Abstract We examine the role of race and racial concordance between financial advisors and their local community. We document significant differences in stock market participation based on community racial composition, as well as differences in the characteristics of communities served by minority advisors. Notably, minority advisors are more likely to serve racially concordant communities, which tend to be poorer. We find that racial concordance has only a modest relation with local stock market participation. However, while minority advisors are more likely to leave the industry, this relation is mitigated among advisors located in more concordant communities. (JEL G20, G50, D14, J15)

Abstract Predicted stock issuers (PSIs) are firms with expected high-investment and low-profit profiles that earn extremely low returns. We evaluate alternative explanations for this empirical phenomenon. Our results show top-PSI firms are cash-strapped, have lottery-like payoffs, high volatility, high beta, low liquidity, and high shorting costs. Over the next 2 years, top-PSI firms earn return on assets of −30% per year, report disappointing earnings, and experience strongly negative forecast revisions. They perform poorly in down markets and are six times more likely to delist for performance-related reasons. Overall, we find substantial support for mispricing, some support for nonstandard preferences, and virtually no support for the risk explanation. (JEL G12, G14, G32, G40, G41) Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

Limited coverage is a standard feature in deposit insurance schemes. It is used to limit moral hazard, and achieves this objective by reinforcing market discipline: depositors have more incentives to monitor banks’ risk-taking if they have skin in the game. In this paper, I study market discipline and coverage levels by analyzing the relationship of funding costs and deposit growth with banks’ risk. I use a database of Colombian banks’ balance sheets and take advantage of a sudden, significant, and exogenous increase in the coverage level that occurred in April 2017. I find evidence of market discipline throughout the period of analysis and most results are consistent with it not being reduced by the change in the coverage level. The results are nuanced, however. Two variables are impacted: one in the quantity and the other in the price dimension. Furthermore, results also vary when I look at specific groups of banks separately. Market discipline is not present in big banks. Too big-to-fail perceptions seem to limit it. This is also the case for banks concentrated in fully insured deposits, where limited coverage has a less prevalent role.

This paper investigates bank stock performance following different monetary policy actions in times of positive and negative interest rates. Controlling for the broader stock market, monetary policy announcements that cause an unanticipated downward shift in the yield curve and a flattening of the shorter-end of the yield curve are found to persistently reduce bank stock prices once the interest rate environment is negative. Consistent with the deposits channel of monetary policy, the effects are larger and more persistent for banks that are relatively dependent on deposit funding. By contrast, a surprise movement in the slope of the longer-end of the yield curve does not impact bank stock prices in times of negative interest rates. Accounting data confirm that a parallel drop in the yield curve following a monetary policy decision in a negative interest rate environment hurts banks through shrinking deposit margins.

In 1936–37, the Federal Reserve doubled member banks’ reserve requirements. Friedman and Schwartz (1963) famously argued that the doubling increased reserve demand and forced the money supply to contract, which they argued caused the recession of 1937–38. Using a new database on individual banks, we find that higher reserve requirements did not generally increase banks’ reserve demand or contract lending because reserve requirements were not binding for most banks. Aggregate effects on credit supply from reserve requirement increases were therefore economically small and statistically zero.

Abstract 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.

From 2007 to 2020, unlisted Chinese firms paid an average of over US $500 million to listed firms for their shell value in reverse merger transactions. We show that this large shadow price for a public listing sheds light on other features of Chinese markets, including (i) near-zero mortality rates, (ii) frequent major-asset restructurings (MARs), (iii) insensitivity of small-firm prices to corporate earnings, and (iv) a large size effect. A firm-level measure of expected shell probability (ESP) predicts stock returns, MARs, earnings-to-price sensitivity, and short-window returns to initial public offering-related regulatory news. Furthermore, adding ESP to existing pricing models for Chinese stocks significantly improves model performance.

Traditionally, economic growth and business cycles have been treated independently. However, the dependence of GDP levels on its history of shocks, what economists refer to as “hysteresis,” argues for unifying the analysis of growth and cycles. In this paper, we review the recent empirical and theoretical literature that motivates this paradigm shift. The renewed interest in hysteresis (or “scarring” in recent parlance) has been sparked by the persistent impact of the global financial crisis —as GDP in advanced economies remained far below the precrisis trends for over a decade—and recent concerns about the lasting impact of the COVID-19 shock. The findings of the recent literature have far-reaching conceptual and policy implications. In recessions, monetary and fiscal policies need to be more active to avoid the permanent scars of a downturn. And in good times, running a high-pressure economy could have permanent positive effects. (JEL E22, E23, E24, E32, E63, G01, O41)

We examine whether individual-level taxes affect executives' propensity to use nonpublic information in insider trades. We predict and find a positive relation between abnormal insider trading profitability and income tax rates. Using plausibly exogenous variation in state income tax rates, we estimate that the average executive uses insider trading profits to offset between 12.2% and 19.6% of the effect that income taxes have on their net compensation. We show that the sensitivity of these profits to tax rates varies predictably with the executives' compensation and shareholdings, firm monitoring effectiveness, and information asymmetry between insiders and outside investors. We also demonstrate a positive association between SEC enforcement actions and tax rates, suggesting that tax-rate-driven changes in abnormal trading profits expose insiders to legal risk. We find that insider trading volume exhibits little sensitivity to tax rates. Our findings show that income taxes affect executives’ tendency to use private information in their trades.

Abstract Using micro-level data, we examine the behavior of socially responsible investment (SRI) funds. SRI funds select firms with lower pollution, more board diversity, higher employee satisfaction, and better workplace safety. Yet, both in the cross-section and using an exogenous shock to SRI capital, we find that SRI funds do not significantly change firm behavior. Moreover, we find little evidence that they try to impact firm behavior using shareholder proposals. Our results suggest that SRI funds are not greenwashing, but they are impact washing; they invest in a portfolio of firms with better environmental and social conduct but do not follow through on their promise of impact.