Using quarterly data and benchmarks based on past performance characteristics, I find little evidence that earnings change following 661 dividend decreases and 484 dividend omissions between 1980 and 1998. The exception is that earnings deteriorate during the quarter of dividend omissions, but they recover within a couple of quarters. My results further suggest that the lack of a more pronounced earnings decline is neither attributable to a contemporaneous and confounding increase in share repurchases, to earnings management, nor to improving investment opportunities, and the results are similar for firms that are not predicted to cut dividend payouts based on their financial flexibility. Instead, I find some evidence that the negative stock price reaction reflects the dismal performance during the quarter of the announcement, especially for firms that omit dividends, and that the market interprets the dividend announcements too pessimistically

The SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 101 to address its concern that firms were masking true performance by managing earnings using accelerated revenue recognition. Critics of this Accounting Bulletin stated that it would eliminate industry-accepted revenue recognition practices and reduce the quality of reported earnings. The FASB's revenue recognition discussions echo these concerns stating that revenues recorded prior to the completion of the earnings process contain value-relevant information about future performance. This paper investigates these two hypotheses using a sample of firms that accelerated revenue recognition prior to SAB No. 101 adoption (SAB 101 firms) and a matched set of firms that were unaffected by this regulation (unaffected firms). Our earnings distribution tests indicate that SAB 101 firms are more likely to meet earnings benchmarks. Specifically, we find that, in the pre-adoption period, SAB 101 firms report fewer small negative and more small positive earnings than they do in the post-adoption period and than do unaffected firms in the pre-adoption period; SAB 101 firms report fewer small negative and more small positive earnings changes in the pre-adoption period compared to the post-adoption period. We also document that SAB 101 firms are more likely to have weaker corporate governance and more likely to have financial covenants, providing them with greater incentives to manage earnings. However, we find that the association between earnings and future cash flows and between unexpected earnings and earnings announcement period returns were higher for SAB 101 firms than for unaffected firms in the preadoption period, indicating higher earnings informativeness for SAB 101 firms. These associations declined for SAB 101 firms in the post-adoption period, suggesting that SAB No. 101 caused a decline in earnings informativeness. Overall, our results suggest that, although the revenue recognition practices targeted by SAB No. 101 have been used by some firms to manage earnings, the regulation's prohibition of revenue recognition prior to completion of the earnings process, on average, results in less informative earnings since these unearned revenues provide value-relevant information

We examine the effects of increased capital market pressure and disclosure frequency-induced earnings/cash flow conflict on myopic behavior. In our experiments, experienced financial managers choose between projects where a conflict exists between near-term earnings and total cash flow. Managers more often choose projects that they believe will maximize short-term earnings (and price) as opposed to total cash flows in response to increased capital market pressure resulting from a pending stock issuance, holding constant agency frictions and other stock market pressures. When faced with increased capital market pressure, changes in disclosure frequency cause managers to behave more or less myopically depending on the impact of the change on the pattern of earnings and the resulting earnings/cash flow conflict. Our study provides insights into managers' beliefs about stock market pressures, mandatory reporting, and the availability of alternative communications channels, and contributes to literature on managerial myopia and earnings management, as well as current debates over disclosure frequency