The effect of banking system reform on investment–cash flow sensitivity: Evidence from China

This study investigates the effect of banking system reform on the investment behavior of Chinese listed firms. We find that the politically-oriented investment problem for state-controlled listed companies is mitigated by the reform due to foreign participation in the management of Chinese banks. The problem of underinvestment in non-state-controlled listed companies also appears to be alleviated due to an increase of bank loans. We include leverage in our analysis and the main findings are robust. The results provide evidence that Chinese banking system reform has increased the efficiency of resource allocation, easing investment distortions in state-controlled listed companies and reducing financial constraints in non-state-controlled listed companies.     

Institutional investment horizon and investment–cash flow sensitivity

This paper examines the relevance of institutional investors’ investment horizon, as reflected in the response of firm investment to internal cash flows. We argue that institutional investors with longer investment horizons have greater incentives and efficiencies to engage in effective monitoring. This improved monitoring mitigates asymmetric information and agency problems, and in turn reduces the wedge between the costs of internal and external funds. As a result, the sensitivity of firms’ investment outlays to internal cash flows decreases in the presence of institutional investors with long-term investment horizons. Using a sample of 8402 US firms over the period 1981–2008, we provide empirical evidence consistent with these arguments.     

Information asymmetry and investment–cash flow sensitivity

Models of capital market imperfections predict that information asymmetry decreases firm investment and increases the sensitivity of investment expenditures to fluctuations in internal funds. Previous empirical tests of the link between investment and financing decisions have relied on indirect measures of financial constraint due to market frictions. In contrast, we use more direct measures derived from the market microstructure literature. Consistent with the theoretical predictions, our analysis shows that scaled investment expenditures are on average lower and the investment–cash flow sensitivity is greater when the probability of informed trading is high. Our results are robust to alternative measures of informed trading and liquidity, but they are not pervasive in our sample.     

Investment–cash flow sensitivity and investor protection

We examine the role of country-level legal investor protection (i.e., shareholder and creditor protection) on firm investment–cash flow sensitivity (ICFS). Using underexplored research data on investor protection across 21 countries and working with a conservative empirical design, we extend prior literature on the relation between investor protection and ICFS and provide new evidence on how these country-level attributes interact to explain a firm's ICFS. We find that either the strong legal protection of minority shareholders or the strong legal protection of creditors reduces the sensitivity of investment to internal cash flow. However, in countries with strong levels of both minority shareholder and creditor protection, ICFS increases. Our results remain robust after controlling for several alternative explanations. The results support the argument that overregulation arises when policymakers increase investor protection at levels that lead firms to avoid external sources of finance, hampering firm investment. Our findings suggest that countries face a regulatory trade-off such that increasing investor protection (either shareholder or creditors protection) enhances financial markets efficiency, but excessive regulation can indeed lead to financial markets inefficiencies.     

An empirical re-examination of the dividend–investment relation

Modigliani and Miller show that, in perfect capital markets, the optimal investment decisions of a firm are not affected by how these investments are financed. Miller and Modigliani further imply that, under the assumption of perfect capital markets, a firm's investment decisions are not affected by its dividend decisions, although dividend decisions may or may not be influenced by investment decisions. Fama and Miller label this result the separation principle. Most recent studies of the separation principle that take into account the existence of market imperfections report sharply contradictory results. This paper tests for linear and nonlinear causality between dividends and investments using both firm-specific and aggregate data for a sample of 417 firms over the 1962 to 2004 period. In general, linear causality tests support the separation principle, whereas nonlinear causality test results contradict the separation principle by revealing strong bi-directional linkages between dividends and investments.     

What drives investment–cash flow sensitivity around the World? An asset tangibility Perspective

Motivated by ongoing debates on investment–cash flow sensitivity (ICFS) and its documented decline and disappearance in the U.S., we investigate the determinants of ICFS. Using firm-level data across 41 countries for the 1993–2013 period, we document an important role of asset tangibility in explaining the patterns in ICFS. Asset tangibility affects ICFS through two channels: investment intensity and cash flow persistence. As the share of tangible capital, investment and cash flow persistence has fallen in developed economies, ICFS has declined. In contrast, as developing economies operate with more tangible capital, have higher investment rates and more persistent cash flows, their ICFS is more stable. The results support our explanation of ICFS as a reflection of capital (investment) intensity and income predictability, rather than a measure of financial constraints.     

Is the relationship between investment and conditional cash flow volatility ambiguous,asymmetric or both?

We investigate the effect of cash flow volatility on investment. Our evidence suggests that financially constrained firms decrease investment (i) when experiencing persistently high volatility; (ii) when experiencing both high volatility and negative cash flow growth realisations; and (iii) when holding low cash levels and experiencing both high volatility and a negative cash flow growth realisations. In financially unconstrained firms, the above effects are either not found or are of relatively low economic importance. Overall, our findings lend support to the financial flexibility literature and tend to contradict predictions of the real options literature.     

Does financing influence the sensitivity of cash and investment to asset tangibility?

Research shows that asset tangibility substantially impacts firms’ cash levels and investment. Using the deregulation of equity issuance in the U.S. as an exogenous shock to access to equity markets, we investigate the influence of financing on the dependence of cash and investment on asset tangibility. We show that financing dampens the sensitivity of cash and investment to asset tangibility, and promotes investment and firm growth. Our results suggest that greater access to financing allows financially constrained firms to invest in productive projects that may otherwise not be taken up. This provides evidence that public firms even in well-developed financial markets such as the U.S. benefit from financial deregulation that removes barriers to external financing, shedding light on the role of financial markets in fostering growth.     

Housing market dynamics in a small open economy: Do external and news shocks matter?

We study the sources of fluctuations in the housing market of a small open economy. We use an estimated dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model and data from seven small open economies to assess the quantitative effects of both contemporaneous and news shocks to domestic and external fundamentals on housing market dynamics. External shocks and news shocks have significant effects. Cyclical fluctuations in housing prices and housing investment are mainly driven by contemporaneous shocks related to foreign housing preferences and terms of trade, and by news shocks related to domestic consumption-goods technology, housing preferences and terms of trade. The spillover effects of external shocks on housing prices are notably larger than those of domestic shocks.     

The effects of operating cash flow disclosure on earnings comparability,analysts' forecasts,and firms’ investment decisions during the Pre-IFRS era

We examine the effects of the availability of operating cash flow (OCF) information disclosed by firms operating in 15 international countries during the pre-IFRS era on: (1) the comparability of these firms' disaggregated earnings to those of U.S. firms for equity valuation purposes, (2) the properties of analysts' earnings forecasts, and (3) the efficiency of firms' investment decisions. We find that the comparability of disaggregated earnings improves after company-disclosed OCF information is available. We also find decreases in analysts' forecast errors and dispersion and a decrease in firms’ tendency to over- or under-invest when they are predisposed to do so.     

The macroeconomic effects of monetary and fiscal policy in a small open economy: Does the exchange rate regime matter?

This paper develops a small open economy model in the spirit of Obstfeld and Rogoff (1995). The introduction of endogenous traded sector output unlocks current account and real exchange rate effects. Within this framework where specific consideration is given to the case with fixed but adjustable parities, exchange rate devaluation generates similar qualitative effects as a money supply expansion under floating rates. Output and external effects of government spending shocks are broadly consistent with the adjusted basic non-micro founded Mundell and Fleming (MF) framework, but differ in significant ways from the baseline MF model. Contrary to the textbook MF model a government expenditure shock depreciates the nominal exchange rate and generates real effects under the fixed rate system.     

The effect of investment tax incentives: evidence from China’s value-added tax reform

We estimate the impact of investment tax credit on firm fixed investment in a difference-in-differences-in-differences framework, using China’s 2004 value-added tax reform pilot that introduces a permanent 17%-tax credit for fixed investment in six industries in the Northeastern region. The tax credit raises significantly fixed investment of eligible firms by 28% on average during 2004–2007 relative to 2001–2003, corresponding to a user cost elasticity of 1.84. The tax incentive has larger effects on firms that are less financially constrained such as smaller firms and firms with a larger cash flow. The result is largely driven by responses of domestic private firms and is robust to specifications addressing the issue of anticipation.     

Is investment–cashflow sensitivity a good measure of financial constraints?

Since Fazzari et al. (1988), investment–cashflow sensitivity has been one of the most important indicators for testing and measuring the external financial constraints of corporations. This study analyzes the effect of changes in the relative cost of internal and external financing on investment decisions in response to tax changes. China’s 2004 VAT reform decreased companies’ effective tax rates, leading to an increase in operating cashflow. This, in turn, reduced the internal cost of financing and the value of the tax shield and increased the cost of debt financing. This study shows that in the case of the VAT reform, investment–cashflow sensitivity increased significantly, whereas cash holdings–cashflow sensitivity and borrowing-slack sensitivity did not significantly change. We conclude that investment–cashflow sensitivity is not an effective measure of financial constraints under information asymmetry, but cash–cashflow sensitivity and borrowing-slack sensitivity may be useful alternatives.     

Do shareholders punish or reward excessive CSR engagement? Moderating effect of cash flow and firm growth

Although extensive past research has studied the connection between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firm value, it has rarely discriminated between optimal and excessive CSR. Thus, we addressed this issue by examining whether shareholders punish or reward excessive CSR engagement through the moderating effect of cash flow and firm growth. We applied country–industry–year fixed-effects (FE) regression to a cross-country sample of 43,803 firm-year observations between 2002 and 2019. The findings show that while both optimal and excessive CSR increase firm value, optimal CSR has greater value relevance than excessive CSR for shareholders. However, although cash flow positively moderates the relationship between optimal and excessive CSR and firm value, firm growth negatively moderates this relationship. The findings are robust regarding alternative CSR proxies, industry-adjusted firm value measures, public governance indicators, and endogeneity concerns.     

Mickey Mouse and the IDioT principle for assessing research contribution: discussion of ‘Is the relationship between investment and conditional cash flow volatility ambiguous,asymmetric or both?’

Keefe and Tate ( 2013 ) provide both interesting and worthwhile insights into whether, under what circumstances and to what extent cash flow volatility impacts corporate investment. In the current paper, I have two related goals. First, more narrowly, I provide a constructively critical commentary on salient aspects of their empirical strategy, giving particular emphasis to the key drivers of Keefe and Tate's contribution to the literature. Second, illustrated in the context of Keefe and Tate, my broader goal is to give general advice especially aimed at novice researchers on how to make any empirical study more appealing to a critical reader.     

Bank risk-taking and corporate investment: Evidence from the Global Financial Crisis of 2007–2009

In this paper, we explore the relation between the banking sector's risk-taking and a firm's investment (“corporate investment”). Specifically, we ask whether firms' cash holdings moderate the effect of the banking sector's risk-taking on corporate investment. Based on a panel sample of publicly listed non-financial firms in 15 EU countries during the period 1990–2015, we document several key findings. First, both cash holdings and the banking sector's risk-taking are positively associated with corporate investment. Second, bank loan growth, which roughly captures the supply of bank credit, is not related to corporate investment. Third, firms with smaller cash holdings disproportionately invest more than do firms with larger cash holdings during periods of higher risk-taking by the banking sector.     

How important are small banks to small business lending?: New evidence from a survey of small firms

Typically, small banks lend a larger proportion of their assets to small businesses than do large banks. The recent wave of bank mergers has thinned the ranks of small banks, raising the concern that small firms may find it difficult to access bank credit. However, bank consolidation will reduce small business credit only if small banks enjoy an advantage in lending to small businesses. We test the existence of a small bank cost advantage in small business lending by conducting the following simple test: If such advantages exist, then we should observe small businesses in areas with few small banks to have less bank credit. Using data on small business borrowers from the 1993 National Survey of Small Business Finance, we find that the probability of a small firm having a line of credit from a bank does not decrease in the long run when there are fewer small banks in the area, although short-run disruptions may occur. Nor do we find that firms in areas with few small banks are any more likely to repay trade credit late, suggesting that such firms are no more credit constrained than firms in areas with many small banks.     

Investor sentiment and the risk–return relation: A two-in-one approach

Traditional finance theory posits a positive risk–return relation, but empirical evidence is inconclusive. Retail investor sentiment has long been viewed as a distorting factor, while more recently institutional investor sentiment is thought to play a role. We examine the separate and joint impacts of retail and institutional investor sentiments on the risk-return relation. We find, at both market and firm levels, the risk-return relation is more likely to be distorted by the two investor-type sentiments jointly, rather than separately. We further find a cross-sectional pattern, with the risk-return relation being more sensitive to investor sentiment for stocks with specific characteristics.