Local Dividend Clienteles

We exploit demographic variation to identify the effect of dividend demand on corporate payout policy. Retail investors tend to hold local stocks and older investors prefer dividend‐paying stocks. Together, these tendencies generate geographically varying demand for dividends. Firms headquartered in areas in which seniors constitute a large fraction of the population are more likely to pay dividends, initiate dividends, and have higher dividend yields. We also provide indirect evidence as to why managers may respond to the demand for dividends from local seniors. Overall, these results are consistent with the notion that the investor base affects corporate policy choices.     

Dividend premium: Are dividend-paying stocks worth more?

This paper reports that the relation between dividend payout and firm value is positive. Panel data regressions suggest that the dividend premium for firms' equity is 17.4% and the dividend premium for firms' assets is 7.1%. The tests using propensity score matching methodology report a lower – but still positive and statistically significant – dividend premium: 12.5% for equity and 6.1% for assets. Thus, stock prices of dividend payers are greater by 12.5% or 17.4% on average (depending on methodology) compared to those of nonpayers. We find that policy-related economic uncertainty and the proportion of firms paying dividends explain more than half of the variation in dividend premium for assets.     

金融危机对公司现金股利政策的影响研究——基于股权结构的视角

论文分析了金融危机对上市公司现金股利政策的影响。研究发现,在金融危机期间,上市公司会降低现金股利支付水平,以应对未来的不确定性。但是,相比非流通股比率低的公司,非流通股比率高的公司在金融危机期间更有可能支付更多的现金股利,以满足非流通股股东对于现金的需求。研究还发现,如果公司在金融危机期间发放现金股利,则市场反应更积极,这说明公司通过股利政策向市场传递了积极的信号。但是,非流通股比率高的公司支付现金股利的市场反应要显著小于非流通股比率低的公司,这可能是市场担心非流通股股东利用现金股利侵害中小股东利益。本文研究结论为完善上市公司的现金股利政策和保护中小投资者利益提供了现实启示。     

Prior Payment Status and the Likelihood to Pay Dividends: International Evidence

By using the signaling model and the life‐cycle theory, I examine the importance of prior payment status in determining the likelihood to pay dividends. I categorize firms into those that paid dividends previously and those that did not. My results show that strong dividend stickiness exists and the determinants to pay differ significantly for the two groups of firms. High growth and low insider holdings make prior payers more likely to pay but prior nonpayers less likely to pay. Furthermore, prior payers are more sensitive to profitability and earned/contributed equity mix, while prior nonpayers are more sensitive to risk and dividend premiums. Finally, taking the prior payment status into account eliminates the problem of overestimating the portion of payers put forth by previous studies.     

Elective stock and scrip dividends

We investigate firms' decisions to pay elective stock dividends, known in the UK as scrip dividends. Scrip dividends give investors the choice between receiving new shares or the equivalent value as a cash dividend. UK firms paying scrip dividends are more likely to be financially constrained, and scrip dividends are used more when access to external financing is costly. Our results are robust to using the 2008 financial crisis as an exogenous shock to credit supply. Cash preservation is the most important corporate incentive to use scrip dividends as they tend to be distributed in combination with dividend cuts and with major corporate investments such as debt-financed mergers and acquisitions. Analysis of US dividend reinvestment plans by which investors purchase new shares confirms firms' cash-preservation motives.     

Board Connections and Dividend Policy

We examine the role of firm board connectedness in shaping a firm's dividend policy. We show that firms with well-connected boards not only have a higher likelihood of paying dividends in the pooled sample of both dividend payers and non-payers but also pay more dividends in the sample of dividend payers, compared with those with poorly connected boards. Further analysis reveals that the relation between board connectedness and dividend-paying behaviour tends to be economically stronger in firms pre-identified to have more severe agency conflicts, suggesting that well-connected boards tend to use dividends to mitigate agency problems in these firms. These findings are robust to different measures of board connectedness, different dividend payout measures, alternative estimation methods, and tests that account for endogeneity.     

Does institutional ownership increase stock return volatility? Evidence from Vietnam

The literature on institutional ownership and stock return volatility often ignores small emerging countries. However, this issue is more profound, due to the large size of institutional investors and small stock market size, in emerging equity markets. This paper examines the effects of the institutional ownership on the firm-level volatility of stock returns in Vietnam. Our data cover most of non-financial firms listed on the Ho Chi Minh City stock exchange for the period 2006–2012. Employing different analysis techniques for panel data and controlling for possible endogeneity problems, our empirical results suggest that institutional investors stabilize the stock return volatility. Moreover, we document that: i) the stabilizing effect of institutional investor ownership is higher in dividend paying firms, and ii) if firms are paying out more dividends, this stabilizing effect is greater. Our results outline the important role of institutional investors in maintaining the stability in emerging stock markets.     

Managerial entrenchment and payout policy: A catering effect

Agency theory suggests that entrenched managers are less likely to pay dividends. However, according to the catering theory, external pressures from investors can force managers to increase dividend payments. Hence, we test whether entrenched managers respond to investor demand for dividends and share repurchases. Using a large sample of 9677 US firms over the period 1990–2016 (i.e. a total of 80,478 firm-year observations), we test and find evidence that managerial entrenchment negatively impacts dividend payments. Our findings suggest that catering effects weaken the negative impact of managerial entrenchment on payout policy and that in firms with entrenched managers an increase in the propensity to pay dividends is conspicuous only when there is external investor demand for dividends. Our results indicate that while insiders and institutional owners might not necessarily favour dividend payments, firms respond to catering incentives when dominated by insiders but not institutional owners. Overall, our findings are consistent with the view that dividend payments are a result of external pressures to reduce agency problems associated with firms run by entrenched managers.     

Effects of investor tax heterogeneity on stock prices and trading behaviour around the ex-dividend day: the case of Australia

Using a sample of Australian stocks during the 1996–2014 period, this study examines how tax heterogeneity between domestic and foreign investors affects trading behaviour and stock prices around the ex-dividend day. Domestic investors prefer dividends and tend to buy stocks cum-dividend and sell them ex-dividend whereas foreign investors tend to trade in the opposite direction. Abnormal trading turnover increases with tax heterogeneity. Moreover, stocks with a larger domestic investor base are associated with a higher price drop-off ratio on the ex-dividend day and higher market value of franking credits. Overall, our findings support the dynamic dividend clientele hypothesis.     

Dividend changes and catering incentives

We extend Baker and Wurgler's [2004a. Journal of Finance 59 1125–1165] catering theory to include decreases and increases in existing dividends. Consistent with our extended model, we find that the decision to change the dividend and the magnitude of the change depend on the premium that the capital market places on dividends. We also find that the stock market reaction to dividend changes depends on the dividend premium. Thus, the capital market rewards managers for considering investor demand for dividends when making decisions about the level of dividends.     

Local Culture and Dividends

I empirically investigate whether geographical variations in local culture, as proxied by local religion, affect dividend demand and corporate dividend policy for a large sample of US firms. Firms located in Protestant counties are more likely to be dividend payers, initiate dividends, and have higher dividend yields, while firms located in Catholic counties are less likely to be dividend payers and have lower dividend yields. There is a geographically varying dividend clientele effect consistent with the variations in risk aversion among different cultural groups. My results suggest that firms largely held by local investors determine their corporate policies in line with local culture.     

What do dividends tell us about earnings quality?

Over the past 30 years, there have been significant changes in the distribution of earnings—cross-sectional variation has increased, with increasing left skewness—as well as in corporate payout policy, with many fewer firms paying dividends and the emergence of stock repurchases. We investigate whether the informativeness of payout policy with respect to earnings quality changes over this period. We find that the reported earnings of dividend-paying firms are more persistent than those of other firms and that this relation is remarkably stable over time. We also find that dividend payers are less likely to report losses and those losses that they do report tend to be transitory losses driven by special items. These results do not hold as strongly for stock repurchases, consistent with them representing less of a commitment than dividends.     

市场行情影响投资者的股利偏好吗?

基于2005-2017年A股上市公司的数据,研究了在不同的市场行情中,投资者对于股利政策的偏好差别。研究发现：对于现金股利而言,在上涨和下跌的市场行情中,投资者更偏好不发放现金股利的上市公司;在平稳行情中,投资者更偏好发放现金股利的上市公司。对于股票股利而言,在上涨行情中,投资者更偏好发放股票股利的上市公司;在下跌行情中,投资者更偏好不发放股票股利的上市公司;在平稳行情中,投资者对于是否发放股票股利没有显著的偏好差异。在上涨和下跌的市场行情中,超能力派现和高送转不会改变投资者的偏好;在平稳行情中,只有正常派现和正常送转才能赢得投资者的青睐,超能力派现行为无益于上市公司,高送转还会损害公司价值。     

Changes to Income Trust Taxation in Canada: Investor Reaction and Dividend Clientele Theory

Abstract:  This paper explores the relationship between tax-induced dividend clientele theory and the recent changes to the taxation of income trusts in Canada. On October 31, 2006, the Canadian government announced the Tax Fairness Plan ( TFP ) calling for the elimination of the considerable tax advantage enjoyed by income trusts. Generally, distributions from income trusts are now taxed at rates comparable to those imposed on corporate dividends. We examine market reaction to the  TFP  to address three issues: first, whether the valuation effect of a dividend tax increase is consistent with the traditional or the new view of dividend taxation; secondly, whether the market reaction to tax increases has a differential impact on firm value that is related to the tax preferences of taxable, tax-exempt, and foreign investor tax clienteles; and thirdly, whether firms change their dividend policies in response to the preference of institutional investors (tax-based dividend policy effect) or whether institutional investors are sorting themselves across firms based on their dividend policies (investor sorting effect). Our results provide strong evidence as follows. First, the valuation effect in reaction to the  TFP  announcement is consistent with the traditional view of dividend taxation – i.e. that taxes on dividends reduce the net return to investors, increase the firm's cost of capital and lower the firm's ability to access capital markets, thereby discouraging investment and savings. Secondly, we saw that trusts with a larger percentage of their units held by tax-exempt, low-tax, and foreign investors had a higher decline in value when compared with trusts held mostly by ordinary taxable investors. These results support dividend tax clientele theory. Finally, we observed changes in institutional investor clienteles consistent with the investor sorting effect.     

Why individual investors want dividends

The question of why individual investors want dividends is investigated by submitting a questionnaire to a Dutch investor panel. The respondents indicate that they want dividends partly because the cost of cashing in dividends is lower than the cost of selling shares. Their answers provide strong confirmation for the signaling theories of Bhattacharya (1979) [Bhattacharya, S., 1979. Imperfect information, dividend policy and the “bird in the hand” fallacy. Bell Journal of Economics 10, 259–270] and Miller and Rock (1985) [Miller, M., Modigliani, F., 1961. Dividend policy, growth and the valuation of shares. Journal of Business 34, 411–433]. They are inconsistent with the uncertainty resolution theory of Gordon (1961, 1962) [Gordon, M., 1961. The Investment, Financing, and Valuation of the Corporation, Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL; Gordon, M., 1962. The savings, investment and valuation of a corporation. Review of Economics and Statistics 44, 37–51.] and the agency theories of Jensen (1986) [Jensen, M.C., 1986. Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance and takeovers. American Economic Review 76, 323–329] and Easterbrook (1984) [Easterbrook, F.H., 1984. Two agency-cost explanations of dividends. American Economic Review 74, 650–659]. The behavioral finance theory of Shefrin and Statman (1984) [Shefrin, H.M., Statman, M., 1984. Explaining investor preference for cash dividends. Journal of Financial Economics 13, 253–282] is not confirmed for cash dividends but is confirmed for stock dividends. Finally, our results indicate that individual investors do not tend to consume a large part of their dividends. This raises some doubt as to whether a reduction or elimination of dividend taxes will stimulate the economy.     

Political institutions,stock market liquidity and firm dividend policy: Some international evidence

In this cross-country study, we draw on the dividend liquidity hypothesis and the political economy literature to examine whether political institutions affect the relationship between stock market liquidity and a firm’s dividend policy. In countries with weak political institutions, we expect that investors are less able to demand higher dividends for stocks with low liquidity. Using a sample of 52 countries, we show that the negative association between stock market liquidity and dividends is more pronounced in countries with sound political institutions, consistent with the “outcome” model of dividends. These results are stronger in countries with better legal institutions and weaker for firms with financial constraints.     

Catering effects in corporate dividend policy: The international evidence

This study tests for the international presence of dividend catering across a sample of twenty-three countries. We find evidence of catering among firms incorporated in common law countries but not for those in civil law nations. Catering persists even after controlling for the effect of the firm’s lifecycle. We conclude that when the legal regime and its accompanying set of investor protections permit, investors force dividends from managers, but they also attempt to extract such payouts indirectly by placing a high value on dividend paying firms. The relative failure of civil law firms to cater might be explained by idiosyncratic behaviors in the consumption of the private benefits of control or a lack of interest in responding to temporary market misevaluations of their equity.     

STOCK DIVIDENDS AS SIGNALS

This study analyzes stock dividends as signals from managers. It is argued that in the presence of information asymmetries between managers and investors, stock dividends provide a relatively inexpensive and unambiguous signalling device. Based on an examination of the daily returns around 317 stock dividend announcements, it is concluded that these announcements are interpreted by investors as signals from managers. Further analysis also indicates that stock dividend size is positively related to announcement day returns.     

Canada's Dual Class Shares: Further Evidence on the Market Value of Cash Dividends

The Canada Income Tax Act of 1971 permitted Canadian corporations to create two classes of equity, one paying ordinary cash income and the other paying capital gains income. Cash-paying shares have often sold at a premium. Empirical results indicate that the premium is largely explained by the relative value of the dividends paid and by costs imposed on investors by stock dividend payment and share conversion procedures. Premiums for a few firms also reflect the relative liquidity of the two classes of shares. No evidence exists that investors prefer cash income to equal amounts of capital gains.     

DISAPPEARING DIVIDENDS: CHANGING FIRM CHARACTERISTICS OR LOWER PROPENSITY TO PAY?

The proportion of U.S. firms paying dividends drops sharply during the 1980s and 1990s. Among NYSE, AMEX, and Nasdaq firms, the proportion of dividend payers falls from 66.5% in 1978 to only 20.8% in 1999. The decline is due in part to an avalanche of new listings that tilts the population of publicly traded firms toward small firms with low profitability and strong growth opportunities—the timeworn characteristics of firms that typically do not pay dividends. But this is not the whole story. The authors' more striking finding is that, no matter what their characteristics, firms in general have become less likely to pay dividends.
The authors use two different methods to disentangle the effects of changing firm characteristics and changing propensity to pay on the percent of dividend payers. They find that, of the total decline in the proportion of dividend payers since 1978, roughly one-third is due to the changing characteristics of publicly traded firms and two-thirds is due to a reduced propensity to pay dividends. This lower propensity to pay is quite general—dividends have become less common among even large, profitable firms.
Share repurchases jump in the 1980s, and the authors investigate whether repurchases contribute to the declining incidence of dividend payments. It turns out that repurchases are mainly the province of dividend payers, thus leaving the decline in the percent of payers largely unexplained. Instead, the primary effect of repurchases is to increase the already high payouts of cash dividend payers.