We quantify how sensitive is migration by star scientists to changes in personal and business tax differentials across states. We uncover large, stable, and precisely estimated effects of personal and corporate taxes on star scientists' migration patterns. The long-run elasticity of mobility relative to taxes is 1.8 for personal income taxes, 1.9 for state corporate income tax, and −1.7 for the investment tax credit. While there are many other factors that drive when innovative individuals and innovative companies decide to locate, there are enough firms and workers on the margin that state taxes matter

We investigate the asymmetric relationship between returns and implied volatility for 20 developed and emerging international markets. In particular we examine how the sign and size of return innovations affect the expectations of daily changes in volatility. Our empirical findings indicate that the conditional contemporaneous return-volatility relationship varies not only based on the sign of the expected returns but also upon their magnitude, according to recent results from the behavioral finance literature. We find evidence of an asymmetric and reverse return-volatility relationship in many advanced, Asian, Latin-American, European and South African markets. We show that the US market displays the highest reaction to price falls, Asian markets present the lowest sensitivity to volatility expectations, while the Euro area is characterized by a homogeneous response both in terms of direction and impact. These results may be safely attributed to cultural and societal characteristics. An extensive quantile regression analysis demonstrates that the detected asymmetric pattern varies particularly across the extreme distribution tails i.e., in the highest/lowest quantile ranges. Indeed, the classical feedback and leverage hypotheses appear not plausible, whilst behavioral theories emerge as the new paradigm in real-world applications

Here, I study the effect of state enactment of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) on R&D among U.S. businesses between 1979 and 1998. Using a new index of the legal protection of trade secrets, I find that the UTSA was associated with higher R&D among larger companies and those in high-tech industries. For the average company in the respective industry, the UTSA was associated with 3.2% more R&D in pharmaceuticals and 3.1% more R&D in computers and office equipment, as contrasted with no significant change in soaps and cleaners, and industrial machinery and equipment.

Deregulation of the trucking industry and significantly lowered transportation costs led to large, widespread, and plausibly exogenous reductions in inventory for U.S. firms, with consequent increased supply-chain disruption (SCD) costs. We find evidence that increased SCD costs help explain the puzzling long-term trend of increasing average U.S. firm cash holdings. We also find that firms facing higher expected costs of disruptions generally save more cash from capital freed up via supply-chain management innovations. Finally, we document significant postdisruption declines in cash holdings consistent with cash as a primary source of financing during disruptions

Firms whose human capital is concentrated in a few irreplaceable employees lack diversification in their human capital stock, exposing them to key human capital risk. Using disclosures of “key man life insurance” to measure this risk, we show that exposed firms are riskier. These younger, smaller, growth firms have abnormally high volatility, and following announcement of key employee departures, the most exposed firms lose 8% of their value. Key employees tend to be highly educated. They are four times more likely to hold PhD degrees than top managers, and firms with key human capital are more innovative

We present a simple 2-factor model that helps explain several capital asset pricing model (CAPM) anomalies (value premium, return reversal, equity duration, asset growth, and inventory growth). The model is consistent with Merton’s intertemporal CAPM (ICAPM) framework, and the key risk factor is the innovation on a short-term interest rate, the federal funds rate, or the T-bill rate. This model explains a large fraction of the dispersion in the average returns of the joint market anomalies. Moreover, the model compares favorably with alternative multifactor models widely used in the literature. Hence, short-term interest rates seem to be relevant for explaining several dimensions of cross-sectional equity risk premia

This paper challenges the view that foreign investors lead firms to adopt a short-term orientation and forgo long-term investment. Using a comprehensive sample of publicly listed firms in 30 countries over the period 2001–2010, we find instead that greater foreign institutional ownership fosters long-term investment in tangible, intangible, and human capital. Foreign institutional ownership also leads to significant increases in innovation output. We identify these effects by exploiting the exogenous variation in foreign institutional ownership that follows the addition of a stock to the MSCI indexes. Our results suggest that foreign institutions exert a disciplinary role on entrenched corporate insiders worldwide

We analyze the effects of institutional cross-ownership of same-industry firms on product market performance and behavior. Our results show that cross-held firms experience significantly higher market share growth than do non-cross-held firms. We establish causality by relying on a difference-in-differences approach based on the quasi-natural experiment of financial institution mergers. We also find evidence suggesting that institutional cross-ownership facilitates explicit forms of product market collaboration (such as within-industry joint ventures, strategic alliances, or within-industry acquisitions) and improves innovation productivity and operating profitability. Overall, our evidence indicates that cross-ownership by institutional blockholders offers strategic benefits by fostering product market coordination

Capital utilization and market power crucially affect asset prices in an economy exposed to shocks that improve real investment opportunities through capital-embodied technological innovations. We embed these two mechanisms in a standard general equilibrium model and show that (i) the price of risk for investment shocks is negative under fixed capital utilization, but positive under sufficiently flexible capital utilization, and (ii) the equity return exposure to investment shocks is negative under perfect competition, but positive under high market power. We further show that, high market power, persistent components in technology growth, and a strong preference for early resolution of uncertainty are jointly important to quantitatively match the observed equity risk premium

We use data from a large survey of Chinese firms to investigate whether local government efforts to facilitate market development improve firm efficiency. Both government provision of information about products, markets, and innovation and government assistance in arranging loans are positively associated with firm efficiency, and those private firms with weak access to and knowledge of financial, input, and product markets benefit most from such assistance. These patterns are robust across multiple estimation approaches. Our examination of the determinants of local government facilitation also suggests that it gravitates toward promoting efficiency, though there are also indications that rent-seeking may play a role. Our evidence is consistent with the notion that government facilitation can help some firms overcome market failures in the early stages of a country's private sector development. Though causality is difficult to establish, we argue that changing fiscal dynamics that forced local governments to become increasingly self-reliant in generating revenue, and a government promotion system based on local economic performance, were key motivating factors for market facilitation by local government officials