The effects of cross-border cooperation on disclosure enforcement,earnings attributes,and transparency

This study tests for changes in U.S.-listed foreign firms’ financial reporting properties and transparency when their home market regulators enter an arrangement that facilitates enforcement cooperation with the Securities and Exchange Commission. This arrangement—the International Organization of Securities Commissions’ Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Consultation and Cooperation and the Exchange of Information (MMoU)—has explicit disclosure-related provisions. I show that the MMoU is associated with improvements across various measures of accounting properties and transparency. Collectively, the findings help resolve enduring questions about why the earnings quality of U.S.-listed foreign firms diverged from that of U.S. firms during pre-MMoU periods.     

Foreign institutional investment: Is governance quality at home important?

This paper examines the investment preferences of foreign institutional investors investing in the U.S. market. We analyse both firm and country-level determinants that influence the foreign institutional investors' allocation choices. At the country level, we find that the governance quality in a foreign institutional investor's home country is a determinant of their decision to invest in the U.S. market. Our findings indicate that investors who come from countries with governance setups similar to that of the U.S. invest more in the United States. The investment levels though, are more pronounced for countries with governance setups just below that of the U.S. Our results are consistent with both the ‘flight to quality’ and ‘familiarity’ arguments, and help reconcile prior contradictory empirical evidence. At the firm level, we present unequivocal evidence in favour of the familiarity argument. Foreign institutional investors domiciled in countries with high governance quality prefer to invest in U.S. firms with high corporate governance quality. This effect is primarily driven by grey (non-monitoring) institutional investors.     

Controlling shareholder share pledging and the cost of equity capital: Evidence from China

We propose and test the incentive view—that the margin call pressure and ownership-control discrepancy associated with insider share pledging increase investors’ perceived risk, and thus also the cost of equity capital, in an emerging market. Using a controlling shareholder share pledging sample for Chinese listed firms, we find that firms with share pledging have a cost of equity capital that is 23.7 basis points higher than firms without share pledging. Further, share pledging increases the cost of equity capital through the information risks and agency conflicts channels. Cross-sectional analyses show that share pledging has a stronger effect on the cost of equity capital in non-state-owned enterprises, firms without monitoring of multiple large shareholders, firms with controlling shareholders assuming the position of chairperson, and firms with a weak institutional environment. In addition, using the global financial crisis and the outbreak of the coronavirus (COVID-19) as quasi-natural experiments, we disentangle the potential confounding effect of firm fundamentals and show that share pledging is positively associated with the cost of equity capital. Overall, the results are consistent with our incentive view that share pledging increases the cost of equity capital in an emerging market.     

IPOs and IFRS in European exchange-regulated markets: A research note

This research note aims to enrich our understanding of reporting incentives of firms listed in European exchange-regulated markets. Many initial public offerings (IPOs) in Europe are within exchange-regulated markets where firms are allowed to choose between local GAAP and IFRS. Therefore, this research note describes the regulatory environment and investigates the choice to voluntarily adopt IFRS within European exchange-regulated markets. Overall, less than 20% of the firms voluntarily adopt IFRS and voluntary IFRS adoption upon IPO is positively associated with firm size, foreign firms, stocks offered to institutional investors prior to the IPO, and a future migration to an EU-regulated market.     

The colors of investors’ money: The role of institutional investors around the world

We study the role of institutional investors around the world using a comprehensive data set of equity holdings from 27 countries. We find that all institutional investors have a strong preference for the stock of large firms and firms with good governance, while foreign institutions tend to overweight firms that are cross-listed in the U.S. and members of the Morgan Stanley Capital International World Index. Firms with higher ownership by foreign and independent institutions have higher firm valuations, better operating performance, and lower capital expenditures. Our results indicate that foreign and independent institutions, with potentially fewer business ties to firms, are involved in monitoring corporations worldwide.     

What drives cross-segment diversity in returns and risks? Evidence from Japanese and U.S. firms

The usefulness of segment reporting is grounded on the presumption of diversities of returns and risks across reported segments. We examine the effect of country-specific factors, reporting incentives, and choices on an ANOVA-based measure of cross-segment diversities (CSD) in risk and returns for a sample of Japanese and U.S. multi-segment firms. We find that, in contrast to our expectations, Japanese firms exhibit greater CSD than U.S. firms. Moreover, we find that in both countries CSD is driven especially by reporting incentives associated with profitability and foreign sales, but not by proprietary costs. Further, the manager's choice of the number of reported segments is an important factor affecting CSD.     

Escape from New York: The market impact of loosening disclosure requirements

We examine the first significant deregulation of U.S. disclosure requirements since the passage of the 1933/1934 Exchange and Securities Acts: the 2007 Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 12h-6. Rule 12h-6 has made it easier for foreign firms to deregister with the SEC and thereby terminate their U.S. disclosure obligations. We show that the market reacted negatively to the announcement by the SEC that firms from countries with weak disclosure and governance regimes could more easily opt out of the stringent U.S. reporting and legal environment. We also find that since the rule's passage, an unprecedented number of firms have deregistered, and these firms often had been previous targets of U.S. class action securities lawsuits or SEC enforcement actions. Our findings suggest that shareholders of non-U.S firms place significant value on U.S. securities regulations, especially when the home country investor protections are weak.     

When does comparability better enhance relevance? Policy implications from empirical evidence

This study investigates the user-specific contexts under which comparability better enhances relevance of accounting information. We first confirm the intuition in the FASB’s (2010) current conceptual framework by documenting that the short-window earnings response coefficient (ERC) is positively associated with the pre-determined level of comparability. Using the cross-sectional variation in the positive relation between ERC and comparability, we show that the link between ERC and comparability is more pronounced for firms with higher investor sophistication and lower information asymmetry among investors. We further support our predictions using analysts’ earnings forecast revisions and various alternative measures of earnings informativeness. In sum, our paper shows that comparability improves information users’ ability to identify similarities and differences across different firms to a greater extent when investor base is more sophisticated and private information is less prevalent. These results suggest that standard setters, regulators, and practitioners should devote more attention to the role of comparability in firms whose investors are less sophisticated and information environment is more opaque.     

The value of the PCAOB’s international audit oversight on U.S. listed foreign companies: Evidence from an initial enforcement breakdown

Using, as a natural experiment, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board’s May 18, 2010, release stating that its oversight of certain foreign auditors had been denied, we examine investors’ early valuation of the PCAOB’s international audit oversight on U.S.-listed foreign companies. Comparing reactions for the release-exposed U.S.-listed foreign companies to reactions for other U.S.-listed foreign companies, we find a significant decline in the share values of the release-exposed companies. The decline is driven by companies with auditors from China; the on-list companies from the 19 on-list European jurisdictions do not experience significantly negative stock market reactions. Using difference-in-differences analyses of earnings response coefficients, abnormal stock returns and trading volumes surrounding earnings announcements, and analyst forecast dispersions, we find a decline in perceived financial reporting quality for the release-exposed foreign listings from China but not for the release-exposed companies from the 19 European jurisdictions—a finding in line with the results of the stock market reaction analyses. These results are consistent with the view that the PCAOB’s international inspection would create a net value for U.S.-listed companies from China.     

IFRS adoption in China and foreign institutional investments

We examine the effectiveness of China’s IFRS adoption from the perspective of an important set of financial report users, foreign institutional investors. We find that foreign institutional investment does not increase after China’s IFRS adoption, and some evidence that it actually declines, particularly among firms with weaker incentives to credibly implement IFRS, or with greater ability to manipulate IFRS’s fair value provisions. We also find that the association between earnings and returns generally declines after IFRS adoption, consistent with reduced earnings quality. In addition, we find that foreign institutional investors’ returns decrease after China’s IFRS adoption. Finally, the decline in foreign institutional investment is greater among investors from countries with weak institutions that have also adopted IFRS. Taken together, our evidence suggests that the weak institutional infrastructure in China’s transitional economy impairs IFRS’s intended goal of attracting institutional investment through improved financial reporting quality. Further, financial information users’ home country institutions and IFRS adoption experience affect the effectiveness of IFRS adoption.     

CDS trading and analyst optimism

This paper investigates whether and how the initiation of Credit Default Swaps (CDS) trading affects analyst forecast optimism. First, we document that the initiation of CDS trading curbs analyst forecasts optimism. Second, we find that the dampening effect of CDS on analyst optimism is stronger for firms with negative news and for firms with poorer financial performance or higher leverage, supporting a “correction effect” of CDS on non-strategic optimism. Moreover, we find that CDS also has a “disciplining effect” on strategic optimism that arises from incentives to cultivate relation with management or to please institutional investors. Overall, our evidence shows that the CDS market not only provides important information for analysts, but also alters analysts’ reporting incentives and enhances their objectivity. Additional analysis shows that this effect has disappeared after the Dodd-Frank Act.     

Do institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? International evidence

This paper assesses whether shareholders drive the environmental and social (E&S) performance of firms worldwide. Across 41 countries, institutional ownership is positively associated with E&S performance with additional tests suggesting this relation is causal. Institutions are motivated by both financial and social returns. Investors increase firms’ E&S performance following shocks that reveal financial benefits to E&S improvements. In cross section, investors increase firms’ E&S performance when they come from countries with a strong community belief in the importance of E&S issues, but not otherwise. As such, these institutional investors transplant their social norms regarding E&S issues around the world.     

CEO compensation,family control,and institutional investors in Continental Europe

This paper investigates the impact of family control and institutional investors on CEO pay packages in Continental Europe, using a dataset of 754 listed firms with 3731 firm-year observations from 14 countries during 2001–2008. We find that family control curbs the level of CEO total and cash compensation, and the fraction of equity-based compensation. Moreover, we do not observe a significant effect of family control on the excess level of total and cash compensation. This evidence indicates that controlling families do not use CEO compensation to expropriate wealth from minority shareholders. We show that institutional ownership is associated with higher levels of CEO cash and total compensation in Continental Europe, especially in family firms. Also, foreign institutional investors have a positive and significant impact on CEO compensation level. Finally, results indicate that institutional investors affect CEO pay structure: they increase the use of equity-based compensation in both family and non-family firms.     

Information asymmetry,mutual funds and earnings management: Evidence from China

This paper investigates how information asymmetry and mutual fund ownership affect listed companies’ earnings management. We show that (1) reducing information asymmetry improves firms’ earnings management behavior; (2) relative to short-term mutual funds, long-term mutual funds promote earnings quality by adopting a monitoring role; and (3) by dividing firms into high/low information asymmetry groups, we find that the information environment significantly increases the effect of long-term mutual funds on firms’ earnings management. In this paper, we provide new evidence for the role that institutional investors play in a typical emerging capital market. Our results have clear policy implications: to increase earnings quality, it is essential to improve information transparency and develop long-term institutional investors.     

Foreign macroeconomic and industry-related information transfers around earnings announcements: Evidence from U.S.-listed non-U.S. firms

This study examines information transfer regarding how investors react to new foreign macroeconomic and industry-related information embedded in foreign firms' earnings releases. Using non-U.S. firms listed in the U.S. as our main setting, we find that U.S. investors react significantly to foreign macroeconomic information and to information generated by the interaction between macroeconomic and industry-related information. We also find that the benefits (costs) of processing earnings reports increase (decrease) both types of information transfers. In addition, we find macroeconomic information transfers in an international cross-listing setting and both types of information transfers in an international non-cross-listing setting.     

Mandatory disclosure and learning from external market participants: Evidence from the JOBS act

This paper examines whether mandatory disclosure affects the extent to which firms learn from external market participants. Conventional wisdom suggests that mandatory disclosure should increase the total amount of information in financial markets. However, disclosure can also reduce investors' incentives to acquire and produce information. Using the JOBS Act to identify variations in disclosure requirements, this paper finds that firms with reduced disclosure requirements attract more informed investors and learn more from financial markets than those with stricter disclosure requirements. This learning is concentrated among firms that attract sophisticated investors, particularly those with industry expertise, and weakens once firms are forced to disclose more information. Overall, the results suggest that one benefit from regulators’ recent efforts to reduce U.S. firm disclosure requirements is an increase in firm learning.     

THE EFFECT OF CROSS‐LISTING ON TRADING VOLUME: REDUCING SEGMENTATION VERSUS SIGNALING INVESTOR PROTECTION

We examine the relation between cross‐listing on the U.S. and UK regulated and unregulated exchanges and trading volume for a sample of 500 foreign firms from 34 countries. We find that the increase in trading volume is a function of both reducing segmentation and signaling investor protection. In addition, we find that home market trading volume, firm size, firm returns, and analyst forecast accuracy are the major determinants of a firm's trading volume. We also show that U.S. and UK investors trade foreign securities that originate from low‐investor‐protection countries more than they trade those from high‐investor‐protection countries, which is consistent with the bonding hypothesis.     

Contracts valuation assessment noise and cross-border listing of equities on U.S. and U.K. stock markets

This study develops and tests the hypothesis that firms in the home country have capital market incentives to cross-border list on foreign stock exchanges that have similar financial reporting with local generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Non-U.S. firms' contracts and the underlying GAAP are based on the home-country culture and institutional climates. This connection with culture and institution makes the local GAAP's assessment of the contracts less spurious relative to foreign GAAP. Ball et al. [J. Account. Econ. 29 (2000) 1] note that contracting with stakeholders in the home markets is based on local GAAP's numbers, while cross-border listing provides settings in which the value relevance of local GAAP-based contracts is assessed based on foreign GAAP. Therefore, foreign investors' assessment of the contracts using foreign stock exchange GAAP or mindset of foreign GAAP is likely to result in an assessment noise, which is value irrelevant. The level of assessment noise depends on the differences between foreign and local GAAP. Because of the valuation implications of the assessment noise, we expect cross-border listing to diminish as the likelihood of assessment noise increases.As predicted, we find that assessment noise undermines cross-border listing on U.S. stock exchanges. Because U.S. and local GAAPs are based on different cultural and institutional environments, assessment noise arises if U.S. investors use the mindset of U.S. GAAP financial reports to assess local GAAP-based contracts of cross-border firms. The results are robust in the London Stock Exchange in which assessment noise is induced by interpreting local GAAP contracts as if they were based on U.K. GAAP. As expected, the influences of assessment noise on cross-border listings are more robust in the United States than in the United Kingdom. Our results suggest that harmonization of financial reporting is critical in attenuating the influences of assessment noise on global capital market developments.     

Do local analysts know more? A cross-country study of the performance of local analysts and foreign analysts

This paper examines whether analysts resident in a country make more precise earnings forecasts for firms in that country than non-resident analysts. Using a sample of 32 countries, we find an economically and statistically significant local analyst advantage even after controlling for firm and analyst characteristics. The local advantage is high in countries where earnings are smoothed more, less information is disclosed by firms, and firm idiosyncratic information explains a smaller fraction of stock returns. It is negatively related to whether a firm has foreign assets and to market participation by foreign investors and by institutions, and positively related to holdings by insiders. The extent to which U.S. investors underweight a country's stocks is positively related to that country's local analyst advantage.     

Investor communication and the benefits of cross-listing

While studies have sought to explain the benefits of cross-listing, little attention has been paid to the role of communication between managers and investors during this process. In this paper, I investigate whether managers change communication policies around U.S. cross-listings. I document significant increases in communication when firms cross-list. I then test whether these investor communication practices around cross-listing are associated with capital market benefits. I find that cross-listed firms that communicate more with investors experience greater and longer lasting cross-listing benefits. Lastly, I explore two potential reasons that may lead managers to choose higher levels of communication: to support an increase in investor recognition and to facilitate monitoring. I find results consistent with communication increasing visibility and scrutiny, suggesting that communication functions as a supporting tool to achieve managers’ cross-listing goals.