In this study, I examine the association between the credibility of the financial reporting system and the quality of governance mechanisms. I use a sample of 87 firms identified by the SEC as fraudulently manipulating their financial statements. Consistent with prior research, results indicate that fraud firms have poor governance relative to a control sample in the year prior to fraud detection. Specifically, fraud firms have fewer numbers and percentages of outside board members, fewer audit committee meetings, fewer financial experts on the audit committee, a smaller percentage of Big 4 auditing firms, and a higher percentage of CEOs who are also chairmen of the board of directors. However, the results indicate that fraud firms take actions to improve their governance, and three years after fraud detection these firms have governance characteristics similar to the control firms in terms of the numbers and percentages of outside members on the board, but exceed the control firms in the number of audit committee meetings. I also investigate whether the improved governance influences informed capital market participants. The results indicate that analyst following and institutional holdings do not increase in fraud firms, suggesting that credibility was still a problem for these firms. However, the results also indicate that firms that take actions to improve governance have superior stock price performance, even after controlling for earnings performance. This suggests that investors appear to value governance improvements.

ABSTRACT We examine whether analysts' incentives are associated with street earnings. Because prior research argues that analysts' incentives to promote stocks increase in the extent to which the stock exhibits glamour characteristics, we predict that analysts are more likely to make income‐increasing adjustments in determining street earnings for glamour stocks than for value stocks. We find that analysts are more likely to exclude expense items from street earnings for glamour stocks than for value stocks and that excluded expense items help predict future earnings for glamour stocks but not for value stocks. Overall, our results suggest that analysts' self‐interest influences street earnings and this self‐interest leads to street earnings that are less useful in predicting future earnings for glamour stocks.

ABSTRACT: Prior research finds that earnings restatements are linked to CEOs’ excessive option-based compensation and equity holdings. In this paper, we investigate whether firms that experience earnings restatements recontract with their CEOs to reduce their option-based compensation and if so, whether this leads to improved firm performance. Based on 289 restatement firms over the period 1997–2001, we find that the proportion of CEOs’ compensation in the form of options declines significantly in the two years following the restatement. Furthermore, we document that this reduction is accompanied by a decrease in the riskiness of investments, as reflected in lower stock return volatility and subsequent improvements in operating performance. Our results suggest that a decrease in option-based compensation reduces CEOs’ incentives to take excessively risky investments, resulting in improved profitability. Overall, our findings provide insights into the design and efficacy of CEO compensation contracts.

ABSTRACT In this study, we investigate whether managerial ability is related to income smoothing and, if so, whether smoothing associated with managerial ability improves the informativeness of earnings and stock prices about future performance. Using a large sample of firms, we find that managerial ability is positively related to smoothing. More importantly, we show that high-ability managers incorporate more forward-looking information about cash flows into current earnings through smoothing, thereby enhancing earnings informativeness. We also find that smoothing associated with high-ability managers improves stock price informativeness about future cash flows. Our study should be of interest to researchers, practitioners, and others concerned with understanding the determinants and usefulness of smoothing.

ABSTRACT This study examines the incremental predictive power of aggregate measures of financial misreporting for recession and real gross domestic product (GDP) growth. We draw on prior research suggesting that misreporting has real economic effects because it represents misinformation on which firms base their investment, hiring, and production decisions. We find that aggregate M-Score incrementally predicts recessions at forecast horizons of five to eight quarters ahead. We also find that aggregate M-Score is significantly associated with lower future growth in real GDP, real investment, consumption, and industrial production. Additionally, our result that aggregate M-Score predicts lower real investment one to four quarters ahead partially accounts for why misreporting predicts recessions five to eight quarters ahead. Our findings are weaker when we use aggregate F-Score as a proxy for misreporting. Overall, this study provides novel evidence that aggregate misreporting measures can aid forecasters and regulators in predicting recessions and real GDP growth. JEL Classifications: M41.