This study investigates the effect of national security-related foreign investment screening laws on managers’ investment choices. These laws weaken takeover markets by granting regulators broad new powers to revise or reject foreign takeovers of firms in national security-related industries. I identify exogenous variation in national security-related foreign investment screening laws using the enactment of a U.S. national security-related foreign investment screening law known as the Foreign Investment and National Security Act (FINSA). Consistent with managerial entrenchment theory, I document that, following the enactment of FINSA, national security firms’ inefficient investment increases. Event-time tests corroborate and cross-sectional tests demonstrate that results strengthen with treatment strength. Results generalize to seven alternative investment efficiency measures. Stacked panel tests exploiting regulators’ staggered enforcement of FINSA across 66 industries over time between 2008 and 2021 further corroborate. Overall, this study documents the unintended consequences of national security-related foreign investment screening laws on managers’ investment choices.

Sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) are government‐owned institutional investors pursuing political and financial investment objectives. With $8 trillion in assets, SWFs are geopolitical powerbrokers actively participating in global capital markets, yet we know little about the financial reporting consequences of SWF investment. I document evidence supporting the hypothesis that the simultaneous pursuit of political and financial investment objectives renders SWFs weak monitors. Using a staggered difference‐in‐differences research design, I document economically significant increases in discretionary accruals for SWF target firms after SWF investment, relative to an entropy‐balanced control group of non‐SWF target firms. Corroborating tests document that the effect of SWF investment on discretionary accruals strengthens with SWFs' equity stake and SWF target firms' earnings management incentives and weakens when regulators curb SWFs' pursuit of political objectives. I highlight SWFs' distinct monitoring effect by replicating my analyses after replacing SWF investment with conventional institutional investment, and document that conventional institutional investment instead reduces discretionary accruals. I further corroborate SWFs' distinct monitoring role among conventional institutional investors using a wide variety of robustness tests employing alternate specifications, samples, and financial reporting proxies. Overall, this study introduces an economically important and fundamentally distinct but little‐studied institutional investor to the accounting literature.

We test the political cost hypothesis using local soldier fatalities as a source of as-if-random variation in the threat of political costs for local defense firms. Soldier fatalities vary the threat of political costs for defense firms because the U.S. tradition of shared sacrifice during war vulgarizes war profits amid dead soldiers. Local defense firms record more income-decreasing accruals, equal to 1.17 percent of total assets, in response to a one standard deviation increase in local soldier fatalities (an additional 29 soldier fatalities in the average state-year). A wide variety of robustness tests corroborate our inferences.

We find that federal bureaucrats award more, larger, and less risky contracts to politically connected firms when they have greater discretion over contracting outcomes. Using a sample of 4.3 million federal government contract actions obligating $2.47 trillion between 2000 and 2015, we show that this result varies predictably across contract and agency characteristics, over time, and in placebo tests, and is robust to a comprehensive fixed effect structure and seven alternate measures of political connectedness. Our evidence illustrates the overlooked role of the bureaucrat in facilitating political bias in federal contracting outcomes.

A rich literature suggests that investor relations officers (IROs) fulfill a one‐way information intermediary role by transmitting firm information to investors. We advance this literature with empirical evidence suggesting IROs are two‐way information intermediaries who also return investment efficiency‐increasing investor feedback to firm insiders. Exploiting granular investor relations activity data for 1,375 global firms, we document that firm investment efficiency is higher when IROs spend more time with existing institutional investors, conduct more institutional investor outreach, and meet more often with investment professionals (market intelligence collection), and when IROs transmit investment community feedback to board directors (market intelligence circulation). We mitigate endogeneity concerns stemming from our association tests by employing an expansive suite of control variables, a high‐dimensional fixed‐effects structure, an entropy‐balanced estimation sample, and an instrumental variables analysis. Our evidence supports theory predicting that managers learn about investment opportunities and their costs and benefits from investors and informs a literature predominantly characterizing IROs as one‐way information intermediaries.

This paper examines earnings management by EU firms that initiate an antidumping investigation. We first document economically and statistically significant income-decreasing earnings management around the initiation of an antidumping investigation. We show that earnings management increases when accounting data directly affect the magnitude of the tariffs imposed in the trade investigation. We also find that earnings management decreases as the number of petitioning firms increases or as the distance between petitioning firms increases, suggesting free-rider and coordination problems. We find that earnings management increases when the petition is directed at a country that imports more goods from the petitioning firm's home country, suggesting that retaliation threats affect incentives. We document that raising equity or debt financing moderates income-decreasing earnings management, consistent with the idea that sample firms trade off capital market and regulatory considerations. Our results indicate that contemporary research methods can detect accruals-based earnings management in settings in which the incentives for earnings management can be clearly identified.

We investigate the effect of board gender diversity (BGD) on investment outcomes. We identify variation in BGD by compiling, for the first time, a global catalog of 83 BGD interventions implemented in 59 countries between 1999 and 2021. Using a staggered difference-in-differences research design, we document that BGD interventions improve investment outcomes. We find that treated firms reduce inefficient investment by 0.6 percent of total assets or 6.5 percent of total investment and are 4 percentage points more likely to have above-median investment efficiency. Cross-sectional tests reveal more pronounced results when BGD interventions are mandatory, are strongly enforced, and result in larger BGD increases. Event-time, stacked panel, and a wide variety of endogeneity-mitigating robustness tests corroborate. Our plausibly causal inferences have important implications for both research and practice.