This paper examines whether managers can reduce the detrimental effects of information overload by spreading out, or temporally smoothing, disclosures. We begin by attempting to identify managerial smoothing. We find that when there are multiple disclosures for the same event date, managers spread the disclosures out over several days. Managers are also more likely to delay a disclosure when there has been a disclosure made within the three days before the event date. Finally, managers are more likely to engage in disclosure smoothing when disclosures are longer, the information environment is more robust, firm information is complex, uncertainty is high, and disclosure news is more positive. Our second set of analyses examines whether there are market benefits to disclosure smoothing. Using two different measures of disclosure smoothing, we find that smoothing is associated with increased liquidity, reduced stock price volatility and increased analyst forecast accuracy.

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) allow managers flexibility in classifying interest paid, interest received, and dividends received within operating, investing, or financing activities within the statement of cash flows. In contrast, U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) requires these items to be classified as operating cash flows (OCF). Studying IFRS-reporting firms in 13 European countries, we document firms’ cash-flow classification choices vary, with about 76, 60, and 57% of our sample classifying interest paid, interest received, and dividends received, respectively, in OCF. Reported OCF under IFRS tends to exceed what would be reported under U.S. GAAP. We find the main determinants of OCF-enhancing classification choices are capital market incentives and other firm characteristics, including greater likelihood of financial distress, higher leverage, and accessing equity markets more frequently. In analyzing the consequences of reporting flexibility, we find some evidence that the market’s assessment of the persistence of operating cash flows and accruals varies with the firm’s classification choices and the results of certain OCF prediction models are sensitive to classification choices.

We use publicly available information to estimate the country location of multinational firms’ cash holdings, examine why investors discount the value of cash held overseas, and examine whether that discount changes after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017. We provide three main results. First, our firm-year foreign cash estimates are reasonably accurate, evidenced by high correlations with simulated data and proprietary country-level data, high adjusted R 2 when explaining a firm’s total cash holdings, and the ability to replicate prior findings. Second, we demonstrate that investors value foreign cash holdings more negatively than domestic cash holdings when the cash is held in high agency-cost countries. Finally, we find that investors no longer appear to discount foreign cash after the TCJA, when the U.S. moved from a worldwide to a quasi-territorial taxation system.

The vast majority of managers’ earnings forecasts are issued concurrently (i.e., bundled) with their firm’s current earnings announcement. We document a predictable bias in these forecasts—the forecasts fail to fully reflect the persistence of the current earnings surprise. Specifically, we find that managers issue (1) optimistically biased forecasts alongside negative earnings surprises and (2) pessimistically biased forecasts alongside large positive earnings surprises. Bayesian updating implies this bias could be unintentional, but we find that the bias is stronger when managers have greater incentives and fewer constraints to issue biased forecasts, suggesting that, to some extent, the bias might be intentional. Relatedly, although managers typically have better information about their firm’s earnings than analysts, we show that analyst reliance on these biased management forecasts represents a mechanism (and an alternative interpretation) for a similar analyst underreaction to current earnings attributed in the literature to analysts’ cognitive bias. We also find that, on average, investors do not appear to initially understand the bias in these forecasts but do unravel it over longer windows. However, investors more quickly unravel the bias when the manager has a history of issuing biased forecasts and when the firm has more sophisticated investors. Overall, we document that managers’ forecasts appear to repeatedly underweight the persistence of current earnings surprises, are biased in ways that improve investors’ perceptions of managers’ ability, and that this behavior concentrates in subsamples where outsiders have a harder time recognizing any bias.