Does sovereign risk matter? New evidence from eurozone corporate bond ratings and zero-volatility spreads

In this paper, we empirically examine if sovereign risk matters for corporate bonds in developed economies. Using a unique panel data sample of 897 corporate bonds from eleven countries within the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), we investigate sovereign and corporate ratings as well as zero-volatility spreads (z-spreads). In the time period from March 2006 to June 2012, we find sovereign risk to be a significant driver of corporate risk. The effect is stronger for companies with domestic revenue structure, for companies that are (partly) owned by the government, and companies active in the utility and transportation sector. Interestingly, the impact of sovereign risk on corporate risk during the acute European sovereign debt crisis period decreases if ratings are examined, but increases if z-spreads are utilized. Rating agencies seem to take a more differentiated view on individual company risk during the sovereign debt crisis, while institutional investors might want to reduce their exposure to a country in financial distress as a whole, regardless of whether sovereign or corporate bonds are held.     

Empirical analysis of corporate tax reforms: What is the null and where did it come from?

Absent theoretical guidance, empiricists have been forced to rely upon numerical comparative statics from constant tax rate models in formulating testable implications of tradeoff theory in the context of natural experiments. We fill the theoretical void by solving in closed-form a dynamic tradeoff theoretic model in which corporate taxes follow a Markov process with exogenous rate changes. We simulate ideal difference-in-differences estimations, finding that constant tax rate models offer poor guidance regarding testable implications. While constant rate models predict large symmetric responses to rate changes, our model with stochastic tax rates predicts small, asymmetric, and often statistically insignificant responses. Even with very long regimes (one decade), under plausible parameterizations, the true underlying theory—that taxes matter—is incorrectly rejected in about half the simulated natural experiments. Moreover, tax response coefficients are actually smaller in simulated economies with larger tax-induced welfare losses.     

On the value relevance of information on environmental and social activities and performance – Some evidence from the UK stock market

Motivated by the requirements of the UK Companies Act 2006 for a Strategic Report introduced in late 2013, and the subsequent Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, we investigate the relationship between the levels of disclosures on environmental and social activities and performance (analyst following) and subsequent analyst following (subsequent levels of disclosures on environmental and social activities and performance). We do so to investigate the value relevance of information about environmental and social activities and performance. Our evidence is consistent with their value relevance and an associated demand for, or general interest in, such disclosures from informed market participants. We also argue that our results suggest positive links between analyst following and the quality of environmental and social disclosure.     

Does financial reporting above or below operating income matter to firms and investors? The case of investment income in China

We explore a unique regulatory change in China in 2007 that moves investment income in an income statement from below the line of operating income to above the line. We find that, post-regulatory change, firms report high investment income when core earnings (operating income excluding investment income) are low and vice versa. Investment income and core earnings exhibit a significantly negative correlation every year post regulation, in contrast to a significantly positive correlation beforehand. We also find that investors do not fully see through the change. Before the regulation, both core earnings and investment income are positively correlated with contemporaneous stock returns and uncorrelated with future stock returns, suggesting appropriate pricing of the information. However, afterward, the results on core earnings are similar to those in the pre-regulation period, but investment income is negatively correlated with future stock returns, implying that the stock market overreacts to the information in investment income in the contemporaneous year.     

Does the ownership structure matter for banks’ capital regulation and risk-taking behavior? Empirical evidence from a developing country

This paper applies the two-stage least squares (2SLS) estimator to examine the bi-directional relationship between banks’ capital regulation and risk-taking behavior concerning the impact of ownership structure. We have used a balanced panel dataset of banks from a developing country over the most recent period between 2006 and 2014. The empirical findings of this study suggest that higher capital regulation enhances banks’ stability when it combats with credit risk but higher credit risk often persuades abating capital ratio. Particularly, the key results are as follows: (i) the higher association of minority active shareholding in stability issues is positive; (ii) the higher contribution of active share holding promotes banks’ capital ratio; (iii) the lower ownership concentration prevents credit risk; (iv) private commercial banks are more risk averse and stable than state-owned banks and other type of banks; and (v) notably, Islamic banks show their superiority through overall performance despite their lower capital stability than conventional banks. Besides, no models show significant non-linear relationship between capital regulation and risk-taking except models of stability show a U-shaped relation in capital equation, indicating that when regulatory pressure works in a country then bank lose solvency at the initial stage. Finally, it also provides some imperative policy implications which will be very useful for a wide range of stakeholders.     

Frequent cross-border acquirers from emerging countries and cultural distance: Does the cultural difference of the initial deal matter?

This paper analyzes the relationship between national cultural differences and the performances of repeated cross-border acquirers from emerging countries, using a sample of 1079 deals conducted by 337 acquirers for the sample period of 1985–June 2008. Empirical results indicate that cross-border acquisitions on average are associated with positive wealth effects; however, for firms starting with deals with high cultural differences, abnormal returns become near zero for subsequent deals. The evidence points to the relevance of the culture factor. Moreover, the results can be consistent with either the hubris behavior (Roll, 1986) or a learning effect (Aktas et al., 2011). Conditional on successful first deals, declining abnormal return pattern is more pronounced, compared to unconditional results. Regression analyses that control for other factors point to the same conclusion that the declining abnormal return pattern is significant only for firms with high initial cultural differences. The results remain qualitatively the same after using an alternative cultural measure and accounting for country median and information asymmetry. In addition, evidence suggests that information asymmetry is greater for initial deals with higher cultural differences. The practical implication of our results is that it is generally better for firms to start international acquisitions in countries with low or medium cultural differences.     

A Standard setter’s framework for selecting between fair value and historical cost measurement attributes: a basis for discussion of “Does fair value accounting for nonfinancial assets pass the market test?”

This paper describes an income-statement-focused framework for selecting between between the fair value and historical cost measurement attributes that differs from the balance-sheet-focused relevance versus reliability tradeoff perspective that is common to most academic research. This income-statement-focused framework is then applied to the Christensen and Nikolaev setting in Rev Account Stud 18(3), (2013) to suggest that most of the study’s findings are not surprising and can be explained by differences in the income-relevance of fair value and historical cost measures for nonfinancial assets rather than issues with the reliability of fair value measurements, which is the perspective taken by the authors. The paper closes by suggesting additional research on the use of fair value and historical cost measures for nonfinancial assets that would be most relevant to current standard-setting activities of the Financial Accounting Standards Board.