Do shareholder views affect corporate political activities?

In this paper, we study shareholder views on corporate political contributions. We find that, with shareholders' explicit approval, firms are more likely to have higher corporate political contribution, measured by the amount of donations to the US political parties in the next election cycle. Firm's political contributions also have a positive long-run impact on firm valuations. When analysing firm's political ideology, we find weak evidence that Democratic party may benefit more from this shareholder's support than Republican party, particularly in case of firms which have recently switched their political ideology to Democratic party. Our results show that shareholders' explicit approval has an impact on firm's engagement of political activities and imply that if the shareholders stand at the same side of the firms, firms engage more in politically-related corporate activities. Our key results are supported in a regression discontinuity design and are robust to two-way clustered standard errors.     

Voluntary disclosure of corporate political spending

In this paper, we study voluntary political spending disclosure, a widespread yet relatively unexplored corporate voluntary disclosure practice. Using an index created by the CPA-Zicklin Center that measures the level of voluntary political spending disclosure for S&P 500 firms, we examine firm-level characteristics associated with such disclosures, and their importance. We find that firms with greater political expenditures, direct political connections, higher investor activism, better corporate social responsibility performance and governance, and more industry competition tend to have a higher level of political spending disclosure. We also find that a higher level of political spending disclosure is positively associated with both the number of institutional investors and the proportion of shares owned by institutional investors, particularly socially responsible institutional investors, after controlling for the quality of other disclosures. The level of political spending disclosure is also associated with a higher analyst following, lower forecast error, and smaller forecast dispersion. Finally, we find that political spending disclosure enhances the positive relationship between annual corporate political spending and firm financial performance. Together, these results are consistent with the view that voluntary political spending disclosure helps align managers’ interests with those of shareholders.     

Large Shareholders,the Board of Directors and the Allocation of Cash Proceeds from Corporate Asset Sell‐offs

Recent finance literature suggests that managers of divesting firms may retain cash proceeds from corporate asset sell‐offs in order to pursue their own objectives, and, therefore, shareholders' gains due to these deals are linked to a distribution of proceeds to shareholders or to debtholders. We add to this literature by examining the role of various corporate governance mechanisms in the context of the allocation of sell‐off proceeds. Specifically, we examine the impact of directors' share‐ownership and stock options, board composition and external large shareholdings on (1) shareholders' abnormal returns around asset sell‐off announcements, and (2) managers' decision to either retain or distribute (to shareholders or to debtholders) sell‐off proceeds. We find that non‐executive directors' and CEO's share‐ownership and stock options are related to shareholders' gains from sell‐offs for firms that retain proceeds. However, corporate governance mechanisms are not significantly related to shareholders' gains for firms that distribute sell‐off proceeds. Furthermore, we find that the likelihood of a distribution of proceeds, relative to the retention decision, is increasing in large institutional shareholdings, executive and non‐executive directors' share‐ownership and non‐executive representation in the board.     

How does institutional investors' information acquisition inhibit share pledging? Evidence from China

This study investigates whether and how institutional investors' information acquisition affects controlling shareholder's share pledging. Taking a unique data of institutional investors' corporate site visits in China, we find that institutional investors' corporate site visits significantly inhibit controlling shareholder's share pledging. This effect is robust to a series of robustness checks, including controlling for endogeneity concerns, propensity score matching method, alternative model specifications, and alternative measures of the independent variable. We then provide evidence that the negative relation between institutional investors' corporate site visits and controlling shareholder's share pledging is more pronounced for listed firms with less efficient information environment and weaker corporate governance. Further analysis indicates that the negative relation is also more pronounced when controlling shareholders are under higher margin call pressure and when the visiting institutional investors consist of more fund companies. Overall, our study is the first to provide direct evidence of the governance mechanism of financial intermediaries on shareholders' pledging decisions.     

Dividend payouts and catering to demands: Evidence from a dividend tax reform

Utilizing the 2012 dividend tax reform in China, this paper examines how firms make dividend payout decisions that cater to the controlling shareholders' demand, especially when controlling shareholders and outside minority shareholders have different dividend preferences. We find that firms increase dividend payouts when controlling shareholders demand higher dividends after the dividend tax reform. In particular, firms pay higher dividends when facing increased demand from controlling shareholders than when the demand is from minority investors. In addition, we find that firms that increase dividend payments due to the controlling shareholders' demand subsequently have more debt financing and poorer firm performance, suggesting that catering to the demands from controlling shareholders is subject to the Type II agency problem.     

Do controlling shareholders' expropriation incentives imply a link between corporate governance and firm value? Theory and evidence

We develop and test a model that investigates how controlling shareholders' expropriation incentives affect firm values during crisis and subsequent recovery periods. Consistent with the prediction of our model, we find that, during the 1997 Asian financial crisis, Asian firms with weaker corporate governance experience a larger drop in their share values but, during the post-crisis recovery period, such firms experience a larger rebound in their share values. We also find consistent evidence for Latin American firms during the 2001 Argentine economic crisis. Our results support the view that controlling shareholders' expropriation incentives imply a link between corporate governance and firm value.     

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND CAPITAL STRUCTURE DYNAMICS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

Consistent with theoretical predictions, we find that both a higher level of financial leverage and a faster speed of adjustment of leverage toward the shareholders' desired level are associated with better corporate governance quality as defined by a more independent board featuring CEO–chairman separation and greater presence of outside directors, coupled with larger institutional shareholding. In contrast, managerial incentive compensation on average discourages use of debt or adjustments toward the shareholders' desired level, consistent with its entrenchment effect. The effect of corporate governance on leverage adjustments is most pronounced when initial leverage is between the manager's desired level and the shareholders' desired level where the interests of managers and shareholders conflict.     

Shareholders' control rights,family ownership and the firm's leverage decisions

We investigate the association between controlling shareholders' ownership (CS_Own) and firms' leverage decisions in the Singaporean context. We examine whether the impact of ownership concentration on leverage differs across excess and lower control. We report that shareholders with excess control prefer leverage financing for an optimal capital structure and focus on value maximisation rather using leverage as a tool of minority shareholders' expropriation. Our analysis shows that firms capital structure significantly influences by the coalition of shareholders particularly decisions about leverage financing in addition to the firms' specific characteristics and institutional arrangements. Our empirical evidence shows that controlling shareholders with a lower fraction of equity are more concerned about limited holding thus prefer leverage over equity financing to inflate their equity stake to protect them from the potential takeovers and mergers. We report that capital structure decisions in Singapore are linked with the trade-off between the controlling shareholders' target of mitigating firm risk and their non-dilution entrenchment needs. Further, we found an inverted U-shaped association between control ownership and leverage financing. In terms of moderating effect of family-controlled ownership, our findings exhibit that leverage financing is less pronounced for family firms in Singapore due to the under-diversified investment portfolio.     

Credit Default Swaps and Managers’ Voluntary Disclosure

We investigate how the availability of traded credit default swaps (CDSs) affects the referenced firms’ voluntary disclosure choices. CDSs enable lenders to hedge their credit risk exposure, weakening their incentives to monitor borrowers. We predict that reduced lender monitoring in turn leads shareholders to intensify their monitoring and demand increased voluntary disclosure from managers. Consistent with this expectation, we find that managers are more likely to issue earnings forecasts and forecast more frequently when traded CDSs reference their firms. We further find a stronger impact of CDS availability on firm disclosure when (1) lenders have higher ability and propensity to hedge credit risk using CDSs, and (2) lender monitoring incentives and monitoring strength are weaker. Consistent with an increase in shareholder demand for public information disclosure induced by a reduction in lender monitoring, we find a stronger effect of CDSs on voluntary disclosure for firms with higher institutional ownership and stronger corporate governance. Overall, our findings suggest that firms with traded CDS contracts enhance their voluntary disclosure to offset the effect of reduced monitoring by CDS‐protected lenders.     

Minority shareholders' activism and stock price crash risk: Evidence from China

This study investigates the effect of minority shareholders' activism on stock price crash risk in the Chinese stock market. Using a novel dataset on minority shareholders' attendance at annual general meetings (AGMs), we find that minority shareholders' attendance, especially the onsite attendance, significantly exacerbates firms' future crash risk. The results are robust to instrumental variable approach, placebo tests, and alternative measures of minority shareholders' attendance and crash risk. We also find three channels: incremental analyst following, media coverage and retail attention, all of which expand market pressure and exacerbate managers' incentives to withhold bad news. Extended analyses show that the impact of minority shareholders' attendance is less pronounced among firms with better investor protection. Overall, our findings are helpful to understand the importance of minority shareholders' activism and its unintended consequences on stock market in the emerging economies.     

Non-controlling large shareholders in emerging markets: Evidence from China

Non-controlling large shareholders play an important role in corporate governance in emerging markets where controlling shareholder expropriation is a major concern. We argue that non-controlling large shareholders are faced with two non-conflicting incentives: to take advantage of their information advantage and obtain positive abnormal returns when they trade company shares, and to serve as effective monitors and minimize controlling shareholders' appropriation of company wealth. Using a sample of large shareholders' selling events upon the expiration of the lockup period following the split-share structure reform in China, we find that non-controlling large shareholders successfully time the market, as shown by their positive abnormal returns when selling their shares. Their returns are higher if they have a greater information advantage. Furthermore, the positive returns of the controlling large shareholder are negatively related to non-controlling large shareholders' ownership, suggesting that non-controlling large shareholders play a monitoring role and prevent controlling shareholders from looting the company. We also show that large shareholders affiliated with the controlling shareholders are not subject to as high a level of monitoring as those controlling shareholders are. Furthermore, both firm opaqueness and the severity of agency cost affect the quality of non-controlling large shareholders' monitoring.     

Do controlling shareholders collude with their related large shareholders? Evidence of equity pledges and shareholding increases from China

The key for controlling shareholders to prevent the risk of equity pledge is to increase the stock price, and the large shareholders' shareholding increases have the effect of increasing the stock price. Using the data of Chinese A-share firms from 2007 to 2019, this paper examines the relationship between the controlling shareholders' equity pledges and their related large shareholders' shareholding increases. We find that when the controlling shareholders pledge equity, their related large shareholders are more likely to increase their shareholdings. By analyzing the necessity, ability and motivation of related large shareholders to provide help, we find that shareholding increases of related large shareholders are behaviors of helping controlling shareholders to mitigate the risk of equity pledge. Based on the analysis of external acquisition threats, stability heterogeneity of control rights and exogenous impact of Vanke Equity Competition, it is shown that the controlling shareholders pledging equity promote their related large shareholders to increase their shareholdings for the purpose of preventing the risk of control transfer. In further analysis, we find that the shareholding increases of related large shareholders have the practical effect of improving the stock price and preventing pledge risks. This paper proves that the controlling shareholders pledging equity collude with their related large shareholders, which is reflected in the fact that the shareholding increases of the related large shareholders have become a means for controlling shareholders to prevent the risk of equity pledge.     

Shareholder Conflict as a Determinant of Corporate Social Responsibility Commitment for Shared Growth

In this study, we seek to explore shareholder conflicts as a determinant of large firms' corporate social responsibility (CSR) commitment for shared growth with subcontractors. Using a sample of 232 firms in the Korean chaebols during 2006'12, we find that CSR commitment is negatively related to controlling shareholders' cash flow rights but positively related to control-ownership disparity. We also find that foreign blockholders mitigate the positive relationship between CSR commitment and control-ownership disparity. This study offers a view of how controlling shareholders and blockholders protect their interests while enhancing their reputations as good citizens through CSR commitment.     

Does societal trust make managers more trustworthy?

This study examines the effects of shareholders' trust on managers' bad news hoarding. Using a large sample of listed firms from 33 countries, we find that firms domiciled in countries with higher societal trust have higher stock price crash risk, which indicates that managers may exploit shareholders' trust to conceal bad news and that a low-trust society can be beneficial in restraining management misconduct due to the monitoring undertaken by low-trust outsiders. We also find that the positive association between societal trust and crash risk is less pronounced (1) when low-trust foreign shareholders have greater control over a country's firms, in line with the view that low-trust shareholders' concerns about being expropriated by managers and the consequent strong efforts at monitoring; (2) when long-term investors have greater control over a country's firms, suggesting that long-term investors playing a complementary role in monitoring corporate governance; and (3) when a country has strong formal institutions, such as investor protection and financial accounting systems, suggesting that robust formal institutions are substitute for social norms.     

Financing constraints and share pledges: Evidence from the share pledge reform in China

Financing constraints are important to triggering controlling shareholders' share pledges. However, the related literature faces two major challenges: the endogeneity problem and the lack of direct evidence of why and how individual share pledges can ease corporate financing constraints. Based on China's Share Pledge Reform (SPR) in Q4 2012 and the phenomenon that private firms face discrimination when obtaining bank loans, this paper studies the impact of financing constraints on share pledging behavior and its mechanisms by building a difference-in-differences (DID) model. The SPR makes it more convenient for shareholders to raise money through share pledges, and shareholders of private firms facing stronger financing constraints are more vulnerable to this reform than are state-owned enterprises (SOEs). After the SPR, the probability of share pledging by controlling shareholders of private firms is approximately 23.04% higher than that of controlling shareholders of SOEs, and the pledge ratio is approximately 16.53% higher. Further tests reveal that, after the SPR, controlling shareholders of private firms are more inclined than those of SOEs to provide loans to the company to alleviate its financing constraints. Heterogeneity tests further corroborate the finding that this effect is more significant in private firms that are smaller and do not have shareholders of banking and institutional firms among their top ten shareholders.     

Controlling shareholders and corporate value: Evidence from Thailand

This study investigates the effects of controlling shareholders on corporate performance. The empirical results, based on a unique database of Thai firms, do not support the hypothesis that controlling shareholders expropriate corporate assets. In fact, the presence of controlling shareholders is associated with higher performance, when measured by accounting measures such as the ROA and the sales–asset ratio. Since most of the firms do not implement control mechanisms to separate voting and cash flow rights, the controlling shareholders might be self-constrained not to extract private benefits. Otherwise, they would internalize higher costs of expropriation from holding high stakes. The controlling shareholders' involvement in the management, however, has a negative effect on the performance. The negative effect is more pronounced when the controlling shareholder-and-manager's ownership is at the 25–50%. The evidence also reveals that family-controlled firms display significantly higher performance. Foreign controlled firms as well as firms with more than one controlling shareholder also have higher ROA, relative to firms with no controlling shareholder.     

The IPO corporate social responsibility information disclosure: Does the stock market care?

We create textual information indices using corporate social responsibility (CSR) information extracted from IPO prospectuses in China. We use the indices to measure the issuers’ corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate environmental performance (CEP) and assess how the stock market reacts. We find that CSP disclosure is significantly related to the post‐market performance of the firm. Specifically, better CSP disclosure is correlated with higher post‐IPO listing holding period returns among firms that do not disclose donations or environmental expenditures, although the association does not hold for firms that make donations and environmental expenditures. In addition, institutional investors seem to care more about the CEP information for a firm than the CSP information.     

Do actions speak louder than words? An empirical investigation of corporate environmental reputation

In this study, we investigate the extent to which firms’ environmental performance is reflected in perceptions of their environmental reputation and whether environmental disclosure serves to mediate the negative aspects of poorer environmental performance associated with those assessments. We also examine whether differences in environmental performance and environmental disclosure appear to be associated with membership selection to the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI), a factor we also believe may be associated with perceptions of environmental reputation. Based on a cross-sectional sample of 92 US firms from environmentally sensitive industries, we find that environmental performance measured using Trucost environmental performance scores is negatively related to both reputation scores and membership in the DJSI. We argue this is due to the more extensive disclosure levels of firms that are worse performers and the finding of a significant positive relation between environmental disclosure and both the environmental reputation measures and DJSI membership. Finally, we show that the DJSI designation positively influences perceptions of corporate reputation. Overall, our results suggest that voluntary environmental disclosure appears to mediate the effect of poor environmental performance on environmental reputation. Perhaps more troubling, our results also suggest that membership in the DJSI appears to be driven more by what firms say than what they do. Thus, like voluntary disclosure, the DJSI may actually be hindering improved future corporate environmental performance.     

Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility

This study uses two distinct quasi-natural experiments to examine the effect of institutional shareholders on corporate social responsibility (CSR). We first find that an exogenous increase in institutional holding caused by Russell Index reconstitutions improves portfolio firms’ CSR performance. We then find that firms have lower CSR ratings when shareholders are distracted due to exogenous shocks. Moreover, the effect of institutional ownership is stronger in CSR categories that are financially material. Furthermore, we show that institutional shareholders influence CSR through CSR-related proposals. Overall, our results suggest that institutional shareholders can generate real social impact.     

Founders,heirs, and corporate opacity in the United States

We argue that information about firm activities can vary substantially in the presence of founder or heir ownership, thereby influencing the risks borne by minority investors. We explore two hypotheses with regard to these controlling shareholders and corporate transparency, focusing on their role as monitor in-place and their potential to exploit firm opacity to accrue private benefits of control. To test these notions, we create an opacity index that ranks the relative transparency of the two thousand largest industrial US firms and find founder and heir ownership in 22% and 25% of these firms, respectively. Our analysis indicates that, in large, publicly traded companies, both founder and heir firms are significantly more opaque than diffuse shareholder firms. We also find that founder and heir-controlled firms exhibit a negative relation to performance in all but the most transparent firms. Surprisingly, additional tests reveal that concerns about divergences in ownership versus control (management type, dual class shares, and board influence) appear to be substantially less important than corporate opacity in explaining the performance impacts of founder and heir control. Finally, we decompose corporate opacity into disclosure and market scrutiny components, finding that the disclosure quality component appears to be of greater importance to investors. However, irrespective of whether these controlling shareholders create or stay in the firm because of corporate opacity, our analysis suggests that founders and heirs in large, publicly traded firms exploit opacity to extract private benefits at the expense of minority investors.