We examine firm disclosure choice during the initial public offering (IPO) roadshow presentation to understand the informativeness of a management presentation designed to attract investors. Although firms submit a comprehensive registration filing during the IPO, managers also prepare a roadshow presentation, which is shorter and typically allows managers more autonomy to select the information released and how it is discussed. We find that IPO roadshows have significantly more positive, less negative, and less uncertain language than the SEC filing. Using machine learning to classify roadshow sentences into five major topics from the registration statement, we find that roadshows differ in both the topics selected and the language used within each topic. We then examine the predictive ability of the roadshow language, finding that roadshow language predicts future accounting performance, whereas filing language does not. These results highlight the informational role of management presentations, despite the flexibility they grant managers.

We investigate managers’ propensity to engage in strategic promotion behavior. Strategic promotion behavior occurs when managers pursue personal economic interests when contributing to employee promotion decisions, such that the probability that relatively lower performing employees are selected for a promotion is increased. We develop theory about how two important organizational characteristics—transparency about individual performance levels and the presence of group incentives—jointly affect managers’ tendency to strategically influence promotion decisions. Using a stylized lab experiment, we find that transparency about individual performance levels decreases strategic promotion behavior when group incentives are absent but not when group incentives are present. We discuss how our findings contribute to our understanding of management accounting and control systems.

Using a comprehensive database of U.S. internal auditor job postings, we find that firms are about 10 percent more likely to post an internal auditor job after the revelation of accounting and operational failures. Also, the demand for internal auditors is stronger when a failure is more severe. Among firms posting internal auditor jobs, firms demand higher-quality internal auditors in response to a failure compared with when there has not been a recent failure. We find evidence of internal audit demand spillovers through connected directors, which helps mitigate concerns that the primary results are due to replacing internal auditors that recently left or due to endogenous links between hiring internal auditors and failure revelations. Overall, our evidence suggests that firms demand internal auditors to help ensure high-quality financial reporting and effective operations.

We examine how executives' ability to control their firms' exposure to risk affects the design of their incentive-compensation contracts. Our natural experimental evidence shows that exchange-traded weather derivatives allow executives to control their firms' exposure to weather risk. Once these derivatives became available, those executives who use them to hedge experience relative reductions in their total compensation and equity incentives. The decline in compensation is consistent with a reduction in the risk premium that executives receive for exposure to weather risk. The decline in equity incentives is consistent with the relation between risk and incentives shifting in a complementary direction when executives can better control their firms' exposure to risk. Collectively, our findings provide evidence that executives' ability to control their firms' exposure and, by extension, their own to an important source of risk influences the design of their incentive-compensation contracts.

We hypothesize that prior evidence of target shareholder capital gains tax liabilities affecting acquisition features is driven by the tax liabilities of the target firm CEO. To test this, we estimate CEOs' capital gains tax liabilities for a large sample of acquisitions and examine the effects of such liabilities on acquisition outcomes. Results indicate that the previously documented positive relations between shareholder-level capital gains tax rates and (1) the likelihood of a nontaxable acquisition (Ayers, Lefanowicz, and Robinson 2004), and (2) acquisition premiums (Ayers, Lefanowicz, and Robinson 2003) are largely driven by CEO tax effects. We also find evidence consistent with (1) CEOs' tax incentives leading to potential agency conflicts under certain conditions, and (2) acquisition structure or premium being adjusted in response to CEOs' taxes depending on the alternatives available to the acquirer. Our study contributes to our understanding of what and whose taxes affect acquisition structure and value.

Brand name audit firms are global networks of local audit firms. These networks claim to enforce consistent audit methodologies across their member firms, which, if true, should systematically affect client financial reporting. We find that clients from different countries have more (less) comparable accruals when they are audited by local audit firms from the same global network (different global networks). Furthermore, inferences are similar when we examine client accrual comparability around audit firm switches induced by the failure of Andersen, which serves as a shock that helps improve identification. In falsification tests, having auditors from the same global network is not associated with differences in operating cash flows. Results also suggest that the role of global network methodologies in global financial reporting comparability is more pronounced across stronger investor protection jurisdictions and across jurisdictions that have adopted International Standards on Auditing.

The effects of tax rate changes on corporate profitability are not fully understood. Implicit tax theory predicts a positive relation between country-level tax rates and firm-level pretax returns. Conversely, income shifting should make reported pretax returns inversely related to tax rates. Among single-country European firms, we find robust evidence of corporate implicit taxes following tax rate changes, concentrated in firms that rely less on intangible assets and firms in closed economies (non-EU countries). Among multinational firm affiliates, we find the effects of income shifting outweigh the effects of implicit taxes for firms with high intangibles and in countries with open borders. Our results imply income shifting estimated using only reported profits is less biased by implicit taxes in settings with open economies and firms with unique inputs or products. Our evidence also helps explain prior evidence of decreasing corporate implicit tax effects over time, particularly for multinationals.

Regulators claim to reward firm cooperation in the enforcement process. However, critics question which actions constitute firm cooperation and contend that cooperation leads to “harsh” and “unfair” outcomes. Examining 1,162 enforcement actions for financial misrepresentation initiated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and Department of Justice, we find that regulator-cited cooperation credit is best explained by remedial actions and self-reported law violations. Cooperation credit is negatively associated with firm monetary penalties assessed by regulators. Our estimates suggest that firms with cooperation credit realize an average penalty reduction of $23.8 million (49 percent). We also estimate that average reputation-related losses are $756 million (70 percent) lower for firms with cooperation credit. We find no association between cooperation credit and related private action outcomes. Our results provide important insight into what constitutes meaningful cooperation with regulators, and suggest that the benefits can be substantial for firms deemed to be cooperative.

Auditors frequently use benchmarking analysis to evaluate the appropriateness of a client's estimates. Client management may strategically select benchmark data, making an auditor's evaluation task more difficult. Psychology research suggests that the composition of the benchmark set can lead to contrast effects, because evaluations of an option in a choice set can change based on the inclusion of other options in the set. In Experiment 1, we examine and find that auditors' judgments of the reasonableness of a client-preferred discount rate for a Level 3 investment are inappropriately influenced by the set of peer companies provided by the client as justification. In Experiment 2, audit managers performing the same task similarly exhibited contrast effects. However, as managers' investment experience increased, the influence of contrast effects from the benchmark set decreased. Given the widespread use of benchmark data, contrast effects from benchmark set composition have implications for accounting and auditing contexts.

To address potential threats to auditor independence, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) requires the audit committee to pre-approve nonaudit services (NAS) procured from the auditor. However, the presence of a former audit firm partner (FAP) affiliated with the current auditor on the audit committee could undermine the audit committee's due diligence over the NAS pre-approval process. To alleviate such concerns, the Securities and Exchange Commission approved a three-year “cooling-off” period for appointing audit firm alumni as independent directors. Our analyses show that the presence of both affiliated and unaffiliated FAPs on audit committees does not lead to greater NAS procured from the auditor; rather, FAPs reduce NAS procured from the auditor. Moreover, NAS decline significantly following the appointment of FAPs to the audit committee. Further tests suggest the three-year cooling-off period may not be warranted and deserves further investigation. Our study raises important implications for regulators, policy makers, corporate boards, and future research. Data Availability: Data are publicly available from sources identified in the text.