Does bank ownership affect lending behavior? Evidence from the Euro area

We analyze the differences in lending policies across banks characterized by different types of ownership, using micro-level data on Euro area banks during the period 1999–2011 to detect possible variations in bank lending supply responses to changes in monetary policy. Our results identify a general difference between stakeholder and shareholder banks: following a monetary policy contraction, stakeholder banks decrease their loan supply to a lesser extent than shareholder banks. A detailed analysis of the effect among stakeholder banks reveals that cooperative banks continued to smooth the impact of tighter monetary policy on their lending during the crisis period (2008–2011), whereas savings banks did not. Stakeholder banks’ propensity to smooth their lending cycles suggests that their presence in the economy has the potential to reduce credit supply volatility.     

Does political pressure matter in bank lending? Evidence from China

Using provincial data from China between 2002 and 2011, we find substantial evidence indicating a positive association between the growth of bank loans issued by commercial banks and the political pressures faced by provincial leaders. This association is particularly true for state‐owned banks, which are much more politically pressurized than others, but is relatively attenuated in provinces with a more developed banking sector. We also find that bank loans issued under greater political pressures are less commercially oriented and have lower quality. Our findings are robust to a variety of sensitivity analyses and alternative measures of political pressure. Overall, our study contribute to a growing literature emphasizing the role of the political incentives of government officials in fuelling economic growth through credit allocation.     

Do shareholders really matter for firm performance? Evidence from the ownership characteristics of Italian listed companies

This paper studies the impact of the features of the shareholder base on the performance of a large sample of Italian listed firms between 2007 and 2019, both within and across firms. We expand the empirical evidence on the relation between shareholder type and different dimensions of firm performance by dividing shareholders into six categories, and further differentiating between domestic and foreign investors. We provide extensive evidence on the relation between firm performance and different types of shareholders, showing how diverse performance metrics are correlated with the voting rights of specific types of shareholders. Consistent with previous studies, the picture that emerges from our analysis shows that the ownership structure of Italian listed companies is characterized by a high degree of concentration. In this context, we find that ownership concentration or the presence of a controlling shareholder is in general associated with better performance. Moreover, a positive relation exists between diverse firm performance metrics and the voting rights of family shareholders, founders and foreign investors, while government ownership is detrimental in the short-term.     

Do loan loss reserves behave like capital? Evidence from recent bank failures

Regulatory capital guidelines allow for loan loss reserves to be added back as capital. Our evidence suggests that the influence of loan loss reserves added back as regulatory capital (hereafter referred to as “add-backs”) on bank risk cannot be explained by either economic principles underlying the notion of capital or accounting principles underlying the recording of reserves. Specifically, we observe that, in sharp contrast to the economic notion of capital as a buffer against bank failure risk, add-backs are positively associated with the risk of bank failure during the recent economic crisis. Furthermore, the positive association of add-backs with bank failure risk is concentrated among cases in which the add-backs are highly likely to increase a bank’s total regulatory capital. The evidence cannot thus be fully explained by accounting principles either, since the role of loan loss reserves according to those principles does not depend on whether the reserves generate a regulatory capital increase. Additional analysis suggests that the observed influence of loan loss reserves on bank failure risk may be an unintended consequence of their regulatory treatment as capital.     

Do capital buffers matter? Evidence from the stocks and flows of nonperforming loans

This paper investigates the determinants of the stocks and flows (both in- and outflows) of nonperforming loans (NPLs) by considering a bank-specific factor that is not adequately analysed in the literature, namely, bank capital buffers. Using unbalanced panel data with 6,087 bank-year observations for the 2006–2018 period and a two-step system generalised method of moments (GMM) estimation, we find that banks with higher levels of capital buffers (both in terms of Tier 1 and total capital) have fewer NPL stocks and generate fewer NPL inflows. When we control for the characteristics of the loan portfolio, real guarantees collected by the bank increase the stocks and flows of new, impaired loans, while personal guarantees favour the outflow of bad loans.     

Does investment banker human capital matter in acquisitions? Evidence from China

Investment banker human capital is valuable in mergers and acquisitions. Exploiting a unique hand-built dataset, this paper studies whether and how investment banker's education and experience impact the merger performance in China. We find that investment bankers' education credentials are positively related to the post-merger performance; however, greater investment banker experience does not. We further explore the channels and show that the education effect is stronger in deals with higher information asymmetry and acquirers with worse corporate governance. On the other hand, experience increases merger performance in deals with high information asymmetry but reduces deal performance in poorly governed firms. Our findings suggest that higher education attainment facilitates both the advisory and monitoring role of investment bankers, while more experience makes investment bankers better advisors yet worse monitors. Our findings also suggest that investment bankers' roles in value creation are highly dependent on different institutional backgrounds, and one cannot generalize the findings in the U.S. across borders.     

Do government preferences matter for tax competition?

This paper explores how government preferences affect capital tax decisions of a country. We develop a model in which governments, differentiating in their preferences for economic development and income equality, compete for mobile capital over corporation taxes. The key prediction of the model, borne out in data from OECD countries over the years 1990–2012, is that an increase in government preferences for pursuing economic development relative to income equality makes countries’ horizontal tax reactions stronger. Unlike the existing studies, our result contributes to the tax competition literature by highlighting the importance of government preferences in determining the extent of tax competition among countries and so offering a novel explanation for the widely observed heterogeneous tax policies across countries.     

Does regulatory forbearance matter for bank stability? Evidence from creditors’ perspective

Regulatory forbearance in times of corporate distress has been a common practice in many countries to achieve bank stability, particularly so in the absence of a unified bankruptcy code, yet very little is known in the context of emerging market economies. Exploiting variation of membership across banks in a corporate debt restructuring programme (CDR) sponsored by the central bank in India, this paper finds that the banks that made use of regulatory forbearance (RF) on the restructured corporate loans could increase their stability significantly due to the extension of low provisioning on restructured loans. However, the positive effect of RF diminishes at higher levels of market power, highlighting that member banks with higher market power tend to originate riskier assets (as reflected in their risk-weighted assets) under the auspices of this programme. Our results remain robust to different estimators (including propensity score matching), ownership structure, and alternative measures of bank stability.     

Does the ownership structure matter for banks’ capital regulation and risk-taking behavior? Empirical evidence from a developing country

This paper applies the two-stage least squares (2SLS) estimator to examine the bi-directional relationship between banks’ capital regulation and risk-taking behavior concerning the impact of ownership structure. We have used a balanced panel dataset of banks from a developing country over the most recent period between 2006 and 2014. The empirical findings of this study suggest that higher capital regulation enhances banks’ stability when it combats with credit risk but higher credit risk often persuades abating capital ratio. Particularly, the key results are as follows: (i) the higher association of minority active shareholding in stability issues is positive; (ii) the higher contribution of active share holding promotes banks’ capital ratio; (iii) the lower ownership concentration prevents credit risk; (iv) private commercial banks are more risk averse and stable than state-owned banks and other type of banks; and (v) notably, Islamic banks show their superiority through overall performance despite their lower capital stability than conventional banks. Besides, no models show significant non-linear relationship between capital regulation and risk-taking except models of stability show a U-shaped relation in capital equation, indicating that when regulatory pressure works in a country then bank lose solvency at the initial stage. Finally, it also provides some imperative policy implications which will be very useful for a wide range of stakeholders.     

Does carbon emission of firms matter for Bank loans decision? Evidence from China

In the context of global climate governance, greater carbon emissions of enterprises often result in a higher potential risk of environmental violations. Taking the non-financial companies listed in China from 2008 to 2018 as research samples, this paper empirically examined the impact of firm carbon emission on their acquisition of new bank loans and its mechanism of action. This paper empirically finds that if the carbon emission of an enterprise is higher, it will be granted with less new bank loans. The results remain robust after pairing analysis and instrumental variable analysis. The mechanism analysis shows that corporate credit rating plays a significant moderating role in the relationship between corporate carbon emission and new bank loans. Carbon emission leads to the improvement of earnings management of enterprises and the significant decline in the conservatism and comparability of accounting information, which is likely to be an important channel for the reduction of corporate bank loans. Upon further analysis, we find that the carbon emission of enterprises will not significantly affect the cost of acquiring bank loans, but it will significantly reduce the loan term structure. The cross-sectional analysis shows that the effect of carbon emission on new bank loans is more obvious in state-owned listed enterprises, enterprises with high internal control quality and enterprises with strong environmental law enforcement. The research results of this paper enrich the research on the economic consequences of carbon emission, reveal the implementation effect of green credit policies, provide empirical evidence for bank credit to play a role in green governance, and promote enterprises to actively reduce carbon emission.     

Do economic institutions matter for trade liberalization? Evidence from China’s Open Door Policy

Trade liberalization can promote export by inducing better resource allocation and more advanced technologies. Although the literature emphasizes the mechanism of geographic proximity, this paper identifies an institutional effect. Using infant mortality rate as an instrument that is irrelevant to export and geographic effects, we confirm that the openness due to China’s Open Door Policy promotes firm exports. We further document that the positive relationship between openness and firm exports is mediated by property rights protection and corporate autonomy, either of which reflects institutional quality at the constraint on the government’s strategic behavior. In particular, our estimates are robust to different samples, different estimation methods, and endogeneity bias.     

Does the disclosure of internal control deficiency matter for accrual quality? Evidence from China

Using a sample of Chinese listed firms that are required to audit and disclose any internal control deficiency (ICD), this paper examines the effect of mandatory ICD disclosure on accrual quality (AQ) in China. We find that relative to voluntary ICD disclosure, mandatory ICD disclosure is associated with poorer AQ, as proxied by abnormal accruals, suggesting that the mandated disclosure of ICD effectively identifies financial reporting quality in Chinese firms. This relationship is enhanced by government control of firms (especially the central government) and by the intensity of government inspections and is stronger in undeveloped regional markets. The results are robust to the application of the PSM-DID method and use of different measures and samples. Our findings demonstrate the critical role of the mandated disclosure of ICD and improve our understanding of internal control mechanisms in emerging markets.     

Do dividends signal safety? Evidence from China

Our paper examines whether dividends convey information about future cash-flow volatility in the Chinese stock markets. We observe that dividend changes are followed by cash-flow-volatility changes in the opposite direction. Taking advantage of the unique context of China, we show, in both the two-way sorting analysis and the regression analysis, that the strong relation between changes in dividend and cash-flow volatility is robust after controlling for potential confounders, including firm-level financial market frictions, macroeconomic and market conditions, and government intervention in firms' decision-making, and holds after we control for endogeneity concerns. Furthermore, we perform the theoretic mechanism tests of the relation and present supporting evidence on the signaling theory under the setting of asymmetric information, instead of the free cash flow theory based on the assumption of agency conflict. This study enriches our understanding of the source and nature of cash-flow information contained in dividends.     

Are regulatory capital adequacy ratios good indicators of bank failure? Evidence from US banks

Motivated by massive bank failures during the financial crisis, this paper examines whether capital adequacy ratios required by regulators are associated with bank failure. It investigates whether the association is affected by the bank's proximity to the minimum required capital ratios. If results show a significant association between regulatory capital and failure of banks falling below the minimum capital ratios, then the ratios are set at an adequate level. Examining a sample of 560 US bank holding companies for the period 2003–2009, results reveal that the association between the core (Tier 1) capital ratio and bank failure becomes significant only if the bank holding company has a Tier 1 capital ratio of less than 6%. This is the level below which US bank regulators do not regard banks as being well capitalized. During the financial crisis period of 2007–2009, there is a significant association only when the criterion is set at or above 8%. Market-based probability of default is more significantly associated with failure relative to Tier 1 capital ratio. The findings of this paper are relevant to regulatory policy discussions and Basel III deliberations on capital adequacy at times of financial turmoil.     

Does foreign institutional ownership increase return volatility? Evidence from China

This paper investigates the impact of foreign institutional ownership on firm-level stock return volatility in China, based on our study of a sample of 1458 firms between 1998 and 2008. The empirical results show that share ownership by foreign institutions (both financial and non-financial) increases firm-level stock return volatility, even after controlling for a complete ownership structure, firm size, turnover, and leverage, and correcting for potential endogeneity problems. However, the results also show that foreign individual shareholdings reduce volatility. Furthermore, we document a positive relationship between domestic shareholdings (individual, institutional, and governmental) and firm-level stock return volatility. Empirical results with interaction terms show that foreign institutional ownership increases firm-level return volatility by strengthening the positive impact of liquidity on volatility. The volatility reduction effect of foreign individual ownership is attenuated by government ownership suggests a poor governance environment as a result of the involvement of the Chinese government.     

The effect of bank capital on lending: Does liquidity matter?

This paper uses a sample of quarterly observations of insured US commercial banks to examine whether the effect of bank capital on lending differs depending upon the level of bank liquidity. We find that the effect of an increase in bank capital on credit growth, defined as growth rate of net loans and unused commitments, is positively associated with the level of bank liquidity only for large banks and that this positive relationship has been more substantial during the recent financial crisis period. This result suggests that bank capital exerts a significantly positive effect on lending only after large banks retain sufficient liquid assets.     

Does central bank governors term in office matter for macroprudential policies? Evidence from MENA banks

Using a comprehensive dataset on MENA banks, we examine whether CB governors use of macroprudential instruments affect bank risk. The findings indicate that the CB governors’ use of such instruments does not significantly reduce bank risk. We propose two hypotheses as to why CB governor are inclined to employ such instruments. Based on the findings, it appears that the decision to use such instruments is dictated more by macroeconomic considerations as opposed to peer pressure concerns.     

Do firms underreport information on cyber-attacks? Evidence from capital markets

Firms should disclose information on material cyber-attacks. However, because managers have incentives to withhold negative information, and investors cannot discover most cyber-attacks independently, firms may underreport them. Using data on cyber-attacks that firms voluntarily disclosed, and those that were withheld and later discovered by sources outside the firm, we estimate the extent to which firms withhold information on cyber-attacks. We find withheld cyber-attacks are associated with a decline of approximately 3.6% in equity values in the month the attack is discovered, and disclosed attacks with a substantially lower decline of 0.7%. The evidence is consistent with managers not disclosing negative information below a certain threshold and withholding information on the more severe attacks. Using the market reactions to withheld and disclosed attacks, we estimate that managers disclose information on cyber-attacks when investors already suspect a high likelihood (40%) of an attack.     

Why Do Firms Switch Banks? Evidence from China

This article uses a sample of matched firms-banks data in China over the period 1999–2012 to determine the drivers of firms switching behavior from one bank relationship to another. The results show that the principal driver of a switching action is the credit needs of the firm. The binding force of the Communist Party in state-owned banks and enterprises would suggest that switching should be a rare phenomenon in Chinese commercial relations. But switching occurs. The findings support the extant literature that transparent firms are able to switch more readily than opaque firms. The results also suggest that banks that develop their fee income services are more effective in locking-in their borrowers and that firms tend to switch from state-owned banks to smaller non-state owned banks. However, in other areas switching does not conform with the mainstream explanations.     

Does government report readability matter? Evidence from market reactions to AAERs

We investigate whether market reactions to Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Releases (AAERs) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) vary with different levels of readability in the AAERs. After controlling for the complexity of an AAER report and the severity of the enforcement case, we find that when the AAER is more difficult to read, with readability measured based on the directives of the Plain Writing Act of 2010, markets react more negatively to the AAER announcement. Cross-sectional tests indicate that the effect of AAER readability is attenuated by investor sophistication and firm visibility, whereas the effect is more pronounced when AAER firms are exposed to greater uncertainty. Contrary to conventional wisdom that linguistically complex disclosures receive reduced market reactions, our results suggest that complex AAER announcements could trigger more negative stock price reactions, since investors under uncertainty and ambiguity tend to assume the worst and bid down the market value of AAER firms. Our study offers meaningful implications for regulators concerned with writing clarity in government documents.