Over recent years, a substantial fraction of US convertible bond issues have been combined with a stock repurchase. This paper explores the motivations for these combined transactions. We argue that convertible debt issuers repurchase their stock to facilitate arbitrage-related short selling. In line with this prediction, we show that convertibles combined with a stock repurchase are associated with lower offering discounts, lower stock price pressure, higher expected hedging demand, and lower issue-date short selling than uncombined issues. We also find that convertible arbitrage strategies explain both the size and the speed of execution of the stock repurchases.

This paper studies the role of scale inflexibility in explaining corporate credit spreads. We find robust evidence that firms with higher inflexibility have higher credit spreads. To mitigate the endogeneity concern, we employ a regression discontinuity design that uses the exogenous variations in labor adjustment costs resulting from close-call union elections. Furthermore, contraction inflexibility is more prominent in influencing credit spreads than expansion inflexibility is. Additionally, inflexibility increases credit spreads due to increased cash flow volatility and financial distress risk. Our findings highlight the importance of a firm’s ability to adapt to productivity shocks in fulfilling its debt obligations.

This paper tests the static tradeoff theory against the pecking order theory. We focus on an important difference in prediction: the static tradeoff theory argues that a firm increases leverage until it reaches its target debt ratio, while the pecking order yields debt issuance until the debt capacity is reached. We find that for our sample of US firms the pecking order theory is a better descriptor of firms’ issue decisions than the static tradeoff theory. In contrast, when we focus on repurchase decisions we find that the static tradeoff theory is a stronger predictor of firms’ capital structure decisions.

We analyze the importance of firm-specific and country-specific factors in the leverage choice of firms from 42 countries around the world. Our analysis yields two new results. First, we find that firm-specific determinants of leverage differ across countries, while prior studies implicitly assume equal impact of these determinants. Second, although we concur with the conventional direct impact of country-specific factors on the capital structure of firms, we show that there is an indirect impact because country-specific factors also influence the roles of firm-specific determinants of leverage.