Does Social Capital Matter in Corporate Decisions? Evidence from Corporate Tax Avoidance

We investigate whether the levels of social capital in U.S. counties, as captured by strength of civic norms and density of social networks in the counties, are systematically related to tax avoidance activities of corporations with headquarters located in the counties. We find strong negative associations between social capital and corporate tax avoidance, as captured by effective tax rates and book‐tax differences. These results are incremental to the effects of local religiosity and firm culture toward socially irresponsible activities. They are robust to using organ donation as an alternative social capital proxy and fixed effect regressions. They extend to aggressive tax avoidance practices. Additionally, we provide corroborating evidence using firms with headquarters relocation that changes the exposure to social capital. We conclude that social capital surrounding corporate headquarters provides environmental influences constraining corporate tax avoidance.     

Does Fair Value Reporting Affect Risk Management? International Survey Evidence

We survey CFOs from 36 countries to examine whether and how firms altered their risk management policies when fair value reporting standards for derivatives were introduced. A substantial fraction of firms (42%) state that their risk management policies have been materially affected by fair value reporting. Firms are more likely to be affected if they seek to use risk management to reduce the volatility of earnings relative to cash flows and if they operate in countries where accounting numbers are more likely to be used in contracting. We document a substantial decrease in foreign exchange hedging and in the use of nonlinear hedging instruments. Finally, firms that take active positions are more likely to be affected by fair value reporting. Taken together, our evidence indicates that requirements to report derivatives at fair values have had a material impact on derivative use; while speculative activities have been reduced, sound hedging strategies have been compromised as well.     

Do Private Placements Turn Around Firms? Evidence from Taiwan

We analyze the stock and operating performance of firms issuing private placements in Taiwan. Issuing firms have poor pre‐issue performance and earn significantly positive returns at announcement. Placements with an owner‐manager or with nonexecutive directors are associated with better post‐issue stock and operating performance, suggesting that an increase in insiders’ stakes leads to better alignment of managerial incentives and an increase in monitoring by insiders. In contrast, placements made to outside investors are unlikely to turn around the issuing firms.     

Does aggressiveness help? Evidence from IPO corruption and pricing in China

Using a unique database of Chinese firms bribing initial public offering (IPO) regulators, we examine the impact of bribing on IPO pricing. Our findings suggest that bribing firms are younger, smaller, more volatile in their operating activities, and more generous in compensating underwriters and management. Most important, bribing firms price their IPO shares more aggressively than non-bribing firms and exhibit a higher price-to-earnings ratio, lower first-day return, and poorer post-IPO stock performance. Additional analyses suggest that both bribing and non-bribing firms exhibit negative announcement returns after the arrest of corrupt officials. However, the effect is stronger for bribing firms. Overall, bribing firms are systematically more aggressive than their non-bribing counterparts. They concede less to IPO investors and reward underwriters and management for helping them access the capital market.     

Has Tax Competition Emerged in OECD Countries? Evidence from Panel Data

The theory of international tax competition suggests a shift of tax burden from mobile to immobile tax bases, especially for small open economies. This paper assesses these hypotheses empirically using a sample of 23 OECD countries and the time period 1965–2000. In accordance with tax competition theory, we find that capital mobility exerts a negative impact on capital tax burden, and a positive one on labor tax burden. Further, we observe a positive effect of country size, suggesting that small open economies are levying lower capital and labor taxes than larger ones. Finally, we analyze the time pattern of tax competition and demonstrate that tax competition has intensified since the mid 1980’s.JEL Code: H7, H87, C23     

Does shareholder coordination matter? Evidence from private placements

We propose a new role for private investments in public equity (PIPEs) as a mechanism to reduce coordination frictions among existing equity holders. We establish a causal link between the coordination ability of incumbent shareholders and PIPE issuance. This result obtains even after controlling for alternative explanations such as information asymmetry and access to public markets. Improved equity coordination following a private placement leads to favorable debt renegotiations within one year of issuance. Mitigating coordination frictions among shareholders ultimately decreases the odds of firm default in half.     

Does corporate international diversification destroy value? Evidence from cross-border mergers and acquisitions

This paper investigates the valuation effects of corporate international diversification by examining cross-border mergers and acquisitions of US acquirers over the period 1990–2000. We find that, on average, acquisitions of “fairly valued” foreign business units do not lead to value discounts. In contrast, unrelated cross-border acquisitions result in a significant diversification discount of about 24% after accounting for the valuation of foreign targets. Furthermore, significant wealth gains accrue to foreign target shareholders regardless of the type of acquisition. Overall, our results suggest that international diversification does not destroy value while industrial diversification leads to discounts even after controlling for the pre-acquisition value of the target.     

Does Corporate Lending by Banks and Finance Companies Differ? Evidence on Specialization in Private Debt Contracting

This paper establishes empirically the existence of specialization in private-market corporate lending, adding a new dimension to the public versus private debt distinctions now common in the literature. Comparing corporate loans made by banks and by finance companies, we find that the two types of intermediaries are equally likely to finance information-problematic firms. However, finance companies tend to serve observably riskier borrowers, particularly more leveraged borrowers. Evidence supports both regulatory and reputation-based explanations for this specialization. In passing, we shed light on various theories of debt contracting and intermediation and present facts about finance companies.     

Do Private Equity Funds Increase Firm Value? Evidence from Japanese Leveraged Buyouts

The author summarizes the findings of his recent study of 62 buyouts of listed Japanese companies by both Japanese and “foreign” private equity funds that were transacted between 2000 and 2007. Roughly half of the author's sample of transactions were accomplished by means of takeover bids by PE funds, and such deals were transacted at prices that represented a premium (of roughly 12%) to current market values. Most of the other PE transactions were privately negotiated deals in which the purchase prices involved discounts (of about 15% on average) to current value. For both sets of deals, however, the announcements of such buyouts were associated, on average, with a significantly positive stock market reaction. By the cutoff date of the study (May 2010), 30 of the 62 acquired firms had realized “exits.” Those companies (though not the others) experienced significant average improvements in operating performance; and the extent of such improvements were roughly consistent with the size of the positive market reaction to the buyout announcements. The test results suggest that the value increases can be attributed to the more efficient use of assets and reduction of operating costs. Meanwhile, there was no evidence suggesting that the acquired firms cut back on their research and development, capital investments, or employee wages and growth. What's more, examination of the operating performance of the 30 companies after their exits showed no deterioration in profitability or investment spending.     

Does location matter for disclosure? Evidence from geographic segments

The segment disclosures of multinational companies provide strategic information. We use the location characteristics of geographic segments to identify the reasons for withholding or disclosing segments. We examine segment data from around the adoption of IFRS 8, a reporting standard that requires firms to reveal more disaggregated information. Consistent with a proprietary cost motive for nondisclosure, we find that segments in regions that are deemed better for business tend to be hidden, while higher entry barriers for a segment are positively related to disclosure. These effects appear to be stronger for firms for which proprietary cost motives are more important. Among the previously unrevealed segments, proprietary costs explain the nondisclosure of segment earnings and other relevant financial information for investors.     

Does FinTech development facilitate firms' innovation? Evidence from China

This study examines the impact of financial technology (FinTech) development on firms' innovation. Using Chinese listed firms' panel data from 2011 to 2021 and the FinTech indicators we constructed, we find that FinTech development significantly facilitates firms' innovation by alleviating their information asymmetry and financing constraints. This finding continues to hold after a series of robustness tests and endogeneity discussions. Moreover, we find that the effect of FinTech development on innovation is more pronounced for non-state-owned firms, firms in the central region, and high-tech firms. These results offer important policy implications as they demonstrate the crucial role of FinTech in the high-quality development of the real economy.     

Does country risks predict stock returns and volatility? Evidence from a nonparametric approach

We use the k-th order nonparametric causality test at monthly frequency over the period of 1984:1–2015:12 to analyze whether aggregate country risk, and its components (economic, financial and political) can predict movements in stock returns and volatility of eighty-three developed and developing economies. The nonparametric approach controls for the existing misspecification of a linear framework of causality, and hence, the weak evidence of causality obtained under the standard Granger tests cannot be relied upon. When we apply the nonparametric test, we find that, while there is no evidence of predictability of squared stock returns barring one case, at times, there are nearly 50 percent of the countries where the aggregate risks and its components tend to predict stock returns and realized volatility.     

Does corporate social responsibility affect auditor-client contracting? Evidence from auditor selection and audit fees

We find that firms with higher CSR performance are more likely to choose Big N auditors and less likely to switch to non-Big N auditors, consistent with socially responsible firms demanding higher audit quality. Furthermore, we provide robust evidence that firms with higher CSR performance pay lower audit fees using both levels and changes models, suggesting that higher CSR performance reduces auditor engagement risk. Our analysis based on the difference-in-differences approach indicates that it is higher CSR performance that leads to lower audit fees, not vice versa. Overall, the results highlight the important role of CSR performance in auditor-client contracting.     

Does mutual fund ownership reduce stock price clustering? Evidence from active and index funds

Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting - The literature is rich with examples of price clustering in financial markets. This study focuses on the relation between mutual fund ownership (both...     

Does firm visibility matter to debtholders? Evidence from credit ratings

This paper investigates the role of a firm's information visibility in the assessment of its default risk. We use press coverage to proxy for firm visibility and find that highly visible firms generally have better credit ratings. The positive association between firm visibility and credit ratings arises because (1) press coverage facilitates the generation and dissemination of firm-specific information to market participants and (2) it disciplines the activities of managers and large shareholders. This positive association becomes stronger for firms with more severe information asymmetry or weaker alternative monitoring systems. Our findings contribute to the accounting literature by providing new evidence on the influence of firm visibility in the debt market.     

Does political pressure matter in bank lending? Evidence from China

Using provincial data from China between 2002 and 2011, we find substantial evidence indicating a positive association between the growth of bank loans issued by commercial banks and the political pressures faced by provincial leaders. This association is particularly true for state‐owned banks, which are much more politically pressurized than others, but is relatively attenuated in provinces with a more developed banking sector. We also find that bank loans issued under greater political pressures are less commercially oriented and have lower quality. Our findings are robust to a variety of sensitivity analyses and alternative measures of political pressure. Overall, our study contribute to a growing literature emphasizing the role of the political incentives of government officials in fuelling economic growth through credit allocation.     

Does the signature of a CPA matter? Evidence from Taiwan

This paper employed aquestionnaire survey to investigate the opinions of audit report stakeholders in Taiwan regarding the regulation of signatures in audit reports. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) proposed these regulations in 2009, and again in 2011 with a slight alteration. Most respondents agree that having the engagement partner sign the audit report could increase the accountability of CPAs. In addition, the participants believed that knowledge of the name of the engagement partner is important for the users of audit reports. Both of these views are consistent with the views voiced by the PCAOB. Most of the respondents also believe that the regulation of signatures would increase the legal responsibility of the engagement partner and minimize the role of firms in the auditing process. Finally, the respondents felt that the engagement partner has a much greater responsibility when their signature is in the audit report than when it is disclosed elsewhere, indirectly supportingthe second proposal of the PCAOB, which, rather than having the engagement partner sign their name on the audit report, simply lists the names of engagement partners elsewhere.     

Does Corporate Governance Predict Future Performance? Evidence from Hong Kong

This study uses time‐series data to examine the relation between changes in the quality of corporate governance practices and subsequent market valuation among large listed companies in Hong Kong. The results indicate that firms that exhibit improvements in the quality of corporate governance display a subsequent increase in market valuation, whereas firms that exhibit deterioration in the quality of corporate governance practices tend to encounter a decline in market valuation. Additionally, the impact is greater for firms that are included in the MSCI index or with a China affiliation. The results provide evidence in support of the notion that good corporate governance can predict future market valuation.     

Does governance travel around the world? Evidence from institutional investors

We examine whether institutional investors affect corporate governance by analyzing portfolio holdings of institutions in companies from 23 countries during the period 2003–2008. We find that firm-level governance is positively associated with international institutional investment. Changes in institutional ownership over time positively affect subsequent changes in firm-level governance, but the opposite is not true. Foreign institutions and institutions from countries with strong shareholder protection play a role in promoting governance improvements outside of the U.S. Institutional investors affect not only which corporate governance mechanisms are in place, but also outcomes. Firms with higher institutional ownership are more likely to terminate poorly performing Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and exhibit improvements in valuation over time. Our results suggest that international portfolio investment by institutional investors promotes good corporate governance practices around the world.