ABSTRACT We provide large‐sample evidence on whether U.S. publicly traded corporations use voluntary disclosures about their commitments to employee diversity opportunistically. We document significant discrepancies between companies' external stances on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and their hiring practices. Firms that discuss DEI excessively relative to their actual employee gender and racial diversity (“diversity washers”) obtain superior scores from environmental, social, and governance (ESG) rating organizations and attract more investment from institutional investors with an ESG focus. These outcomes occur even though diversity‐washing firms are more likely to incur discrimination violations and have negative human‐capital‐related news events. Our study provides evidence consistent with growing allegations of misleading statements from firms about their DEI initiatives and highlights the potential consequences of selective ESG disclosures.

We develop a theory of trust in lending that distinguishes between reputation and trust. Banks emerge as more trusted lenders than non-banks. We show that trust severs the link between performance and the cost and availability of financing for lenders, but trust can be lost and is difficult to regain. Banks survive an erosion of trust better than non-banks. Banks' trust advantage arises from the lower cost of funding due to insured deposits and an endogenous belief revision channel that complements the effect of the funding cost advantage. The results have novel policy relevance for deposit insurance scope.

Using a large sample of leveraged loans, we provide evidence that, despite having fewer creditor control rights, covenant-lite (Cov-Lite) loans have similar recovery rates and significantly lower spreads than loans with maintenance covenants. We find that the propensity to borrow Cov-Lite is related to various proxies for the reputational capital of a borrowing firm’s private equity sponsor. We construct a simple model to illustrate the relationship between reputational capital, covenants, and loan spreads in the leveraged loan market. Our model illustrates how reputational capital can substitute for covenants in mitigating agency costs of debt, leading to lower loan spreads for Cov-Lite loans.

This paper examines how physical climate exposure affects firm performance and global supply chains. We document that heat at supplier locations reduces the operating income of suppliers and their customers. Further, customers respond to perceived changes in suppliers’ exposure: when suppliers’ realized exposure exceeds ex ante expectations, customers are 7% more likely to terminate supplier relationships. Consistent with experience-based learning, this effect increases with signal strength and repetition and decreases with country-level climate adaptation. Subsequent replacement suppliers show a lower expected and realized but similar projected heat exposure. We find similar results for suppliers’ exposure to floods.

Given that tax‐related critical audit matters (tax CAMs) were prevalent among accelerated filers (18.5% of observations) during the initial year of CAM disclosures, we examine whether an auditor's disclosure of tax CAMs is associated with variation in tax‐related financial reporting quality, tax avoidance, and tax‐related earnings management. Finding an association between tax CAMs and one of these tax outcomes would indicate that the new auditor reporting standard has indirectly affected investors. Examining the first year of CAM disclosures, we do not find that tax CAMs are associated with broad proxies of tax‐related audit or financial reporting quality (e.g., restatements, internal control weaknesses, comment letters) or tax avoidance (e.g., effective tax rates or book‐to‐tax differences). We do find that tax CAMs are associated with a modest increase in tax accrual quality, an increase in the reserve for unrecognized tax benefits, and a reduction in the likelihood of tax‐related earnings management. However, we do not find these tax CAM effects persist into the second year of CAM reporting. Our evidence is consistent with tax CAM disclosures having a modest but short‐lived effect on companies' reporting of tax accounts. Our findings should inform the PCAOB as they conduct their post‐implementation review of the new audit reporting standard.

Inspired by experimental evidence, we amend the recursive utility model to let risk aversion decrease with the temporal horizon. Our pseudo-recursive preferences remain tractable and retain appealing features of the long-run risk framework, notably its success at explaining asset pricing moments. In addition, our model addresses two challenges to the standard model. Calibrating the agents’ preferences to explain the equity premium no longer implies an extreme preference for early resolutions of uncertainty. Horizon-dependent risk aversion helps resolve key puzzles in finance on the valuation of assets across maturities and captures the term structure of equity risk premiums and its dynamics.

Critics assert that securities class actions are economically burdensome and yield minimal recoveries, whereas proponents claim they deter wrongdoing. We examine key events in the recent Goldman Sachs Supreme Court case to test the net effect of securities litigation risk on shareholder value. We find that investors view securities class actions as value‐increasing. However, the strength of this effect varies based on external monitoring. Investors view securities class actions as more value‐enhancing when institutional ownership is low. We also use this setting to examine the effect of securities litigation risk on mandatory disclosure because the Goldman Sachs case focuses on mandatory disclosure properties. Using a difference‐in‐differences design, we find firm risk factor disclosures become shorter and less similar to industry peers, and they contain more uncertain and weak terms. Overall, our results show nuanced effects of securities litigation risk on shareholder value and firm disclosure.

In the late nineteenth century, the North American bison was brought to the brink of extinction in less than two decades. We demonstrate that the loss of the bison had immediate, negative consequences for the Native Americans who relied on them and ultimately resulted in a persistent reversal of fortunes. Once amongst the tallest people in the world, the generations of bison-reliant people born after the slaughter lost their entire height advantage. By the early twentieth century, child mortality was 16 percentage points higher and the probability of reporting an occupation 19 percentage points lower in bison nations compared with nations that were never reliant on the bison. Throughout the latter half of the twentieth century and into the present, income per capita has remained 25% lower, on average, for bison nations. This persistent gap cannot be explained by differences in agricultural productivity, self-governance, or application of the Dawes Act. We provide evidence that this historical shock altered the dynamic path of development for formerly bison-reliant nations. We demonstrate that limited access to credit constrained the ability of bison nations to adjust through re-specialization and migration.

In this study, we examine auditors' reliance on artificial intelligence (AI) systems that are designed to provide evidence around complex estimates. In an experiment with highly experienced auditors, we find that auditors are more hesitant to rely on evidence from AI‐based systems compared to human specialists, consistent with algorithm aversion. Importantly, we also find that a small amount of control (i.e., providing input to specialists) can mitigate this aversion, though this effect depends on auditors' personal locus of control (LOC). Providing input increases reliance on evidence from AI systems for auditors who believe they have little control over their outcomes (i.e., an external LOC). In contrast, auditors with an internal LOC are particularly hesitant to rely on AI‐based evidence, and providing input has little impact on their reliance. Interviews with experienced auditors corroborate our findings and suggest auditors feel a greater sense of control working with human specialists relative to AI‐based systems. Overall, our results suggest perceived control plays an important role in auditors' aversion to AI and that auditors' individual traits can affect this aversion.