We analyze over 27,000 social media livestreams by Chinese mutual funds to investigate whether they achieve regulators’ goal of improving retail investment decisions. Our findings indicate that livestreams generate significant inflows, often within minutes of their start times. Yet rather than educating investors, livestreams amplify return-chasing behavior and predict sharp declines in fund performance. Investors who buy in response to livestreams would earn higher returns by holding index funds or even cash. Further analyses using deep learning algorithms reveal that livestreams are more persuasive when speakers are more physically attractive, use more positive language, and sound more excited. We conclude that livestreams primarily function as persuasive advertising and that regulators should be wary of educational efforts led by sellers of consumer financial products. We also conclude that prior evidence on the benefits of firms’ social media use in equity markets does not extend to financial product markets in this setting.

Downside risks are ubiquitous and can profoundly impact firm operations and valuation. Failure to adequately assess and manage target firms' downside risks hinders acquirers' ability to integrate and manage these businesses. This article introduces a novel measure of firms' downside risk similarity (DRS) based on risk factor descriptions and examines its implications for mergers and acquisitions (M&A) outcomes. We first validate that the measure is distinct from existing similarity measures and that it captures similarity in firms' potential significant downside. Using the new measure, we find that the market reacts more positively to deals in which acquirers and targets share more downside risks. Additional analyses show that this beneficial effect of DRS is driven primarily by risks that are idiosyncratic or firm‐specific, consistent with these risks requiring acquirers' relevant expertise to manage. Last, we document that in deals with more similar downside risks, the acquirers experience fewer risk profile changes and are less likely to suffer from adverse outcomes, such as deal‐specific goodwill impairment, divestitures, and significant profitability declines. Overall, we conclude that DRS plays a significant role in the M&A process.

We investigate whether judges’ political ideology affects corporate tax behaviors. We find that firms engaging in less aggressive tax planning when Circuit Court judges are more liberal. Cross-sectionally, the deterrent effect of liberal judge ideology is more pronounced for firms that engage in judiciary-sensitive tax strategies, face higher enforcement risk from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), or have larger reputational costs from tax disputes. Our findings further suggest that liberal judge ideology reduces firms’ R&D investments and market value by constraining tax planning. Overall, our evidence highlights the importance of judge ideology for firm behavior in the context of corporate tax planning.