We use variation in real estate prices as exogenous shocks to firms’ debt capacity to study the causal effect of financial flexibility on payout policy. We show that an increase in financial flexibility results in higher dividends, share repurchases, and payout flexibility. We find that a 1-standard-deviation increase in a firms’ collateral value results in 0.26- and 0.55-percentage-point increases in nondiscretionary and discretionary payouts, respectively. This effect is stronger for firms with few investment opportunities. Moreover, highly leveraged firms are more likely to cut dividends in response to a sharp decrease in their financial flexibility.

We study how risk management through hedging affects firms and competition among firms in the life insurance industry, an industry with over 7 trillion in assets and over 1,000 private and public firms. We examine firms after a staggered state-level reform that reduces the costs of hedging by granting derivatives superpriority in case of insolvency. We show that firms that are likely to face costly external finance increase hedging and reduce risk and the probability of receivership. Firms that are likely to face costly external finance also lower prices, increase policy sales, and increase their market share post-reform.

We develop a dynamic model of corporate investment and financing, in which shocks to the value of collateralizable assets generate variation in firms’ debt capacity. We show that the degree of similarity among firms’ financial flexibility forecasts cross-sectional variation in return correlation. We test the implications of the model with firm-level data in two empirical analyses using i) an instrumental variable approach based on shocks to the value of collateralizable corporate assets and ii) the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis as an event study. We find that firms in the same percentile of the cross-sectional distribution of financial flexibility have 62% higher correlation in stock-return residuals than firms 50 percentiles apart.

The elasticity of taxable income is vital when predicting the effect of taxes. Bunching at kinks/notches has been used to estimate this elasticity. We show that when the preference distribution is unrestricted, bunching at a kink or a notch is not informative about the size of the elasticity, and neither is the entire distribution of taxable income. Bunching identifies the taxable income elasticity when the preference distribution is correctly specified across the kink and provides bounds under restrictions on the preference distribution. We find wide bounds in an empirical example based on upper and lower bounds for the preference density.