Interest Rates in Trade Credit Markets

All things equal, interest rates should increase with the borrower's risk. And yet, Klapper, Laeven, and Rajan (2012) cannot find such a positive relation in a broad sample of trade credit contracts. We shed some light on this puzzle by arguing that competition between informed and uninformed suppliers weakens the link between the trade credit cost and the borrower's creditworthiness. Our model implies that trade credit rates are more likely to increase with the borrower's risk if suppliers are less profitable, have high cost of funds, or sell inputs to firms plagued by moral hazard and financial distress.     

Trade Credit Use as Firms Approach Default

Using a sample of distressed firms with information about suppliers, we document an average fall in the use of trade credit as firms approach bankruptcy compared to a control sample of nonbankrupt firms. However, we uncover a large degree of heterogeneity across suppliers. Suppliers facing high switching costs maintain their business ties with the distressed firms as they approach bankruptcy, and provide them more trade credit. Suppliers in concentrated markets provide temporary support to their clients. Overall, the findings of this paper suggest that switching costs are fundamental to explain whether suppliers provide liquidity to their distressed clients or not.     

Bank Loan Availability and Trade Credit Demand

This paper investigates the effects of bank loan availability on the trade credit and credit card demand of small firms, using firm‐level data from the 1995 Credit, Banks, and Small Business Survey, conducted by the National Federation of Independent Business. We find that firms increase their demand for trade credit and credit card debt when facing credit constraints imposed by banks. These results provide evidence of a pecking order of debt financing, where firms increase their reliance on potentially expensive sources of funds when bank loans are not available.     

Do Credit Ratings Really Affect Capital Structure?

This paper revisits recent investigations into the role credit ratings play in the marginal financing behavior of firms. Although it has long been documented that credit ratings may be an important determinant of firm capital structure policy, academics have only recently subjected this motivation to empirical scrutiny. We add to the brief existing literature by investigating the sensitivity of marginal financing behavior of firms to a number of attributes deemed to capture firms’ affinity to emphasize credit ratings in their financing behavior. Our results suggest that credit ratings are not a first‐order concern in capital structure decisions.     

Founder CEO management and the long-run investment performance of IPO firms

This study provides a comparative analysis of the long-run investment performance of founder and non-founder CEO led IPO firms in high and low technology environments. We find weak evidence of superior long-run investment performance on the part of founder CEO led IPO firms, since the significance of the results are sensitive to choice of benchmark, portfolio weighting method, and factor regression model. However, in the context of high technology IPO firms, we find consistent evidence to indicate that founder CEO led firms provide significantly higher long-run returns relative to non-founder CEO led firms. Our results suggest that the unique nature of founder CEO leadership is particularly beneficial to IPO firms in high technology environments.     

Managerial risk taking incentives and corporate pension policy

We examine whether the compensation incentives of top management affect the extent of risk shifting versus risk management behavior in pension plans. We find that risk shifting through pension underfunding (and, to a lesser extent, through pension asset allocation to risky securities) is stronger with compensation structures that create high wealth-risk sensitivity (vega) and weaker with high wealth-price sensitivity (delta). These findings are stronger for chief financial officers (CFOs) than for chief executive officers (CEOs), suggesting that pension policy falls within the CFO’s domain. Risk shifting through pension underfunding is also lower when the CFO’s personal stake in the pension plan is larger. Overall, these findings show that top managers’ compensation structure is an important driver of corporate pension policy. They also highlight firms within which the moral hazard concerns fueled by Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation insurance are most relevant.     

Determinants of corporate cash policy: Insights from private firms

We provide one of the first large sample comparisons of cash policies in public and private U.S. firms. We first show that despite higher financing frictions, private firms hold, on average, about half as much cash as public firms do. By examining the drivers of cash policies for each group, we are able to attribute the difference to the much higher agency costs in public firms. By combining evidence from across public and private firms as well as within public firms across different qualities of governance, we are able to reconcile existing mixed evidence on the effects of agency problems on cash policies. Specifically, agency problems affect not only the target level of cash, but also how managers react to cash in excess of the target.     

Financial distress and corporate risk management: Theory and evidence

This paper extends the current theoretical models of corporate risk-management in the presence of financial distress costs and tests the model's predictions using a comprehensive data set. I show that the shareholders optimally engage in ex-post (i.e., after the debt issuance) risk-management activities even without a pre-commitment to do so. The model predicts a positive (negative) relation between leverage and hedging for moderately (highly) leveraged firms. Consistent with the theory, empirically I find a non-monotonic relation between leverage and hedging. Further, the effect of leverage on hedging is higher for firms in highly concentrated industries.     

Do executive stock options induce excessive risk taking?

We examine whether executive stock options can induce excessive risk taking by managers in firms’ security issue decisions. We find that CEOs whose wealth is more sensitive to stock return volatility due to their option holdings are more likely to choose debt over equity as a capital-raising vehicle. More importantly, the pattern holds not only in firms that are underlevered relative to their optimal capital structure but also in overlevered firms. This evidence is inconsistent with executive stock options aligning the interests of managers and shareholders; rather, it supports the hypothesis that stock options sometimes make managers take on too much risk and in the process pursue suboptimal capital structure policies.     

Deviations from optimal CEO ownership and firm value

The transaction cost theory of managerial ownership and firm value predicts that deviations from optimal managerial ownership reduce firm value. This paper empirically tests the transaction cost theory by studying the relation between deviations on either side of optimal CEO ownership and firm value. We find that both above-optimal and below-optimal deviations reduce firm value. We find that a change in CEO ownership is associated with a higher (lower) abnormal return if it moves the ownership towards (away from) the optimal level. These findings are consistent with the transaction cost theory of managerial ownership and firm value.     

Managerial ownership dynamics and firm value

From 1988 to 2003, the average change in managerial ownership is significantly negative every year for American firms. We find that managers are more likely to significantly decrease their ownership when their firms are performing well and more likely to increase their ownership when their firms become financially constrained. When controlling for past stock returns, we find that large increases in managerial ownership increase Tobin's q. This result is driven by increases in shares held by officers, while increases in shares held by directors appear unrelated to changes in firm value. There is no evidence that large decreases in ownership have an adverse impact on firm value. We rely on the dynamics of the managerial ownership/firm value relation to mitigate concerns in the literature about the endogeneity of managerial ownership.     

FOUNDING FAMILY OWNERSHIP AND CASH HOLDINGS

I investigate the relation between founding family ownership and firm cash holdings. I find that cash holdings are significantly lower at family firms than nonfamily firms. I also examine the marginal value of cash and report a smaller value of cash for family firms. Combined, the findings are consistent with the spending hypothesis that family firms tend to deploy cash quickly and the market discounts the quality of their spending.     

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.     

Understanding seasoned equity offerings of Chinese firms

We examine the empirical relevance of standard theories explaining the motivation of Seasoned Equity Offerings (SEOs) in the Chinese context. Analyzing Chinese SEOs during 1994-2008 and controlling for other factors reflecting features of Chinese corporate finance, we find that Chinese SEOs are mostly motivated by timing the market. Financing for investment and growth receives weak empirical support. We do not obtain any consistent evidence supporting both the tradeoff and the agency theories. In addition, we find that the firm’s SEOs behavior varies between rights issues and public offerings and across different periods along with the progress of China’s market transition. Our results show that Chinese listed firms in general behave similarly as their counterparts in other countries concerning SEOs decisions in that they issue SEOs when there are opportunities to take advantage of market overvaluation. These results are consistent with the well-documented convergence trend of corporate SEOs behavior of firms around the world. In addition, our findings challenge the conventional perception on Chinese SEOs that controlling shareholders use SEOs as a means to expropriate minority shareholders.     

Long term changes in voting power and control structure following the unification of dual class shares

We study the effects of a regulatory change that induced the unification of most dual class shares in Israel in the 1990s. Specifically, we follow the evolution of ownership structure in a sample of 80 companies that unified their dual-class shares, and compare it with a control sample of firms that maintained their dual share structure at least until 2000. Our main findings are as follows. First, controlling shareholders offset the dilution of voting rights they incurred upon unification by: 1) increasing their holdings prior to the unification (ex-ante preparation), and 2) by buying shares afterwards; by the end of the sample period their voting power was only marginally lower than in the control sample. This offsetting result suggests that marginal voting rights may be important to controlling shareholders even beyond the 50% threshold. Second, share unifications were not associated with much change in the identity of controlling shareholders. Third, the proportion of firms affiliated with pyramidal business groups in the sample of unifying firms was lower than in the population of listed firms as a whole and not different from that in the control sample, suggesting that pyramidal ownership structures did not replace dual class shares. Finally, unifying firms did not exhibit a substantial improvement in their performance and valuation in comparison with the control sample.