I develop a structural model to quantify the costs of tax avoidance. In the model, the firm trades off tax savings with tax audit risk, financial reporting considerations, and operational frictions imposed by tax avoidance, the last of which I label as nontax costs. The estimated parameters suggest nontax costs, which are difficult to observe, decrease pretax income by 6.4 percent or $58 million per firm-year. The large magnitude of this estimate can explain why firms appear to underutilize tax avoidance strategies. Through counterfactual analysis, I estimate the effect of tax audit risk and financial reporting considerations to find that financial reporting considerations have an effect on tax avoidance similar to the penalties imposed by tax authorities. Overall, the estimated parameters help explain the “undersheltering puzzle.”

As part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the US Congress repealed a long‐standing exception that allowed companies to deduct executives' qualified performance‐based compensation in excess of $1 million. The purpose of this study is to examine whether Congress achieved its stated objective of reversing a shift in executive compensation away from cash compensation and toward performance pay, which Congress believed led executives to focus on short‐term results rather than the long‐term success of the company. Across a battery of tests, including a difference‐in‐differences design that exploits the staggered time‐series implementation of the deduction limit, we find evidence compatible with the new deduction limit having no effect on executives' salary, performance pay or total compensation, inconsistent with Congressional intent. Our results suggest that taxes are not a first‐order effect of executive pay and that tax regulation could be relatively ineffective at curbing executive compensation.

The wide-spread reporting of non-GAAP earnings suggests efficiency gains from doing so. By estimating a dynamic investment model, we examine the real implications of investors using both GAAP and non-GAAP earnings to value firms. When investors use the firm’s GAAP earnings only, the firm’s manager—who cares about current stock prices—underinvests, and his investment is sensitive to transitory earnings. Non-GAAP earnings can improve investment efficiency by adjusting for these transitory earnings, but can also hide inefficient investment by introducing opportunistic bias. Although non-GAAP earnings induce overinvestment, they dominate GAAP-only reporting. Counterfactual analysis reveals supplementing GAAP earnings with biased non-GAAP earnings increases firm value by 3.4 percent relative to GAAP-only reporting. Precluding bias reduces overinvestment and further increases firm value by 1 percent. Data Availability: Data are available from the sources cited in the text.

We address how value relevance of accounting information evolved as the new economy developed. Prior research concludes that accounting information—primarily earnings—has lost relevance. We consider more accounting items and find no decline in combined value relevance from 1962 to 2018. We assess evolution in each item’s value relevance and find increases, most notably for items related to intangible assets, growth opportunities, and alternative performance measures, which are important in the new economy. The number of relevant items also increases. We also consider separately new economy, old economy profit, and old economy loss firms. The trends are more pronounced for, but extend beyond, new economy firms. We base inferences on a nonparametric approach that does not require specifying the valuation relation. Taken together, our findings reveal an evolution to a more nuanced, but not declining, relation between accounting information and share price.