We examine the readability of text and the use of numbers in the annual filings and earnings press releases of foreign firms listed on U.S. stock exchanges. We find that foreign firms generally write clearer text and present relatively more numerical data than their U.S. firm counterparts. More importantly, we find that the readability of the text and use of numbers increases as the foreign firms get geographically further from the U.S. It also increases as the foreign firm's home country has greater differences in accounting standards or investor protection laws relative to the U.S. Further corroborating our results, we also find that these communication efforts are partially successful. Within a country, firms that produce relatively more readable disclosures attract relatively more U.S. institutional ownership. Collectively, our results suggest that foreign firms are responding to a perceived reluctance on the part of U.S. investors to own them and attempt to lower the investors' information disadvantage or psychological distance by providing clearer and more concrete disclosures.

We study neighborhood choice using a novel research design that contrasts the move rate of homeowners who receive a new different-race neighbor immediately next-door versus slightly farther away on the same block. This approach isolates a component of preferences directly attributable to neighbors’ identities. Both Black and White homeowners are more likely to move after receiving a new different-race neighbor. Findings are robust to additional controls (e.g., income) and alternative research designs. We find evidence of heterogeneity in responses, especially associated with housing density, which has implications for understanding contemporary neighborhood racial change and prospects for maintaining stable, integrated neighborhoods.

We examine the financial health and performance of reverse mergers (RMs) that became active on U.S. stock markets between 2001 and 2010, particularly those from China (around 85 percent of all foreign RMs). As a group, RMs are early-stage companies that typically trade over the counter. However, Chinese RMs (CRMs) tend to be more mature and less speculative than either their U.S. counterparts or a group of exchange-industry-size-matched firms. As a group, CRMs outperformed their matched peers from inception through the end of 2013, even after including most of the firms accused of accounting fraud. CRMs that receive private investment in public equity (PIPE) financing from sophisticated investors perform particularly well. Overall, despite the negative publicity, we find little evidence that CRMs are inherently toxic investments. Our results shed light on the risk-performance trade-off for CRMs, as well as the delicate balance between credibility and access in well-functioning markets.

Embedding disasters into a general equilibrium model with heterogeneous firms induces strong nonlinearity in the pricing kernel, helping explain the empirical failure of the (consumption) CAPM. Our single-factor model reproduces the failure of the CAPM in explaining the value premium in finite samples without disasters and its relative success in samples with disasters. Due to beta measurement errors, the estimated beta-return relation is flat, consistent with the beta “anomaly,” even though the true beta-return relation is strongly positive. Finally, the consumption CAPM fails in simulations, even though a nonlinear model with the true pricing kernel holds exactly by construction.

Although entry regulations are ubiquitous across countries, comprehensive evaluations on how such regulations affect firm dynamics and productivity are lacking. We examine a 2012-2014 pilot program in Guangdong (which later became a national policy) that was designed to reduce firm registration costs and encourage entrepreneurial activities. Using administrative data on firms' business registrations and annual reports, our analysis shows that the reform increased firm entry by 25% and firm exit by 8.7% in the manufacturing sector. The productivity of post-reform entrants was 1.1% higher than the productivity of pre-reform entrants, likely due to relaxed financial constraints and more intense competition.

Using a Supreme Court ruling that rejected the use of “bright-line” rules previously relied upon in evaluating materiality claims, this study examines how heightened materiality uncertainty impacts audit pricing. We expect the heightened uncertainty to make it more difficult for auditors and clients to assess materiality and to reach a consensus on materiality assessment, which increases audit effort and engagement risk, leading to higher audit fees. Consistent with this prediction, we find that after the ruling, audit fees increase significantly for treatment firms in the circuits using bright-line rules in the pre-ruling period, relative to control firms not affected by the ruling. This effect is stronger when auditors have lower quality or lower industry expertise, and when investors have more diverse opinions. We also find that for firms audited by low-expertise auditors, auditor turnover due to auditor-client disagreement on materiality-related issues increases significantly for treatment firms relative to control firms. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.

We argue that contracting with the federal government involves significant proprietary information cost due to regulations requiring contractors to provide proprietary information, which may become available to outsiders via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. We provide evidence by showing that firms become more willing to bid for government contracts after a recent Supreme Court ruling on FOIA (Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media) that improved information protection for contractors and that this effect strengthens when the contracts entail higher proprietary information cost for contractors. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.