This study examines whether and how the properties of corporate bond ratings change following Moody׳s and S&P׳s adoptions of the issuer-pay business model in the early 1970s. Regulators and debt market observers have criticized the issuer-pay model for creating an independence problem. However, the issuer-pay model allows for economic bonding between rating agencies and issuers through explicit contractual arrangements, which should improve the flow of nonpublic information. Using a difference-in-difference research design, I find that more optimistic ratings by issuer-pay rating agencies predict greater future profitability, differences between the ratings of issuer-pay and investor-pay rating agencies are associated with narrower secondary bond market bid-ask spreads, and that issuer-pay rating agencies become relatively more accurate and timely predictors of default compared to investor-pay agencies after the adoption of issuer-pay. These results reinterpret the recent findings of optimistic ratings by Jiang et al. (2012) as consistent with more informative bond ratings.

In an important new book, Anat Admati and Martin Hellwig raise broad critical questions about bank regulation. These questions are reviewed and discussed here, with a focus on how the problems of maintaining a stable financial system depend on fundamental problems of information and incentives in financial intermediation. It is argued that financial regulatory reforms can be reliably effective only when their basic principles are understood by informed citizens, and that Admati and Hellwig's book is a major contribution toward this goal, as it clearly lays out the essential case for requiring banks to have more equity. (JEL G01, G21, G28, G32, L51, M48)

ABSTRACT Financial accounting standards increasingly require fair value measurements. I experimentally examine how uncertainty affects auditors’ adjustment decisions when evaluating fair values. I manipulate two types of uncertainty, input subjectivity and outcome imprecision , and one reporting choice, supplemental disclosure . I find that auditors are most likely to require adjustments when fair values contain both more input subjectivity and more outcome imprecision, but that this likelihood diminishes when clients supplement recognized fair values with additional disclosure. Thus, consistent with moral licensing, I find that auditors tolerate greater potential misstatement in the financial statements when clients provide disclosure, suggesting that the SEC's preference for supplemental disclosure may have the unintended consequence of affecting fair values recognized in the body of the financial statements. I also provide evidence that auditors determine adjustment size by comparing recorded fair value to the nearest bound, rather than the midpoint, of the auditors’ own range estimate, consistent with strict application of auditing standards.

A long-recognized phenomenon in capital markets is the underinvestment in foreign equity securities, known as equity home bias. Our study examines the effect of board independence on the firm's ability to attract foreign equity capital. After accounting for potential endogeneity, we document that U.S. and non-U.S. foreign investors exhibit a strong preference for firms with more independent corporate boards. Further, our analysis indicates that the positive relation between board independence and foreign ownership is significantly stronger in countries with less developed legal institutions and poor external protection of investor rights. We suggest that it is in these countries that firm-determined characteristics such as independent boards can be most beneficial in attracting capital. We also find that institutional investors are more responsive to the impact of independent corporate boards than are other types of investors.

We examine the impact of differences in time varying social views towards sin stocks across G20 nations on firm valuation and excess returns. Sin stocks have an 8% lower equity valuation in countries where society is strongly against such industries. After controlling for other factors, sin stocks have excess returns of about 1–2% annually. However, these returns are largely arbitraged away in nations without capital and investment controls, but persist in countries with capital restrictions. These results are robust to proxies for litigation risk, transparency, growth opportunities, sin measures, and alternative measures of firm valuation.

Information collection and processing in financial institutions is challenging. This can delay the observation by traders of the exact capital charges and constraints of their institution. During this delay, traders face preference uncertainty. In this context, we study optimal trading strategies and equilibrium prices in a continuous centralized market. We focus on liquidity shocks, during which preference uncertainty is likely to matter most. Preference uncertainty generates allocative inefficiency, but need not reduce prices. Progressively learning about preferences generate round–trip trades, which increase volume relative to the frictionless market. In a cross section of liquidity shocks, the initial price drop is positively correlated with total trading volume. Across traders, the number of round–trips is negatively correlated with trading profits and average inventory.

Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Citation Gregory B. Waymire; Neuroscience and Ultimate Causation in Accounting Research. The Accounting Review 1 November 2014; 89 (6): 2011–2019. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50881 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe Accounting Review Search Advanced Search

The SEC promulgated the Securities Offering Reform (SOR) in 2005 to ease disclosure restrictions prior to seasoned equity offerings (SEOs). The SEC argued that SOR would improve the information environment, but critics claimed it would allow firms to hype their stock. This paper is the first to examine the information environment at the time of capital formation under SOR. We find more frequent and accurate management earnings forecasts, more 8-K filings, greater absolute market-adjusted returns, and more positive stock returns leading up to the SEO issue date indicating a richer pre-SEO information environment with capital formation benefits after SOR.