Knowledge that Transforms

Prior research criticizes PCAOB inspection reports for focusing solely on audit deficiencies, arguing that this encourages auditors to pursue traditional procedures to demonstrate compliance with standards rather than procedures that maximize audit quality. We contribute to this debate by examining whether the PCAOB's approach discourages auditors from considering innovative audit procedures (that are potentially more effective), since they are, by definition, less standard. We compare the PCAOB's current inspection approach (which focuses on reporting audit deficiencies) to a balanced inspection approach that discloses examples of audit strengths as well as deficiencies discovered during inspections. We predict and find that when the risk of material misstatement (RMM) is moderate, a balanced inspection approach leads auditors to consider the potential effectiveness of innovative audit procedures to a greater extent, ultimately prioritizing more of them in audit plans. Our findings contribute to both research and practice by enhancing our understanding of ways to encourage audit innovation and ultimately improve overall audit quality.

We develop a complete-market production economy in which heterogeneous beliefs about productivity growth affect both asset prices and real activity. Firms must hire workers before productivity is realized, so operating leverage increases the exposure of profits to productivity risk. Because the firm’s discount factor depends on a wealth-weighted aggregation of investor beliefs, shifts in optimism compress risk premia and raise employment, while reversals trigger contractions. This mechanism generates an equilibrium feedback between asset prices, hiring, and risk exposure. A taxonomy of belief systems shows that only extrapolative beliefs produce amplification and endogenous risk build-up. Disciplined by survey expectations, the model jointly matches key asset-pricing, trading-volume, and business-cycle moments.

How do investor reactions to the mandatory disclosure of firm tax information influence managers' reporting choices? To answer this question, we build a structural model of reporting bias, which we test with a unique data set of Turkish firms that have been mandated to publicly disclose their tax returns since 2009. We find that both book and tax income numbers are informative to investors. Structural estimates are consistent with disclosure of the tax report reducing both market incentives to manage book earnings and investor uncertainty about underlying firm value. Tax disclosure is associated with higher reported tax income, though the increase is not statistically significant. Counterfactual estimates suggest that book‐tax‐conformity could change financial and tax reporting biases, but lead to a lower quality information environment relative to the separate disclosure of book and tax reports.

We study how online job search advice affects job search behavior and labor market outcomes of unemployed workers. In a large-scale field experiment embedded in the online platform of the Danish public employment service, we provide job seekers with vacancy information and occupational recommendations. Using a two-stage randomized design with regionally varying treatment intensities, we examine both direct effects of advice and treatment spillovers. We find that advice significantly increases employment and earnings when provided to a limited share of job seekers. As treatment intensity rises, these effects diminish and eventually disappear. The decline is driven by negative spillovers among treated job seekers, consistent with increased congestion in the occupations toward which job seekers redirect their search. Spillover effects on untreated job seekers are heterogeneous and depend on how advice alters occupation-specific competition in local labor markets.

Quality regulation seeks to ensure quality and foster competition by reducing vertical differentiation, but it may also have adverse effects on market structure. We study this trade-off in the context of pharmaceutical bioequivalence, which is the primary quality standard for generic drugs. By exploiting the introduction of bioequivalence in Chile, we find that stronger regulation reduced the number of drugs in the market by 18% and increased average paid prices by 13%. We estimate a model of drug entry, certification, and demand to study how drug quality, aversion to generics, and certification costs shape the equilibrium effects of quality regulation. We find that quality regulation increased demand for generic drugs by resolving asymmetric information and reducing aversion to unbranded generics, which induced the entry of high-quality drugs in place of low-quality drugs. Consumer welfare increased despite higher prices and a lower number of firms. We compare minimum quality standards with alternative designs of quality regulation, including quality disclosure.

We study competition between two payment instruments: bank deposits and digital platform tokens. Using a Hotelling model that integrates the theory of two-sided markets and payment economics, we assess how this competition is affected by a public payment infrastructure that makes private payment instruments interoperable. We show that interoperability, whether implemented as a fast payment system (FPS) or a central bank digital currency (CBDC), may eliminate payment access exclusion and increase trade volumes and social welfare, but at the cost of some disintermediation. When new payment service providers (PSPs) enter and compete for consumers, they soften competition for merchants: incumbent intermediaries then charge merchants higher fees and earn higher profits. This contrasts with entry of PSPs on the merchant side, which disciplines incumbent fees instead.

We study how firms choose to allocate control over strategic corporate decisions between shareholders and management in a historical setting where governance design was not mandated by corporate law, but ownership structures were constrained by differences in regional wealth distributions. The general shareholder meeting is the dominant governance body, retaining control over the largest number of strategic decisions. Nevertheless, firms with a predominance of small —and plausibly less informed— shareholders empower managers by delegating control over a larger number of strategic decisions to them. Furthermore, shareholder empowerment is accompanied by statutory provisions that facilitate information acquisition, suggesting that control and information are complements. Our findings highlight that the debate on shareholder empowerment should account for the role of ownership structure and information as key determinants of the allocation of control between shareholders and management.

We exploit two regulatory changes, one under US GAAP and the other under IFRS, that mandate improved disclosure of pension asset allocation. While the changes are otherwise similar, US GAAP retains the expected rate of return (“ERR”) on pension assets, which preparers can more easily manipulate if asset allocation remains opaque, while IFRS eliminates the ERR. We find that the IFRS standard improves pension asset transparency more than the US standard, which only mandates higher-quality disclosure without changing recognition or measurement and hence leaves unchanged preparers’ incentives to obfuscate. The US standard elicits a mixed response that reduces transparency in some respects. We isolate the relative deterioration in US firms’ transparency to firms with stronger incentives to inflate ERRs. Overall, our study highlights the potential for standard setters to learn from each other by comparing their regulatory experience on a specific accounting topic with clearly identifiable managerial incentives.

This paper identifies a novel channel—corporate fraud—through which local firms protect themselves during anti-mafia periods. We initially explore the impact of the anti-mafia campaign on mafia-like forces captured by accepted mafia-like criminal cases. The results indicate that the average number of accepted mafia-like criminal cases increases by 10.03%. More importantly, the accepted mafia-like criminal cases committed by firms also exhibit a notable increase, mainly within the first 30 months of the anti-mafia campaign. We then theorize that the anti-mafia campaign may have two contradictory effects on corporate fraud: deterrence and self-protection. The main results show that the self-protection effect prevails over the deterrence effect and that firms are more likely to commit fraud to strategically protect themselves from potential losses. The baseline findings reveal that the fraud occurrence of an average firm increases by 44.07% during anti-mafia periods.