The Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act (IBBEA) represented a significant step in the deregulation of interstate banking and branching. The IBBEA's passage had a positive wealth effect on a sample of large Bank Holding Companies (BHCs). Cross-sectional tests of abnormal returns reveal that BHCs having characteristics associated with acquisition targets and BHCs headquartered in states that prohibited interstate branching experienced significantly higher returns. Collectively, the evidence suggests that investors anticipated that the IBBEA would provide for increased corporate control activities among banks and that a large portion of the BHC gains stems from the relaxation of interstate branching restrictions.

[This article presents evidence on persistence in the relative investment performance of large, institutional equity managers. Similar to existing evidence for mutual funds, we find persistent performance concentrated in the managers with poor prior-period performance measures. A conditional approach, using time-varying measures of risk and abnormal performance, is better able to detect this persistence and to predict the future performance of the funds than are traditional methods.]

This paper develops and implements a semiparametric estimator for investigating, with panel data, the importance of human capital and time nonseparable preferences to females when aggregate shocks are present. It provides a set of conditions for making statistical inferences about agents' expectations of their correlated future choices, from a short panel. Under the assumption that observed allocations are Pareto optimal, a dynamic model of female labour supply and participation is estimated, in which experience on the job raises future wages, and time spent off the job in the past directly affects current utility (or, indirectly through productivity in the nonmarket sector).

This paper summarizes nine case studies, by nine authors, on the efficiency effects of bank mergers. The mergers selected for study were ones that seemed relatively likely to yield efficiency gains. That is, they involved relatively large banks generally with substantial market overlap, and most occurred during the early 1990s when efficiency was getting a lot of attention in banking. All nine of the mergers resulted in significant cost cutting in line with premerger projections. Four of the nine mergers were clearly successful in improving cost efficiency but five were not. It is not possible to isolate specific factors from these mergers that are most likely to yield efficiency gains, but the most frequent and serious problem was unexpected difficulty in integrating data processing systems and operations.

Restrictions on stock ownership may harm a company's performance, because restrictions prevent owners from choosing an optimal structure. We examine the stock-price performance and ownership structure of a sample of thrift institutions that converted from mutual to stock ownership. We find that after conversion and the expiration of ownership-structure restrictions, firm performance improves significantly, and the portions of the firm owned by managers and the firm's employee stock ownership plan increase. Changes in performance are positively associated with changes in ownership by managers, but negatively associated with changes in ownership by employee stock ownership plans.

The literature suggests two competing explanations for reincorporations: efforts at managerial entrenchment and attempts to improve contractual efficiency. The empirical evidence to date is inconclusive. To seek further evidence, we examine a large sample of firms that changed their state of incorporation over the period 1980–1992. We find that shareholder wealth is decreased by reincorporations that erect takeover defenses, but is increased by reincorporations that establish limits on director liability. Firms that claim they reincorporate to limit the personal liability of their board members and thereby attract better qualified outside directors do, in fact, expand the outside representation on their boards, whereas firms citing other motives do not.