The Pricing of IPOs Post-Sarbanes-Oxley

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) imposes new requirements for firms going public. Many provisions of SOX should improve the transparency of U.S. firms going public and therefore reduce the uncertainty surrounding their valuation. We find that initial returns of initial public offerings (IPOs) in the United States have declined since SOX. Furthermore, the aftermarket performance of IPOs since SOX is significantly higher. While the expense of public reporting has increased in the United States because of SOX, the valuations of newly public firms at the time of the IPO are subject to less uncertainty and smaller aftermarket corrections.     

IAS Versus U.S. GAAP: Assessing the Quality of Financial Reporting in South Africa,the United Kingdom,and the United States

In this study, we investigate whether financial reporting, using International Accounting Standards (IAS) results in quality disclosures, given differences in institutional and market forces across legal jurisdictions. This study contributes to the global accounting debate by utilizing U.S.-based companies complying with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) as a benchmark for measuring the quality of IAS as applied by South Africa (S.A.) and United Kingdom (U.K.) companies. Although South Africa, United Kingdom, and the United States are common law countries with strong investor protection, South Africa's institutional factors and market forces vary from that of the U.K. and the U.S. South Africa's financial market is less developed than that of the U.K. and the U.S. We compare the discretionary accruals of firms complying with U.S. GAAP to the discretionary accruals of U.K. and S.A. firms complying with IAS. This allows a comparison between companies (S.A. and U.K.) operating under different institutional factors and market forces that have adopted IAS versus U.S. companies that report under U.S. GAAP. Our sample, consisting of U.S., S.A., and U.K. listed firms, contains 3,166 firm-year observations relating to the period 1999–2001. The results of our study indicate that S.A firms utilizing IAS report absolute values of discretionary accruals that are significantly greater than absolute values of discretionary accruals of U.S. firms utilizing U.S. GAAP. In contrast, U.K. firms utilizing IAS report discretionary accruals that are significantly less than the discretionary accruals of companies in the United States reporting under U.S. GAAP. This study contributes to the literature by providing evidence of the quality of financial information prepared under IAS and its dependency on the institutional factors and market forces of a country.     

Eclipse of the Public Corporation or Eclipse of the Public Markets?

The authors look back at Michael Jensen's 1989 article “The Eclipse of the Public Corporation.” They find some of his predictions have been borne out but other important ones, not. Jensen concluded that the publicly held corporation was in decline and had outlived its usefulness in many sectors. He argued that agency costs made public corporations an inefficient form of organization and that new private organizational forms promoted by private equity firms would likely replace the public firm. The number of public firms in the U.S. has declined significantly but there are still many hugely profitable and successful public companies. U.S. public markets are still well‐suited for firms with mostly tangible assets. So, what we are really witnessing is an eclipse not of public corporations, but of the public markets as the place where young firms with mostly intangible capital seek their funding. This is especially true when the usefulness of the intangible assets has yet to be proven. Sometimes the market is extremely optimistic about some intangible assets, but otherwise firms with unproven intangible assets may be better off funding themselves privately. This evolution has a downside: investors limited to public markets are cut off from investing in high intangible‐asset firms. Additionally, as fewer firms remain publicly listed, fewer firms will be transparent to society.     

美国货币政策推升了新兴市场国家非金融企业杠杆率吗？

全球金融危机后,美国量化宽松货币政策的实施导致全球流动性异常充裕,对新兴市场国家非金融企业外部融资环境造成显著影响。本文运用28个新兴市场国家2003-2015年非金融类上市企业财务数据和美国影子利率数据对美国货币政策调整与新兴市场国家非金融企业杠杆率变动之间的关系进行了实证分析。结果显示,美国影子利率与新兴市场国家非金融企业杠杆率变动之间存在显著负相关关系,即美国影子利率的降低会促使新兴市场国家非金融企业杠杆率出现更大幅度的上涨。进一步地,这一影响在融资约束程度较高的企业、外部融资依赖度较高的行业以及资本账户开放程度较高但汇率弹性僵化的国家表现得更为显著。上述发现意味着新兴市场国家在调控企业部门杠杆率的过程中,除要考虑国内因素外,也应高度重视美国货币政策的变化。     

Public Equity and Audit Pricing in the United States

To what degree are audit fees for U.S. firms with publicly traded equity higher than fees for otherwise similar firms with private equity? The answer is potentially important for evaluating regulatory regime design efficiency and for understanding audit demand and production economics. For U.S. firms with publicly traded debt, we hold constant the regulatory regime, including mandated issuer reporting and auditor responsibilities. We vary equity ownership and thus public securities market contextual factors, including any related public firm audit fees from increased audit effort to reduce audit litigation risk and/or pure litigation risk premium (litigation channel effects). In cross‐section, we find that audit fees for public equity firms are 20–22% higher than fees for otherwise similar private equity firms. Time‐series comparisons for firms that change ownership status yield larger percentage fee increases (decreases) for those going public (private). Results are consistent with litigation channel effects giving rise to substantial incremental audit fees for U.S. firms with public equity ownership.     

The Effect of Volume of Intrafirm Transfers on Market Metrics

In this paper, we examine the relationship between international intrafirm area transfers and market metrics as measured by market-to-book value and systematic risk. Intrafirm transfers – the amount that multinational corporations charge one another for the transfer of goods, intellectual property, and services – have become an increasingly important issue for policymaking, managerial, financial, and tax purposes. This paper also examines whether international intrafirm intergeographic area transfers are attributed to corporate tax. We find that firms with a sizable volume of international intrafirm transfers have higher systematic risk than comparable firms without these transfers. We show cross-sectionally that firms engage in international transfers have a higher market-to-book ratio, suggesting that transfers add value through their effect on earnings and taxes. Consistent with Mills and Newberry (2003) and Collins, Kemsley, and Lang (1998), we document that U.S. (global) income tax is positively (negatively) related to intrafirm transfers, implying that U.S. multinational firms shifted taxable income to the United States from 1995 to 1999.     

The U.S. left behind? Financial globalization and the rise of IPOs outside the U.S.

From 1990 to 2011, the share of world IPO activity by non-U.S. firms increased because of financial globalization and because of a decrease in U.S. IPO activity. Financial globalization reduces the impact of national institutions on domestic IPO activity and enables more non-U.S. firms from countries with weak institutions to go public with a global IPO. U.S. IPO activity does not benefit from financial globalization. Compared to other countries, the rate of small-firm IPO activity in the U.S. is abnormally low in the 2000s. This abnormally low rate cannot be explained by the regulatory changes of the early 2000s.     

Examination of U.S.-based Japanese subsidiaries: Evidence of the transfer of the Japanese strategic cost management

As a result of global competition, many Japanese companies are now operating in the United States. This article presents a survey of the management accounting methods employed by U.S.-based Japanese manufacturers and documents evidence about the current direction of accounting practices that are being transferred from Japan to the U.S. work environment. The results of the study show that most of the U.S.-based Japanese firms are similar to Japanese domestic firms in their use of management accounting methods of target costing and value engineering, variable costing, and strategic adaptation of traditional methods such as standard costing and budgeting. It is also evident that U.S.-based Japanese affiliates may be influenced by U.S. practices, as shown by significant usage of activity-based costing and internal rate of return for evaluating capital investment projects. This article is an important part of a continuing effort to study the development of management accounting among foreign-owned subsidiaries in the U.S., helping them to meet the challenges of global competition. Additionally, expanding this line of research on foreign subsidiaries that apply world class management accounting practices in other countries may assist U.S. multinational firms in their overseas subsidiaries' operations. Two limitations of this study and, thus, suggestions for future research are identified. First, the data on U.S.-based Japanese affiliates were collected for one point in time. Second, this study did not match each U.S.-based Japanese affiliate with its parent in Japan.     

Financial Shocks and Corporate Investment in Emerging Markets

We examine how cross-firm and cross-country heterogeneity shapes the responses of corporate investment in emerging markets to changes in U.S. monetary policy and financial-market volatility, the latter proxying for uncertainty. We find that in response to increases in U.S monetary policy rates or financial-market volatility, financially weaker firms reduce investment by more than financially strong firms. We also show that firms with stronger balance sheets delay investment voluntarily when faced with higher uncertainty. Finally, we find that stronger macroeconomic fundamentals (lower public debt or higher international reserves) help to buffer corporate investment from increases in U.S. monetary policy rates.     

The pricing of U.S. IPOs by seasoned foreign firms

We examine the pricing of U.S. initial public offerings (IPOs) by foreign firms that are already seasoned in their domestic countries. Presumably, these equity offers have less downside risk for investors than typical IPOs since domestic share prices can be used to help establish a preoffer value for the firm's equity. In spite of the presumed diminished downside risk, we find that offers by firms from countries that impose foreign ownership restrictions and capital controls are on average underpriced, experiencing an average first-day return in the United States of 12.7%. This result stems in part from the underwriter's failure to price the issue to fully reflect the postoffer premium that often arises for the U.S. shares. In contrast, offers by firms from countries without ownership restrictions have an average first-day return of 0.0%.     

How did a domestic housing slump turn into a global financial crisis?

The global financial crisis clearly started with problems in the U.S. sub-prime sector and spread across the world from there. But was the direct exposure of foreigners to the U.S. financial system a key driver of the crisis, or did other factors account for its rapid contagion across the world? To answer this question, we assessed whether countries that held large amounts of U.S. mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and were highly dependent on dollar funding experienced a greater degree of financial distress during the crisis. We found little evidence of such direct spillovers from the United States to abroad. Although CDS spreads generally rose higher and bank stocks generally fell lower in countries with more exposure to U.S. MBS and greater dollar funding needs, these correlations were not robust, and they fail to explain the lion’s share of the deterioration in asset prices that took place during the crisis. Accordingly, less tangible channels of contagion may have played a more important role in the global spread of the crisis: a generalized run on global financial institutions, given the opacity of their balance sheets; excessive dependence on short-term funding; vicious cycles of mark-to-market losses driving fire sales of MBS; the realization that financial firms around the world were pursuing similar (flawed) business models; and global swings in risk aversion. The U.S. sub-prime crisis, rather than being a fundamental driver of the global crisis, may have been merely a trigger for a global bank run and for disillusionment with a risky business model that already had spread around the world.     

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.     

Using Financial Accounting Data to Examine the Effect of Foreign Operations Located in Tax Havens and Other Countries on U.S. Multinational Firms' Tax Rates

This paper investigates the effect tax havens and other foreign jurisdictions have on the income tax rates of multinational firms based in the United States. We develop a new regression methodology using financial accounting data to estimate the average worldwide, federal, and foreign tax rates on worldwide, federal, and foreign pretax book income for a large sample of U.S. firms with and without tax haven operations. We find that on average U.S. firms that disclosed material operations in at least one tax haven country have a worldwide tax burden on worldwide income that is approximately 1.5 percentage points lower than firms without operations in at least one tax haven country. Our results also show that U.S. firms face a 4.4% current federal tax rate on foreign income whether or not they have tax haven operations. Finally, we find that U.S. firms with operations in some tax haven countries have higher federal tax rates on foreign income than other firms. This result suggests that in some cases, tax haven operations may increase U.S. tax collections at the expense of foreign country tax collections.     

Earnings Quality under Rules‐ versus Principles‐based Accounting Standards: A Test of the Skinner Hypothesis / LA QUALITÉ DES RÉSULTATS SELON QUE LES NORMES COMPTABLES SONT AXÉES SUR LES RÈGLES OU SUR LES PRINCIPES: VÉRIFICATION DE L'HYPOTHÈSE DE SKINNER*

We provide preliminary evidence, consistent with Skinner (1995), that Canada's relatively principles‐based GAAP yield higher accrual quality than the United States' relatively rules‐based GAAP. These results stem from a comparison of the Dechow‐Dichev (2002) measure of accrual quality for cross‐listed Canadian firms reporting under both Canadian and U.S. GAAP. However, we document lower accrual quality for Canadian firms reporting under U.S. GAAP than for U.S. firms, which are subject to stronger U.S. oversight, reporting under U.S. GAAP. The latter results suggest that stronger U.S. oversight compensates for inferior accrual quality associated with rules‐based GAAP. Consistent with the positive effect of Canada's principles‐based GAAP and the offsetting negative effect of Canada's weaker oversight, we find no overall difference in accrual quality between Canadian firms reporting under Canadian GAAP and U.S. firms reporting under U.S. GAAP. Our results imply that (1) policymakers who wish to compare the effectiveness of oversight across jurisdictions must control for the GAAP effect; and (2) accounting standard‐setters who wish to compare the effectiveness of principles‐ versus rules‐based GAAP must control for oversight strength.     

Why Are U.S. Stocks More Volatile?

U.S. stocks are more volatile than stocks of similar foreign firms. A firm's stock return volatility can be higher for reasons that contribute positively (good volatility) or negatively (bad volatility) to shareholder wealth and economic growth. We find that the volatility of U.S. firms is higher mostly because of good volatility. Specifically, stock volatility is higher in the United States because it increases with investor protection, stock market development, new patents, and firm‐level investment in R&D. Each of these factors is related to better growth opportunities for firms and better ability to take advantage of these opportunities.     

ADRs,Analysts, and Accuracy: Does Cross Listing in the United States Improve a Firm's Information Environment and Increase Market Value?

This paper investigates the relation between cross listing in the United States and the information environment of non‐U.S. firms. We find that firms that cross list on U.S. exchanges have greater analyst coverage and increased forecast accuracy than firms that are not cross listed. A time‐series analysis shows that a change in analyst coverage and forecast accuracy occurs around cross listing. We also document that firms that have more analyst coverage and higher forecast accuracy have higher valuations. Furthermore, the change in firm value around cross listing is correlated with changes in analyst following and forecast accuracy, suggesting that cross listing enhances firm value through its effect on the firm's information environment. Our findings support the hypothesis that cross‐listed firms have better information environments, which are associated with higher market valuations.     

An empirical investigation of Yankee stock offerings

This paper examines the operating and investment performance of 100 foreign firms that conduct their initial public offerings (IPOs) in the U.S. (Yankee stock offerings). The uniqueness of these firms is that the U.S. IPOs are their first public equity issue in any market, including the home market. We find significant improvement in the operating performance subsequent to these U.S. IPO events and firms from countries with poor investor protection benefit more. Compared to various benchmarks, unlike the significant underperformance of IPOs documented in many countries, these firms show no significant abnormal long-run stock market performance after 1, 3, or 5 years of seasoning. The findings are consistent with signaling and selective entry hypotheses.     

Emerging market corporate leverage and global financial conditions

This paper explores how global financial conditions influence corporate leverage growth in emerging markets (EMs). Using a sample of 800,000 listed and non-listed firms across 28 EMs, we find that accommodative global financial conditions—initially proxied with a measure of U.S. monetary policy—are associated with faster leverage growth. The impact is more pronounced for financially constrained firms, such as small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and for EMs whose domestic monetary policy is more aligned with that of the United States. The findings suggest that global financial conditions affect EM firms' leverage growth by influencing domestic interest rates and by relaxing corporate borrowing constraints. Finally, leverage increases disproportionately more for firms that are either relatively less profitable or less solvent when global financial conditions become looser.     

Foreign issuers in the U.S. PIPE market

We document that the use of private investment in public equity (PIPE) by foreign firms listed on U.S. exchanges is growing even faster than its use by U.S. firms. On average, foreign firm PIPE stock deals represent a similar proportion of the firm's market capitalization to U.S. firm PIPEs, but suffer less of a share price discount than U.S. firm PIPE issuances, a relation that is robust to consideration of exchange, deal size, share turnover and return volatility. We document that hedge funds are only small investors in foreign firm PIPEs issued in the U.S., which tend to be purchased by pensions, government funds and corporations. PIPE, in combination with the reverse merger method of going public, provides a cost-effective means for foreign firms to raise capital in the U.S. capital market.     

The evolution of corporate payout in Canada

We document changes in the aggregate percentage and number of dividend-paying Canadian firms from 1989 to 2021 and observe a disappearing and partially reappearing dividend phenomenon similar to that in the United States. Unlike the US experience, in Canada, the number and percentage of dividend-paying firms are consistently higher than those of repurchasing firms throughout the sample period. Further, in Canada, the changes are driven by changes in the number of listed firms before and after the bursting of the internet bubble and the effects of the global financial crisis, which we call the new listing effect. The numbers are also affected by a tax change directed at income trusts and the change in the number of firms in the oil, gas, and mining sectors. In predicting a firm's dividend status based on firm-level characteristics, unlike recent US research, we find that the life-cycle theory, as measured by cumulative retained earnings and earnings volatility, plays an important role in explaining dividend status.