We examine Twitter discussion of sell-side analysts’ stock recommendation revisions. While many investors lack direct access to analyst research, we observe revision-related Twitter discussion associated with approximately 90 percent of the revisions in our sample, usually within three hours of their announcement. Revision-related Twitter discussion is greater for upgrades and for analysts from larger brokerages. Examining within-revision intraday price discovery, we observe increased price discovery during intraday windows with more revision-related tweets, especially for tweets that have more user engagement, are posted by more influential authors, or involve stocks with more intense retail trading volume. We find that revision-related retail trading is more intense and better predicts future returns for revisions with more revision-related Twitter discussion. We observe no such evidence for institutional investors who have direct access to sell-side research. Our results suggest that Twitter is an important channel in facilitating price discovery following analyst revisions, particularly among retail investors.

We study lease accounting in an international panel data set to examine how accounting outcomes vary with two features of accounting standards: the emphasis on using professional judgement to apply principles, and the presence or absence of bright-line tests. We study four countries—Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US—and companies in two lease-intensive industries—retail and transportation. Our primary study period spans the time when Australia and the UK switched from domestic to international accounting standards, and in one test, we also consider Canada’s transition to international standards. We find that neither an explicit requirement to apply a principle nor omitting bright-line tests materially increases the use of capital lease treatment among these firms. Overall, we conclude that this financial reporting outcome is relatively insensitive to these standard-setting tools.

The new lease standard (ASC 842) allows firms to keep variable leases off balance sheet, in part based on the assumption that future expenses are difficult to estimate reliably. We show that variable lease expenses are both prevalent and substantial, exhibiting persistence and predictability comparable to operating lease expenses while showing limited sensitivity to revenue changes. These patterns are consistent with variable lease payments being based on stable drivers. Following ASC 842 adoption, firms report lower minimum operating lease commitments and higher variable lease expenses, suggesting a substitution from operating to variable leases. Neither equity betas nor credit ratings reflect potential variable lease liabilities. Conservative estimates show that recognition of variable lease liabilities would increase debt by 7.1% on average. Our findings provide evidence on the properties of variable leases and the potential implications of keeping them off balance sheet.

Managers are required to disclose material climate risk in Form 10-K, but their decision whether or not to disclose is confounded by the lack of consensus on whether climate risk is material to the firms, as well as uncertainty about enforcement of disclosure regulations. Using the SASB Materiality Map™ to proxy for market expectations of climate risk materiality, we test whether the association between disclosing climate risk in 10-Ks and firm risk (proxied by cost of equity (COE)) varies with market expectations of climate risk materiality. Using S&P 500 firms’ decisions whether to disclose climate risk in Form 10-K for 2008 to 2016, we find that disclosing firms’ COE is 27 bps lower than nondisclosing firms’ COE. In industries where the market expects climate risk to be material, disclosing firms’ COE is 50 bps lower than nondisclosing firms’, while in industries where the market does not expect climate risk to be material, disclosing firms’ COE is 23 bps lower than nondisclosing firms’. Our results indicate that markets use expectations of climate risk materiality to infer the credibility of managers’ climate risk disclosure decisions. Our research contributes to policy-making on climate risk disclosures in regulatory filings and informs the debate around the costs and benefits of the SEC’s current proposal to enhance climate risk disclosures.

The choice between historical cost and fair value measurement is one of the most debated issues among accounting academics and practitioners. We use the election of the fair value option (FVO) to study the effects of entities’ measurement choices on accounting comparability. The FVO enables entities to use different measurement bases for similar assets and liabilities, raising questions about whether the FVO compromises or enhances comparability. Using a sample of US banks, we find that FVO elections increase comparability both across FVO electing banks and between FVO electing banks and banks that never elect the FVO but only if the FVO elections comply with the intent of the standard setters to remedy accounting mismatches. Overall our results suggest that banks elect the FVO to better present their economics, yielding higher comparability.

We examine the choice of organizational structure for VC-backed startup firms. These firms overwhelmingly organize as C-corporations rather than as tax advantaged limited liability companies (LLCs). This results in foregone tax savings of $43.9 billion, or 4.9% of the total equity invested in the sample firms. The decision is puzzling, given plausible estimates of the direct costs involved, but appears related to “hassle” and other transition costs generated by participants implementing a new form. Firms with more employees and investors are likely to choose the C-corporation. VCs appear to prefer the C-corporation form, as receiving VC money is associated with most LLC firms switching to a C-corporation within 30 days. Greater VC preferences for C-corporations are linked to a preference for familiarity, and less attention to taxes.