policy,Cash Savings,and the Cost of Consistency: Evidence from a Structural Estimation

We develop a dynamic structural model to better understand how corporate payout policy is determined in conjunction with other corporate decisions. In a first‐best model, a manager maximizes equity value by choosing the firm's optimal financing, investment, dividends, and cash holdings. By using simulated method of moments, we show that, on average, firms excessively smooth their payout while making corporate savings overly volatile and retaining excess cash. We then extend the model to capture the effect of a manager, who perceives a cost to cutting payouts. Estimating the model, we infer the magnitude of this cost. We find that a managerial preference for consistent payout explains the smooth payout and high volatility of cash holdings.     

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.     

融资约束、审计费用与现金持有价值

审计费用和现金持有价值是公司财务审计研究领域的两个重要话题。审计费用高低所隐含的公司风险程度影响着投资者对公司增加现金持有量将产生积极还是消极效应的判断,会导致公司股票超额回报率的变化,进而也可能影响其现金持有价值,目前尚无相关的研究。本文以现金持有的边际价值模型为基础,引入审计费用和融资约束变量,对融资约束条件下审计费用与公司现金持有价值的关系进行研究后发现,过高的审计费用会降低公司的现金持有价值,审计费用增加得越多,公司的现金持有价值越低。进一步的分析发现,相对于其面临较高程度的融资约束时,公司面临较低程度的融资约束时审计费用对其现金持有价值的负向影响更为显著。     

Earnings quality and corporate cash holdings

Poor earnings quality exacerbates information asymmetry between internal and external stakeholders of a firm. Agency considerations then persuade investors to discount the value of corporate cash holdings out of concern about the inappropriate use of funds. In this study, we show that poor earnings quality has a negative impact on the value of corporate cash holdings and a positive impact on the level of cash reserves. We find that the negative effect of poor earnings quality either neutralizes or more than offsets the positive effect of excess cash on firm value. Our results are robust to several measures of earnings quality and model specifications.     

The effect of financial constraints,investment policy,product market competition and corporate governance on the value of cash holdings

This study empirically investigates the value shareholders place on excess cash holdings and how shareholders’ valuation of cash holdings is associated with financial constraints, firm growth, cash‐flow uncertainty and product market competition for Australian firms from 1990 to 2007. Our results indicate that the marginal value of cash holdings to shareholders declines with larger cash holdings and higher leverage. However, firms that are more financially constrained, that have higher growth rates and that face greater uncertainty exhibit a higher marginal value of cash holdings. These findings are consistent with the explanation that excess cash holdings are not necessarily detrimental to firm value. Firms with costly external financing and that also save more cash for current operating and future investing needs find that the market values these cash hoarding policies favourably. Finally, there is limited evidence of an association between various corporate governance measures and the value of cash holdings for a shorter sample period.     

The Influence of a Credit Rating Change on Corporate Cash Holdings and Their Marginal Value

We examine the influence of credit rating changes on corporate excess cash holdings. We find that downgraded firms increase excess cash holdings by approximately 3% of total noncash assets, compared to a matched sample of firms without a rating change. We largely observe no significant cash policy change following upgrades. While our findings support existing studies on the value of precautionary cash hoarding in the face of increased financial constraint, we find hoarding is value‐decreasing for shareholders. The marginal value of excess cash declines by at least 40% for downgraded firms and much more so when firms have histories of excess cash hoarding.     

Corporate Financial Policy and the Value of Cash

We examine the cross‐sectional variation in the marginal value of corporate cash holdings that arises from differences in corporate financial policy. We begin by providing semi‐quantitative predictions for the value of an extra dollar of cash depending upon the likely use of that dollar, and derive a set of intuitive hypotheses to test empirically. By examining the variation in excess stock returns over the fiscal year, we find that the marginal value of cash declines with larger cash holdings, higher leverage, better access to capital markets, and as firms choose greater cash distribution via dividends rather than repurchases.     

Does free cash flow problem contribute to excess stock return synchronicity?

We investigate whether Jensen’s free cash flow problem contributes to excess stock return synchronicity. We find that low-growth firms with high free cash flow have greater stock return synchronicity. These firms also engage in earnings management to lower their disclosure quality. To the extent that free cash flow for low-growth firms provides corporate insiders an opportunity to extract private control benefit, our findings lend direct and concrete support to Jin and Myers (J Financ Econ, 79:257–292, 2006) prediction that insiders increase opaqueness to capture cash flow beyond the level expected by outsider investors. We identify Jensen’s free cash flow problem as an important driver for stock return synchronicity.     

Excess Cash and Stock Returns

I document a positive relationship between corporate excess cash holdings and future stock returns. The difference in returns of portfolios of high and low excess cash firms amounts to 5% annually or 6% after standard three-factor risk adjustment. Firms with more excess cash have higher market betas and earn lower returns during market downturns. High excess cash companies invest considerably more in the future than do their low cash peers, but do not experience stronger future profitability. On the whole, this evidence is consistent with the notion that excess cash holdings proxy for risky growth options.     

Corporate cash holdings: Evidence from Switzerland

This paper investigates the determinants of cash holdings for a comprehensive sample of Swiss non-financial firms between 1995 and 2004. The median Swiss firm holds almost twice as much cash and cash equivalents as the median US or UK firm. Our results indicate that asset tangibility and firm size are both negatively related to corporate cash holdings, and that there is a non-linear relationship between the leverage ratio and liquidity. Dividend payments and operating cash flows are positively related to cash reserves, but we cannot detect a significant relationship between growth opportunities and cash holdings. Most of these empirical findings, but not all of them, can be explained by the transaction costs motive and/or the precautionary motive. Analyzing the corporate governance structures of Swiss firms, we document a non-linear relationship between managerial ownership and cash holdings, indicating an incentive alignment effect and an opposing effect related to increasing risk aversion. Finally, our results suggest that firms in which the CEO simultaneously serves as the COB hold significantly more cash.

Liquidity and the Future Stock Returns of the REIT Industry

This paper examines how deviations from expected optimal cash holdings affect future stock returns in the real estate investment trust (REIT) industry. Our findings indicate that REIT managers elect to hold less cash to reduce the agency problems of cash flow, supporting the pecking order theory that growth opportunities lead managers to retain more cash on hand. The results show that any deviation from the estimated optimal cash holdings is significantly detrimental to future market performance, suggesting that excess or insufficient cash is harmful to stock returns. The adverse influence of deviations above the optimal value is insignificantly stronger than that of deviations below the optimal value. We also find that the return performances of deviations that do not differ from the expected optimal value surpass those of deviations that differ significantly from the expected level. This implies that REIT managers determine their cash policies based on future growth opportunities and the external costs of capital. Finally, for REIT firms, holding excess or insufficient cash increases the possibility of agency conflict or underinvestment, which will consequently worsen the firm??s future performance.     

Economic policy uncertainty,institutional environments,and corporate cash holdings

We investigate the effect of economic policy uncertainty (EPU) on corporate cash holdings using a large sample of international firms. EPU intensifies concerns of investors on managerial self-dealing and political extraction. Consequently, the potential cost of cash holdings (i.e., expropriation) outweighs its benefit (i.e., precautionary motives), and the optimal amount of cash holdings decreases. We find supportive evidence that firms hold less cash when EPU is high. We further show that the market discounts excess cash holdings under high policy uncertainty, but this negative effect is mitigated by stronger investor protection, better freedom of press, and better government quality.     

The Determinants of REIT Cash Holdings

The factors influencing the cash holdings of REITs are examined with the view that the REIT industry should yield new information regarding the drivers of corporate cash policy due to their unique operating conditions. The availability of REIT line of credit data also allows us to test the association between cash holdings and line of credit access and use. Data constraints in prior investigations have left this an unresolved empirical question in the cash holdings literature. The baseline results show that REIT cash holdings are inversely related to funds from operations, leverage, and internal advisement and are directly related to the cost of external finance and growth opportunities. Cash holdings are also negatively associated with credit line access and use. The results imply that REIT managers elect to hold little cash to reduce the agency problems of cash flow thereby increasing transparency and reducing the future cost of external capital.

Parent-subsidiary investment layers and the value of corporate cash holdings

Our study investigates whether agency costs arising from organizational structure in terms of the number of investment layers which connect the parent firm and its lowest-tiered subsidiaries within the corporate pyramid are associated with the value of cash holdings. Using a sample of Taiwanese publicly traded firms, we find that a change of a dollar in cash holdings is associated with less than a dollar change in market value. In line with our expectation, we find that the marginal value of cash decreases with the number of investment layers, supporting the agency theory of excess cash holdings. We also find that the negative association between the number of layers and the value of cash holdings is stronger for firms with high deviation between cash flow and voting rights and for family-controlled firms.     

Internal controls,risk management,and cash holdings

Exploiting a unique setting in China where internal controls are intended to manage risks, we investigate how internal controls shape the cash holding policies. Results show that firms with higher internal control quality (ICQ) are less likely to have abnormal cash holdings, either excess or deficit cash, and this effect is not driven by corporate governance quality. We also find that firms with higher ICQ are more likely to increase dividend payments and are less likely to increase M&A investments, especially when the firms have had a negative experience with prior M&A investments. Furthermore, our tests on the market valuation of cash holdings show that investors place a higher value on cash holdings of firms with higher ICQ. Collectively, our findings suggest that internal controls help companies shape reasonable cash policies that lead to value creation.     

Why Do Firms Hold Cash? Evidence from EMU Countries

This paper investigates the determinants of corporate cash holdings in EMU countries. Our results suggest that cash holdings are positively affected by the investment opportunity set and cash flows and negatively affected by asset's liquidity, leverage and size. Bank debt and cash holdings are negatively related, which supports that a close relationship with banks allows the firm to hold less cash for precautionary reasons. Firms in countries with superior investor protection and concentrated ownership hold less cash, supporting the role of managerial discretion agency costs in explaining cash levels. Capital markets development has a negative impact on cash levels, contrary to the agency view.     

Corporate cash holdings: Causes and consequences

The considerable growth in corporate cash holdings around the world has prompted scholarly interest. Consequently, there is now a large academic literature examining cash holdings and their impact on corporate outcomes and firm values. This article reviews and synthesizes the literature to offer insight into two primary motives to hold cash: precautionary and agency. We first present a stylized model that explores the trade-off in holding cash between these two motives and then examine empirical studies to determine how existing theories are supported by evidence using data from a variety of countries. In addition, we examine the effectiveness of a variety of corporate governance devices in curtailing cash holdings and also the extent to which these devices offer investors' confidence that cash will not be wasted. Finally, we discuss methodological and measurement issues associated with empirical cash holdings studies.     

CORPORATE CASH HOLDINGS

There have been several cases in recent years—most notably, Chrysler—in which shareholders have objected to the level of companies' holdings of cash and other liquid assets. This paper describes the authors' study of the determinants of liquid asset holdings by publicly traded U.S. firms and how these holdings change over time. For those companies that appear to hold excess cash, the study also attempts to investigate whether such companies have a tendency to reduce value by "overinvesting"—a tendency described in the academic finance literature as the "free cash flow problem."
According to the study, the most important determinants of corporate cash holdings are size, risk, and the extent of the firm's investment opportunities, with smaller, riskier, and high-growth firms holding larger amounts of cash as a percentage of total (noncash) assets. These results are consistent with corporate decisions to hold liquid assets in order to preserve the firm's ability to make strategic investments when operating cash flow turns down and outside funds are expensive.
The authors also report that most companies with large amounts of excess cash tend to acquire it mainly by accumulating internally generated cash flows, and not by issuing securities. Perhaps surprising, the study also finds that spending on new projects and acquisitions is only slightly higher for firms with excess cash—and that such firms also tend to have higher payouts to shareholders in the form of dividends or stock repurchases. Thus, there is little evidence in this study of a free cash flow problem, as well as some indication that managers are aware of and attempt to address the problem.     

Getting the Right Mix of Capital and Cash Requirements in Prudential Bank Regulation*

Cash reserve requirements are useful as a broadly conceived prudential tool, not just as a narrowly focused means of limiting the risks associated with illiquidity. Indeed, illiquidity risk is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for establishing bank liquidity requirements. The primary means of mitigating the systemic costs of bank illiquidity risk is the creation of an effective lender of last resort (LOLR). But instead of focusing narrowly on bank funding risks when designing liquidity requirements, regulators should consider tradeoffs among capital requirements, liquidity requirements, and LOLR policies for achieving the broader prudential goal of limiting bank default risk. When considering the optimal tradeoff between capital ratios and cash ratios as prudential requirements, five “frictions” are identified that favor the use of one or the other: (1) the adverse‐selection costs of raising equity (which favors the use of cash); (2) the opportunity cost of forgone abnormal profits (or “quasi rents”) from lending (which favors the use of capital); (3) the limited verifiability of loan outcomes (which favors the use of cash); (4) the moral hazard that results from costly or postponed loss recognition, given the incentive for risk shifting in bad states (which favors the use of cash); and (5) the prospect of changes in the risk environment (which favors cash since it creates greater option value for maintaining targeted default risk with lower adjustment costs in the face of changing loan risk or illiquidity risk). When viewed from the perspective of achieving the main prudential goal of controlling default risk at a minimum social cost, capital requirements have some limitations that favor liquidity requirements, and vice versa. And thus the optimal regulatory policy will combine liquidity and capital requirements.     

Cash and Corporate Control

The takeover market is often suggested as appropriate for containing the agency problems of excessive corporate cash holdings. However, recent studies report contradictory evidence. I focus on the takeover‐deterrence effects of corporate liquidity and suggest the proxy contest as an effective alternative control mechanism. I find that proxy fight targets hold 23% more cash than comparable firms, and that the probability of a contest is significantly increasing in excess cash holdings. Proxy fight announcement return also is positively related to excess cash. Following a contest, executive turnover and special cash distributions to shareholders increase, while cash holdings significantly decline.