Executives with poor prior performance may be inclined to take excessive risk in the hope of meeting performance targets, in which case a compensation contract featuring severance pay can be optimal. While prior work has shown that severance can induce managers to take positive NPV risks, we show that it can also keep them from taking negative NPV risks. We show that severance should be contingent on results: complete failure should nullify any payments. We also show that mandating a firm size that is larger than first-best, while costly, can help screen for good managers.

I study the impact of Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy and resultant inability to honor its obligations as a lender under committed credit lines. Firms that lost access to a credit line committed by Lehman Brothers experienced abnormal stock returns of −3%, on average, on the day of and day after Lehman's bankruptcy filing, amounting to roughly $5.7 billion in aggregate, risk-adjusted losses. These losses were significantly larger for firms that were more financially constrained, firms with less cash, firms for whom Lehman was a lead-bank, and firms that lost access to larger amounts of committed credit. During the four quarters immediately following Lehman's collapse, firms that lost access to a credit line cut their investment spending significantly while simultaneously hoarding more cash than comparable firms. Overall, these findings indicate that firms that lost access to a credit line incurred economically significant costs and real-side consequences as a result of Lehman's default on its loan commitments.

We observe a persistent increase in the percentage of firms with little or no debt in their capital structure over the last three decades. The fraction of firms with less than five percent debt in their capital structure increases from 14.01 percent in 1977 to 34.42 percent in 2010 while the percentage of all-equity firms increases 200 percent over the same period. We find that even after controlling for firm- and industry-specific variables that are relevant to capital structure policy, there is a deficiency in firms' propensity to be levered. Additionally, the deficiency is increasing over time and by 2010 the percent of firms that are nearly all-equity is twice the predicted level. Our findings are robust to different methodologies, specifications, and time periods. Overall, these results suggest that the well-documented benefits of leverage are less valuable over the sample period and that the determinants of firms' capital structure decisions have evolved since the 1970s.

We examine corporate payout policy in dual-class firms. The expropriation hypothesis predicts that dual-class firms pay out less to shareholders because entrenched managers want to maximize the value of assets under control and the associated private benefits. The pre-commitment hypothesis predicts that dual-class firms pay out more to shareholders because firms use corporate payouts as a pre-commitment device to mitigate agency costs. Our results support the pre-commitment hypothesis. Dual-class firms have higher cash dividend payments and total payouts, and they use more regular cash dividends rather than special dividends or repurchases, compared to their propensity-matched single-class firms. Dual-class firms with severe free cash flow-related agency problems and few growth opportunities rely even more on corporate payouts as a pre-commitment mechanism. We also rule out the alternative explanation that dual-class firms pay out more because super-voting shareholders lack the ability to generate home-made dividends by selling shares since super-voting shares are often non-tradable or very illiquid.

Consistent with the predictions of Brennan and Thakor's (1990) model of shareholder preferences, we find that, on average, institutional shareholders are net sellers during share repurchases. After controlling for liquidity provision and characteristics investing, we find that a one standard deviation increase in share repurchases during a given quarter is associated with a 0.11 standard deviation decrease in institutional investor demand. We estimate that 37% of the inverse relation is attributed to institutional investors executing liquidity provision strategies, 8% is explained by institutions reacting to the investment characteristics signaled by a repurchasing firm. We attribute the majority, 55%, to the information asymmetry between institutions and individual investors. This work is one of the first to exploit the SEC mandate requiring firms to report the actual number of shares they repurchase each quarter, beginning in 2004. Using actual number of shares repurchased, we find evidence of institutional investors increasing their selling as firms increase their repurchasing. This finding is robust to models of endogeneity and autocorrelation in share repurchases and institutional investor trading.

We analyze call announcement returns taking into account two recent developments in the convertible bond market: the inclusion of dividend protection clauses in convertibles' terms, and the high fraction of convertible issues purchased by hedge funds. Calls of dividend-protected convertible bonds are predictable, yet we still observe a negative stock price reaction that cannot be explained by signaling. Greater hedge fund involvement prior to a call means less short selling in response to the call and we document a reduced price reaction. We conclude that price pressure and not signaling underlies the negative announcement effect of convertible bond calls.