Knowledge that Transforms

This paper analyzes the risk dynamics surrounding convertible bond offerings (CBOs) and Seasoned Equity Offerings (SEOs). As convertible bonds are commonly believed to be very effective at mitigating adverse selection or overinvestment problems we would expect differing risk and return patterns for convertible bond and seasoned equity issuers. By analyzing 1148 convertible bond offerings and comparing them to 2905 seasoned equity offerings, we show however that for both issuer types the systematic risk increases prior to issuance and drops sharply thereafter. This result is consistent with the notion of exercising real options, as growth options are always riskier than the underlying assets and exercising them at issuance causes an immediate drop in risk. The real option framework and the proposed dynamics of systematic risk also provide a rational explanation for the negative announcement effect, as well as any long-term underperformance subsequent to the CBO and the SEOs.

Are CEO initial compensation packages based on variations in the expected match quality of the hiring firms? Using CEO tenure as a proxy for expected match quality, and a sample of CEO turnovers between 1992 and 2006, we find that CEOs that experience good matches, defined as tenures exceeding four years, have higher initial compensation packages. We also find evidence from exogenous switching regression models that inside CEOs receive a higher good match premium than outside CEOs. To account for economic and regulatory changes across our sample period, we divide our sample into three subsamples: 1992–1997, 1998–2002, and 2003–2006, and repeat our analyses. Even though the positive relation between expected match quality and initial compensation persists across all periods, we find that the good match premium for inside and outside CEOs does not differ in the post-2002 period. We attribute this result to increased board independence and changes in regulation (Sarbanes–Oxley) in the post-2002 sample period.

In this study, we investigate financial distress risks of European companies around the buyout event in the period between 2000 and 2008. In addition, we analyze whether buyout companies go bankrupt more often than comparable non-buyout companies. Our results suggest that private equity investors select companies which are less financially distressed than comparable non-buyout companies and that the distress risk increases after the buyout. Despite this increase, private equity-backed companies do not suffer from higher bankruptcy rates than comparable non-buyout companies. In fact, when companies are backed by experienced private equity funds, their bankruptcy rates are even lower. These findings indicate that experienced investors are better able to manage distress risks than their inexperienced counterparts.

We test the impact of taxes and governance systems on dividend payouts across countries. We show that, unlike previous studies, firms in strong investor protection countries pay lower cash dividends than in weak protection countries when the classical tax system is implemented, but they repurchase more shares to maximise their shareholders' after-tax returns. In weak protection countries, cash dividends and repurchases are low and less responsive to taxes. Our results suggest that when investors are protected, they weigh the tax cost of dividends against the benefit of mitigating the agency cost, but, when they are not, they accept whatever dividends they can extract, even when this entails high tax costs.

We examine how asset structure is related to leverage in different institutional environments, using tens of thousands of firm-level observations from small, privately held, emerging market firms that are likely to face financing constraints. Our empirical analysis indicates that the linkage between asset tangibility (fixed assets as a portion of total assets) and leverage (measured as long-term debt over total assets) varies, such that in countries with fewer restrictions on collateral (land transferability), the relationship between these variables is much tighter. This also applies to the linkage between tangibility and debt maturity structure (measured as long-term debt over total debt). We find no evidence that industry concentration in different countries or changing composition of firms over time is driving our findings. The results are robust to using firm-level fixed effects specifications, to clustering error terms at the country level, and to using an alternative proxy for collateral law regime.

China's new Corporate Income Tax Law was passed in March 2007 and took effect on January 1, 2008. It terminated the dual corporate income tax regime by removing the preferential tax treatments offered to foreign investment enterprises (FIEs) and unifying the corporate income tax regime for FIEs and Chinese domestic enterprises (DEs). This paper uses a difference-in-differences approach to determine whether FIEs responded to the law by raising debt ratios. Employing the Chinese Industrial Enterprises Database from 2002 to 2008 to implement the analysis, we find that FIEs have responded to the law by raising debt ratios; the treatment effect is larger for Hong Kong–Macau–Taiwan (HMT) investment enterprises than for other FIEs, which implies that HMT investment enterprises are more sensitive and more responsive to the removal of the preferential tax treatments than other FIEs; and the treatment effect by restricting the control group to State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) is less than that by restricting the control group to Private-Owned Enterprises (POEs), which is consistent with the perception that SOEs might enjoy more favorable treatments from the Chinese government than POEs. All three findings are consistent with the tax-based theories of capital structure, and hence we conclude that taxation plays an important role in the choice of capital structure. We argue that our conclusion is not China-specific, but a general lesson for modern finance theory and is portable to developed countries.

This study examines the extent to which principal–principal agency conflicts within venture capital (VC) syndicates lead to additional principal–agent conflicts in IPO firms in two institutional contexts. Using a matched sample of 274 VC-backed IPOs in the US and the UK, it shows that the diversity of a VC syndicate increases pre-IPO discretionary current accruals, used as a proxy for earnings management, but the impact of such diversity is higher in the US. There is also evidence of higher underpricing and lower aftermarket performance in firms with higher earnings management and VC diversity, and these negative performance effects are also higher in the US. Our findings indicate that local and informal institutions have a significant effect on multiple agency conflicts in IPO firms and performance outcomes.