Firms coordinate their actions with industry peers, thereby affecting product market competition. Using the cartel setting, we investigate how financial reporting transparency affects industry coordination. Economic theory predicts that transparency might either prolong cartel duration through increased contracting efficiency, or destabilize cartels due to earlier detection of deviating members. We test these predictions on firms indicted by the European Commission for anticompetitive behavior between 1980 and 2010. Using reporting under internationally recognized accounting standards (IFRS or U.S. GAAP) as our measure of reporting transparency, we find that following a transparent accounting framework decreases cartel duration. We show this finding is partly explained by transparent segment disclosure, which provides a means for the verification of agreed-upon sales for a product or region. Consistent with the view that transparent reporting leads to earlier detection of deviating members, we further show that transparency lowers cartel duration when the likelihood of cheating is high.

We examine whether the local press is an effective monitor of corporate misconduct. Specifically, we study the effects of local newspaper closures on violations by local facilities of publicly listed firms. After a local newspaper closure, local facilities increase violations by 1.1% and penalties by 15.2%, indicating that the closures reduce firm monitoring by the press. This effect is not driven by the underlying economic conditions, the underlying local fraud environment, or the underlying firm conditions. Taken together, our findings indicate that local newspapers are an important monitor of firms’ misconduct.

We study the effect of executives’ pledges of integrity on firms’ financial reporting outcomes by exploiting a 2016 regulation that requires holders of Dutch professional accounting degrees to pledge an integrity oath. We identify chief executive officers (CEOs) and chief financial officers (CFOs) required to take the integrity oath and find that firms reduce income-increasing discretionary accruals after executives took the oath. These firms also reduce discretionary expenditures, indicating that oath-taking executives reduce overall earnings management and do not merely substitute accruals-based with real-activities earnings management. These effects are concentrated in firms where the CFO took the oath. Overall, our results indicate that integrity oaths for executives improve firms’ financial reporting quality. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.

Taking advantage of the implementation of the 2003 European Commission (EC) directive on financial reporting, we explore the impact of mandatory financial disclosure on mergers and acquisitions (M&A). We find robust evidence that the number (and volume) of private firms becoming an M&A target increases with mandatory disclosure. Analyses of cross-industry differences, deal-level data, and post-deal performance indicate that financial disclosure increases M&A activity by reducing information frictions in the market for corporate control.

We study whether firms avoid financial disclosures to preserve their owners' financial privacy. We find that firms named after their owner, for whom firm disclosure would more directly expose owner information, are more opaque. Eponymous owners prefer firm opacity when disclosure exposes sensitive owner information with social stigma, in rural and anticapitalist areas, and in insider-oriented settings with high secrecy and distrust. When firms are forced to disclose, eponymous owners more frequently change their firms' names, and new firms are less frequently named after their founding owners. These findings indicate that owner-level privacy concerns dampen firm-level disclosure incentives. Data Availability: The data used in this study are available from public sources listed in the paper.