The Citicorp–Travelers Group merger increased the prospects for new legislation to remove the barriers between banking and insurance, resulting in a positive wealth effect for institutions most likely to gain from deregulation. Analysis of abnormal returns surrounding the merger show that life insurance companies and large banks (excluding Citicorp and Travelers Group) have significant stock price increases, while the returns of small banks, health insurers, and property/casualty insurers are insignificantly different from 0. This analysis provides evidence that investors expect large banks and insurance companies to receive significant benefits from recent congressional legislation removing barriers to bancassurance.

The Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act (IBBEA) represented a significant step in the deregulation of interstate banking and branching. The IBBEA's passage had a positive wealth effect on a sample of large Bank Holding Companies (BHCs). Cross-sectional tests of abnormal returns reveal that BHCs having characteristics associated with acquisition targets and BHCs headquartered in states that prohibited interstate branching experienced significantly higher returns. Collectively, the evidence suggests that investors anticipated that the IBBEA would provide for increased corporate control activities among banks and that a large portion of the BHC gains stems from the relaxation of interstate branching restrictions.

Forty-nine states and the District of Columbia enacted legislation reducing interstate banking restrictions between July 1982 and April 1993. For these 50 banking bills, deregulation increased the average price of bank stocks. Returns vary cross-sectionally by firm characteristics, regulatory features, and economic conditions. Returns are positively related to the characteristics of acquisition targets. Furthermore, returns are positively related to legislative features that increase the bargaining power of potential targets and economic conditions that are likely to encourage bank acquisition. These findings are consistent with the relaxation of geographic restrictions increasing activity in the corporate control market.

In a typical IPO, insiders are “net sellers” of IPO shares; however, in a demutualizing thrift, insiders are “net buyers” of IPO shares. Using a sample of mutual depository IPOs, we find evidence consistent with earnings management prior to the conversion of mutual thrifts. We find on average that mutuals report lower ROA and increased loan loss provisions and loan loss reserves in the period prior to the demutualization. Using a two-stage approach, we also find that the level of discretionary loan loss provisions and discretionary reserves are positively related to both the level of insider participation in the IPO and the first-day returns to investors. Our results are consistent with management of mutual thrifts benefiting at the conversion from reduced pre-IPO earnings and book equity resulting from earnings management.