This paper reviews the economic theory of regulation and surveys the empirical evidence on its application to past and recent changes in U.S. securities regulation. The theory provides multiple potential motives for regulation and cautions the empirical researcher against naïve modeling of the costs and benefits of regulatory change. Moreover, the nature of the regulatory process compounds the standard pitfalls of empirical analysis such as endogeneity and confounding events. Productive empirical techniques include the development of cross-sectional predictions of the effects of regulation as well as the use of unregulated control samples. An important avenue for future research is a more refined estimation of the extent to which regulation has unintended consequences.

[We provide new evidence on termination provisions and the takeover bidding process. Our central contribution is a novel database from Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) documents that accurately measures the incidence of termination provisions and the depth of competition in takeover deals. We show that biased data in prior research produced incorrect conclusions on the relation between termination provisions and judicial decisions, bidder toeholds, and deal size. Our comprehensive data also show that termination provisions are positively related to takeover competition. Our evidence is consistent with the information/commitment hypothesis in which termination provisions do not truncate bidding but instead culminate the takeover process.]

We provide new evidence on termination provisions and the takeover bidding process. Our central contribution is a novel database from Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) documents that accurately measures the incidence of termination provisions and the depth of competition in takeover deals. We show that biased data in prior research produced incorrect conclusions on the relation between termination provisions and judicial decisions, bidder toeholds, and deal size. Our comprehensive data also show that termination provisions are positively related to takeover competition. Our evidence is consistent with the information/commitment hypothesis in which termination provisions do not truncate bidding but instead culminate the takeover process.

As measured by the number of bidders that publicly attempt to acquire a target, the takeover arena in the 1990s appears noncompetitive. However, we provide novel data on the pre‐public, private takeover process that indicates that public takeover activity is only the tip of the iceberg of actual takeover competition during the 1990s. We show a highly competitive market where half of the targets are auctioned among multiple bidders, while the remainder negotiate with a single bidder. In event study analysis, we find that the wealth effects for target shareholders are comparable in auctions and negotiations.