We provide the first large‐scale empirical evidence of banks functioning as tax planning intermediaries. We posit that some banks specialize in assisting corporate clients with tax planning. In this role, banks make use of their centrality in financial relationships; access to private information; and ability to structure, execute, and participate in tax planning transactions for clients. We measure bank‐client relationships using loan contracts and measure client tax planning using either the cash effective tax rate or the unrecognized tax benefit balance. Using a difference‐in‐differences design, we find that firms experience meaningful tax reductions when they begin a relationship with a bank whose existing clients engage in above‐median tax planning. The effects of pairing with such tax intermediary banks are concentrated in relationships with larger or longer maturity loans, clients with foreign income or greater credit risk, and when the bank is an industry specialist or has above‐median investment banking activities. Finally, we find that potential clients are more likely to choose tax intermediary banks than nontax intermediary banks, suggesting that tax intermediary banks benefit by attracting new business. Collectively, our results suggest that some banks act as tax planning intermediaries, a role beyond the traditional one of financial intermediary.

We examine whether financial reporting quality affects worker wages using employer‐employee matched data in the United States. We find that low financial reporting quality is associated with a compensating wage differential—that is, a risk premium—using three distinct approaches while controlling for worker characteristics by (1) regressing wages on firm‐year–level and firm‐level reporting quality, (2) documenting wage changes when workers switch firms, and (3) estimating a structural approach that separates reporting quality from performance‐related volatility. We find evidence consistent with two channels: performance pay and turnover risk, where workers bear risks from noise in performance measurement and unemployment, respectively. To mitigate endogeneity concerns, we show that—after the accounting scandals in 2002 and after the announcements of an internal control weakness (ICW)—former Arthur Andersen clients and ICW firms pay wage premiums to employees, with magnitudes between 0.9% and 2.8% of annual wages.