Do shareholder views affect corporate political activities?

In this paper, we study shareholder views on corporate political contributions. We find that, with shareholders' explicit approval, firms are more likely to have higher corporate political contribution, measured by the amount of donations to the US political parties in the next election cycle. Firm's political contributions also have a positive long-run impact on firm valuations. When analysing firm's political ideology, we find weak evidence that Democratic party may benefit more from this shareholder's support than Republican party, particularly in case of firms which have recently switched their political ideology to Democratic party. Our results show that shareholders' explicit approval has an impact on firm's engagement of political activities and imply that if the shareholders stand at the same side of the firms, firms engage more in politically-related corporate activities. Our key results are supported in a regression discontinuity design and are robust to two-way clustered standard errors.     

Firstborn CEOs and credit ratings

Our study examines whether CEOs’ birth order can predict firms’ credit ratings. Consistent with studies that document a positive relationship in the general population between being firstborn and being conservative, our study finds that firms managed by firstborn CEOs tend to have higher credit ratings than those managed by later-born CEOs. Our results are robust to controlling for additional personal CEO traits, such as political identity, and to using a propensity score matching sample. A change analysis supports the causality of the firstborn effect. We suggest that return on assets and free cash flow are possible channels through which firstborn status affects credit ratings. Cross-sectional analyses show that the positive association is less (more) pronounced for firstborn CEOs who have a pilot license (run firms in less competitive industries). These results suggest that managerial conservatism may be an important factor in credit rating agencies’ credit risk assessments.     

Credit ratings and social capital

We posit that credit ratings are higher for firms headquartered in high social capital regions, where managers are more likely to be trustworthy. To test this hypothesis, 9460 corporate debt ratings of US firms from 2001– 2015 was examined. We find that firms headquartered in a county with high social capital in the US have a higher credit rating. This effect is incremental and economically comparable to that of corporate social responsibility. Additional tests suggest that the impact of social capital on ratings is likely because analysts find them more credible. We conclude that credit analysts may consider the social norm around the firm's headquarters when rating firms.     

Determinants of the floating-to-fixed rate debt structure of firms

We analyze the effects of managerial incentive, firm characteristics and market timing on floating-to-fixed rate debt structure of firms. We find that chief financial officer's (CFO's), not chief executive officer's (CEO's), incentive has a strong influence on firm's debt structure. When CFOs have incentives to increase (decrease) firm risk, firms obtain volatility-increasing (-decreasing) debt structure. These effects are present only for CFOs who are not subject to high monitoring by board members, CEOs, or corporate control market. Our findings suggest that agency problems at the level of non-CEO executives could be an important driver of various corporate decisions.     

What Drives the Consequences of Intentional Misstatements? Evidence from Rating Analysts’ Reactions

This paper aims to identify the mechanisms through which intentional misstatements adversely affect firms by analyzing rating analysts’ reaction to misstatements. In order to identify the mechanisms through which the misstatement affects firms’ credit ratings, we analyze the content of rating reports. Rating analysts are concerned about seven different mechanisms. They are most concerned about misstatement‐related violations of debt covenants that increase a firm's liquidity risk. We find that, subsequent to an intentional misstatement becoming publicly known, credit ratings of misreporting firms are adversely affected for up to seven years. The adverse impact of an intentional misstatement on a firm's credit rating is most pronounced in cases in which rating analysts mention concerns about misstatement‐related violations of covenants. Our results suggest that these covenant violations are the most severe mechanism through which misstatements adversely affect firms’ creditworthiness.     

Do religiosity and political beliefs affect female representation and firm performance?

We investigate the effect of the community values surrounding a firm's headquarters on the percentage of women on a firm's board of directors. We use religiosity and political affiliation measures to capture the values associated with the community norms. We find that firms headquartered in counties with lower religiosity and a lower percentage of Republican voters are more likely to have a greater number of female board members. Furthermore, firms with more female directors located in more Republican areas or more religious cities are more likely to have lower valuations, as measured by Tobin's Q. These results have implications for corporate culture and the supply of female directors.     

Inventor CEOs

One in five U.S. high-technology firms are led by CEOs with hands-on innovation experience as inventors. Firms led by “Inventor CEOs” are associated with higher quality innovation, especially when the CEO is a high-impact inventor. During an Inventor CEO's tenure, firms file a greater number of patents and more valuable patents in technology classes where the CEO's hands-on experience lies. Utilizing plausibly exogenous CEO turnovers to address the matching of CEOs to firms suggests these effects are causal. The results can be explained by an Inventor CEO's superior ability to evaluate, select, and execute innovative investment projects related to their own hands-on experience.     

Corporate lobbying,CEO political ideology and firm performance

In this paper, we investigate the influence of CEO political orientation on corporate lobbying efforts. Specifically, we study whether CEO political ideology, in terms of manager-level campaign donations, determines the choice and amount of firm lobbying involvement and the impact of lobbying on firm value. We find a generous engagement in lobbying efforts by firms with Republican leaning-managers, which lobby a larger number of bills and have higher lobbying expenditures. However, the cost of lobbying offsets the benefit for firms with Republican CEOs. We report higher agency costs of free cash flow, lower Tobin's Q, and smaller increases in buy and hold abnormal returns following lobbying activities for firms with Republican managers, compared to Democratic and Apolitical rivals. Overall, our results suggest that the effects of lobbying on firm performance vary across firms with different managerial political orientations.     

Does Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Improve Credit Ratings? Evidence from Geographic Identification

We show that a firm's CSR policy is significantly influenced by the CSR policies of firms in the same three‐digit zip code, an effect possibly due to investor clienteles, local competition, and/or social interactions. We then exploit the variation in CSR across the zip codes to estimate the effect of CSR on credit ratings under the assumption that zip code assignments are exogenous. We find that more socially responsible firms enjoy more favorable credit ratings. In particular, an increase in CSR by one standard deviation improves the firm's credit rating by as much as 4.5%.     

On the Foundations of Corporate Social Responsibility

Using corporate social responsibility (CSR) ratings for 23,000 companies from 114 countries, we find that a firm's CSR rating and its country's legal origin are strongly correlated. Legal origin is a stronger explanation than “doing good by doing well” factors or firm and country characteristics (ownership concentration, political institutions, and globalization): firms from common law countries have lower CSR than companies from civil law countries, with Scandinavian civil law firms having the highest CSR ratings. Evidence from quasi‐natural experiments such as scandals and natural disasters suggests that civil law firms are more responsive to CSR shocks than common law firms.     

Institutional investment horizons,corporate governance,and credit ratings: International evidence

Using a comprehensive set of firms from 57 countries over the 2000–2016 period, we examine the relation between institutional investor horizons and firm-level credit ratings. Controlling for firm- and country-specific factors, as well as for firm fixed effects, we find that larger long-term (short-term) institutional ownership is associated with higher (lower) credit ratings. This finding is robust to sample composition, alternative estimation methods, and endogeneity concerns. Long-term institutional ownership affects ratings more during times of higher expropriation risk, for firms with weaker internal corporate governance, and for those in countries with lower-quality institutional environments. Additional analysis shows that long-term investors facilitate access to debt markets for firms facing severe agency problems. These findings suggest that, unlike their short-term counterparts, long-term investors improve a firm's credit risk profile through effective monitoring.     

Credit ratings and acquisitions

There is a curvilinear relation between credit ratings and acquisitions. Non-investment grade firms make more acquisitions as their ratings improve, consistent with the relaxation of financial constraints. However, this pattern reverses for investment grade firms, supporting the view that such firms want to preserve their rating and are concerned about acquisition-related downgrades. Abnormal returns first decrease and then increase as ratings improve. In support of these findings, acquisitions have a negative impact on future ratings only for highly-rated firms. These results indicate that the level of a firm's credit rating has a significant impact on the acquisition process.     

CEO political ideologies and auditor-client contracting

We investigate whether CEOs’ political ideology, as captured by their political contributions, is related to audit risk and, consequently, to audit pricing. We find that Republican CEOs are associated with lower inherent risk and control risk, which represent the two components of audit risk related to the firm, while their Democratic counterparts are seen to have higher risks. Consequently, Republican (Democratic) CEOs are associated with lower (higher) audit fees. The results are robust to controlling for religiosity, executive incentives and ability, obtaining alternative measures of inherent and control risk, and to using propensity score matching and entropy balancing. We further show that changes in political ideology are associated with changes in audit risk and fees. In sum, the evidence implies that auditors view the political ideology of CEOs as an important determinant of engagement risk, which may have important implications for disclosure policy.     

CEO Turnover and Retention Light: Retaining Former CEOs on the Board

Prior CEO turnover literature characterizes the board's decision as a choice between retaining versus replacing the CEO. We focus instead on the CEO's decision rights and introduce a third option in which the incumbent CEO is removed but retained on the board for an extended period, which we call Retention Light. Firms may benefit from Retention Light because former CEOs possess unique monitoring and advising abilities, but the former CEO could also exploit available decision rights for personal benefit. A Retention Light CEO's decision rights generally exceed those of CEOs who exit the firm entirely but fall short of the rights of a retained CEO. We find that when prior firm performance is better, the former CEO is more likely to be retained on the board (Retention Light) than to exit the firm. However, this relation is weaker when the CEO reaches normal retirement age at which time CEO power becomes more important. We also provide evidence on how the nature of the CEO's bargaining power varies with his personal attributes and board characteristics in its influence on the Retention Light decision. Retention Light firms are more likely than CEO‐exit firms to select a successor CEO with relatively weaker bargaining power. Finally, Retention Light involving a nonfounder CEO is negatively associated with the firm's postturnover financial performance. Overall, Retention Light is a distinct CEO turnover option that has important consequences for board decisions and firm performance.     

The ordered qualitative model for credit rating transitions

Information on the expected changes in credit quality of obligors is contained in credit migration matrices which trace out the movements of firms across ratings categories in a given period of time and in a given group of bond issuers. The rating matrices provided by Moody's, Standard & Poor's and Fitch became crucial inputs to many applications, including the assessment of risk on corporate credit portfolios (CreditVar) and credit derivatives pricing. We propose a factor probit model for modeling and prediction of credit rating matrices that are assumed to be stochastic and driven by a latent factor. The filtered latent factor path reveals the effect of the economic cycle on corporate credit ratings, and provides evidence in support of the PIT (point-in-time) rating philosophy. The factor probit model also yields the estimates of cross-sectional correlations in rating transitions that are documented empirically but not fully accounted for in the literature and in the regulatory rules established by the Basle Committee.     

“I Do”: Does Marital Status Affect How Much CEOs “Do”?

This paper explores whether a CEO's marital status reveals unobservable risk preferences which influence their firm's investment and compensation policies. Using biographical data for CEOs of large domestic companies, we find that corporate deal‐making activity (e.g., mergers, joint ventures, major capital expenditures, etc.) and overall firm riskiness both increase significantly with personal life restructuring (e.g., marriages and divorces). This relation is supported by an instrumental variables analysis and also an investigation surrounding CEO turnover. Finally, the link between a CEO's marital status and preference for option‐based compensation further suggests that personal restructuring may be an indicator of executive risk appetites.     

Are more able CEOs getting more compensated? Evidence from the pay-for-performance sensitivity of equity-based incentives

This study investigates whether the managerial ability of a chief executive officer (CEO) is associated with the CEO's pay-for-performance sensitivity (PPS) of the equity-based compensation. We predict that more talented CEOs receive a higher PPS of equity incentives. Using the managerial ability score (Demerjian, Lev, & McVay, 2012) and PPS measures of options and stocks (Core & Guay, 1999), we find that a CEO's PPS of the equity-based compensation is significantly increasing in the CEO's ability. We also find that the association between managerial ability and the PPS of stock incentives is more evident for small firms. Furthermore, our results show that high ability CEOs are associated with a steeper PPS of option incentives, especially when they are not near retirement. Together, our findings suggest that firms generally incorporate the relative efficiency factor of CEO's ability in designing the CEO's equity-based compensation contracts, and thus the cross-sectional variation in the CEO's PPS is positively influenced by the CEO's ability.Data availability: Data used in this study are available from public sources identified in the study.     

The color of shareholders' money: Institutional shareholders' political values and corporate environmental disclosure

In this study, we investigate whether and to what extent institutional shareholders' political values influence their investees' environmental disclosure and performance. Using employees' political donation data, we construct institutional investors' political ideology score, which higher (lower) value represents a more Republican- (Democratic)-leaning culture. We find that firms led by institutional shareholders with a more Republican-oriented political ideology are less likely to issue environmental reports. Such a negative effect is more pronounced for firms with institutional shareholders with long-term horizons, with high corporate Republican ideology scores, and without an environmental committee. We further find that institutional shareholders' Republican-oriented political values are negatively associated with their investee firms' environmental performance and green innovations. Overall, our results indicate that institutional shareholders' internal political polarization significantly influences corporate environmental disclosure policies.     

Financial constraints on credit ratings and cash-flow sensitivity

This study investigates whether financial constraints, as measured by the level of credit ratings and their migrations would affect the firm's cash flow allocation policies and reflect the main financial constraints on a firm's cash flow sensitivity of cash. For a given credit quality shock, control for firm-level characteristics and endogeneity of cash flow allocation, our results suggest that firms with higher credit financial constraints have significantly higher cash flow sensitivities on cash holding, investment, and debt financing activities. Our results provide evidence that credit rating risk has a larger impact on cash flow allocation and drives the financial constraints on cash flow sensitivity for various reasons, including precautionary motivation and restricted access to external financing.     

How Common Are Intentional GAAP Violations? Estimates from a Dynamic Model

This paper uses data on detected misstatements—earnings restatements—and a dynamic model to estimate the extent of undetected misstatements that violate GAAP. The model features a CEO who can manipulate his firm's stock price by misstating earnings. I find the CEO's expected cost of misleading investors is low. The probability of detection over a five‐year horizon is 13.91%, and the average misstatement, if detected, results in an 8.53% loss in the CEO's retirement wealth. The low expected cost implies a high fraction of CEOs who misstate earnings at least once at 60%, with 2%–22% of CEOs starting to misstate earnings in each year 2003–2010, inflation in stock prices across CEOs who misstate earnings at 2.02%, and inflation in stock prices across all CEOs at 0.77%. Wealthier CEOs manipulate less, and the average misstatement is larger in smaller firms.