Competitors engage in product market predation when they lower prices or increase expenditures on nonprice competition with the goal of forcing a rival to exit. This study provides evidence that financially constrained firms avoid financial statement disclosure to mitigate predation risk. The empirical tests examine German private firms, most of which failed to comply with financial statement public disclosure requirements until an enforcement change increased noncompliance costs. The evidence shows more financially constrained firms were more likely to avoid disclosure until the change. Results from cross-sectional and supplemental analyses are consistent with predation risk driving this relation.

We review the empirical accounting literature on private firms. Recent advances in data gathering provide new openings to examine private firms which, despite driving half of private sector economic activity, have historically been challenging to study. We provide a conceptual framework to organize the literature, centering on information production, information verification, and information dissemination. Four key takeaways emerge from our review. First, private firm settings offer unique advantages for understanding the economic role of accounting. Because private firms face less regulation than public firms, their accounting choices can shed light on economic tradeoffs that public firm choices cannot. Second, there is limited descriptive evidence on many fundamental accounting choices, including the extent to which private firms follow US GAAP, obtain an audit, or use various management accounting practices. Third, studies jointly modeling private and public firms provide more complete, robust analyses of the economy, regulation in particular. Fourth, private and public firms differ on many central dimensions, which raises difficulties related to conducting empirical analysis and assessing generalizability.

We examine whether the public availability of product market incumbents' financial disclosures leads to greater capital structure mimicking of incumbents by entrants. Exploiting a change in disclosure enforcement for German private firms in the mid-2000s, we find entrant-incumbent mimicking rises substantially in concentrated markets once incumbents' financial statements are publicly available. Additional tests exploring potential mechanisms are more consistent with interfirm learning underlying the effect than alternative channels. Our findings shed light on the effects of competitor financial statement disclosure on private firms’ initial financing decisions and highlight how capital structure dependencies among peer firms arise.

Using a novel pairwise measure of firms’ acquisition of rivals’ disclosures, we show that investment opportunities drive interfirm information flows. We find that these flows predict subsequent mergers and acquisitions as well as how and how much firms invest, relative to rivals. Moreover, firms’ use of rivals’ information often hinges on the similarities of their products. Our results suggest that rivals’ public information, far from being unusable, helps facilitate investment and product decisions, including acquisitions and product differentiation strategies. The findings also support a learning mechanism that could partly underlie the emerging literature on peer investment effects.

We examine size management by European private firms for which disclosure requirements increase at size thresholds. Our estimates suggest at least 8% of firms near thresholds that impose income statement disclosure manage size downward, and the average firm that manages size sacrifices more than 6% of its assets. We find that multiple determinants of proprietary costs predict this behavior, and that size management to avoid mandatory audits, which are similarly imposed at size thresholds, is of comparable magnitude. Our results triangulate the economic significance of proprietary costs in a setting largely without confounding capital market, agency, or compliance costs.

Using an experiment to rule out reverse causality, we examine whether a small investment in a company's stock leads investors to purchase more of the company's products and adopt other views and preferences that benefit the company. We preregister our research methods, hypotheses, and supplemental analyses via the Journal of Accounting Research ’s registration‐based editorial process. We find little evidence consistent with these hypotheses for the average investor in our sample using our planned univariate hypothesis tests, and planned Bayesian parameter estimation shows substantial downward belief revision for more optimistic ex ante expectations of the treatment effects. In planned supplemental analyses, however, we do find that the effects of ownership on product purchase behavior and on regulatory preferences are intuitively stronger for certain subgroups of investors—namely, for investors who are most likely to purchase the types of products offered by the company and for investors who are most likely to vote on political matters. The results contribute to our understanding of the benefits of direct stock ownership and are informative to public company managers and directors.

Capital flows increase in response to new public information. Conventional explanations typically conclude that this reflects a rational response to reduced risk. However, investors may also be overconfident in their ability to benefit from new information, even when it is publicly available and does not provide a relative advantage. We exploit two complementary settings to examine how this “better‐than‐average” mechanism affects capital flows. Archival evidence from horse race betting markets shows capital flows increase following the public provision of a summary measure of horse performance, even though more total parimutuel wagering necessarily implies a greater wealth transfer from bettors to tracks. A controlled lab experiment provides direct causal evidence of our proposed mechanism. Combined, our results suggest that new public information can increase capital flows due to investors’ overconfidence in their ability to benefit from information relative to others. Our findings inform regulators seeking to understand the consequences of expanding the public information available to individual investors.

Business complexity involves important tradeoffs for managers and investors, but empirical evidence is limited by measurement issues. We construct and validate a measure of business complexity using a GPT model fine-tuned on narrative disclosures and inline XBRL tags. We first show that our measure is associated with slower price formation in capital markets, consistent with complexity increasing processing costs. Next, we apply our measure to study the complexity of debt, an economically important topic that encompasses a wide range of features. The results show that nonstandard debt features such as call and convertibility provisions underlie debt complexity. We also find that debt complexity correlates with more persistent interest expense and better performance when lending conditions worsen, suggesting it is in part an adaptive response to manage financial risk. Overall, our study underscores the tradeoffs of business complexity and provides a flexible measure of complexity for future research. Data Availability: Contact authors for data, model weights, and measure.