In this study, we are the first to reevaluate causally the effects of antitakeover provisions (ATPs) on the likelihood and quality of investment in mergers and acquisitions (M&A). We do so by exploiting instrumental variables to circumvent evidential endogeneity in ATPs. Our causal analysis is new to reveal that higher levels of ATPs are associated with lower propensity for investment in M&A and, after accounting for unobservable factors that affected the decision to invest in M&A, with investment that is more likely to be both value enhancing to shareholders and personally riskier to managers. Our findings support theory and evidence in other corporate contexts that gives weight to the possibility that ATPs curb risk related agency conflict. Our collective findings of a (positive) surprise also provide substantiation for known information about ATPs having value relevance for market perception of the quality of investment in M&A.

We investigate how ownership structure influences operating performance and implied agency costs. Our sample includes over 42,000 U.K. private and public firms. We document several new results of considerable economic significance relating to i) horizontal agency costs arising from unequal ownership within private firms, ii) amplification of agency costs from joint presence within the same firm of horizontal agency problems and vertical agency problems arising from separation of ownership and control, iii) mitigation in agency costs wrought by a second large shareholder, iv) impact of complex ownership structures, and v) agency cost differences between public firms and comparable private firms.