ABSTRACT: This study explores causes and effects of business combinations disclosure level. Investigating the association between disclosure level on business combination and acquirers' future performance, I find that acquirers' future performance as measured by the change in ROA and by abnormal stock returns increases with abnormal levels of disclosure on business combinations. Investigating the determinants of business combination disclosure, I find that the disclosure level on business combinations decreases with abnormal levels of the purchase price allocated to goodwill. Both results provide evidence consistent with disclosure theory and suggest that acquirers tend to provide less forthcoming disclosure on less favorable acquisitions (“bad news”). I also provide evidence consistent with investors failing to immediately incorporate the information content of business combination disclosure level into their information set and evidence that investors are quicker to react to firms with negative abnormal disclosure.

Abstract In Gantler v. Stephens (2009), the Delaware Supreme Court makes explicit that corporate officers owe the same fiduciary duty to the firm and shareholders as do board members. The decision increased the risk of non‐board‐serving officers being added as named defendants to investor litigation but did not change the risk of corporate litigation. Analyzing the effect of the Gantler ruling on non‐board‐serving CFO s, we find a significant change in their behavior as well as in their firms’ disclosure and accounting choices. Specifically, speech tone during earnings calls of non‐board‐serving CFO s becomes more negative when compared to board‐serving CFO s and the firm's CEO , and non‐board‐serving CFO firms disclose bad news earlier and report more conservatively. Results are stronger for firms incorporated in Delaware. Our findings suggest that CFO s respond to personal litigation risk over and above corporate litigation risk.

ABSTRACT We find that foreign‐born CEOs are more inclined than domestic‐born ones to acquire across borders, and that this inclination is explained by their preference for targets in their birth country. This preference is motivated by foreign‐born CEOs’ information advantage in their birth country and by these CEOs’ desire to give back to the birth country. CEOs’ desire to help their birth country also influences target location, increasing the likelihood of a target in countries that colonized the CEO birth country. The motives that drive acquisitions in acquirer CEOs’ birth countries measurably affect the returns of acquirers’ shareholders, target premium, and acquisition synergy. Both acquirers’ returns and synergy but not target premium are abnormally positive when the motive for an acquisition is a CEO's information advantage in the birth country. Targets premiums but not acquirers’ returns and synergy are abnormally positive when the motive for an acquisition is the desire to give back to the CEO's birth country.