Half of individuals released from prison in the United States will be re-incarcerated within three years, creating an incarceration cycle that is detrimental to individuals, families, and communities. There is tremendous public interest in ending this cycle, and public policies can help or hinder the reintegration of those released from jail and prison. This review summarizes the existing empirical evidence on how to intervene with existing offenders to reduce criminal behavior and improve social welfare. (JEL D91, I18, I28, I38, K42, R23)

Abstract Many of the events that trigger clawback provisions are associated with risky corporate policies and variable performance outcomes. We propose and test the hypothesis that clawback provisions motivate managers to reduce firm risk. Panel ordinary least squares, general method of moments with instrumental variables, and propensity square matching models all indicate that clawback provisions decrease the volatility of stock returns. The channels that connect clawback presence to firm risk include more conservative investment and financial policies. The clawback-induced reduction in risk-taking appears to benefit shareholders on average. The gains from reduced risk-taking are larger for firms with fewer growth options, lower R&D, and prior wrongdoing. (JEL G32, G34, J33, M41, M52, M55)

Abstract We study the effects of time-varying volatility and investment horizon on the economic significance of stock market return predictability from the perspective of Bayesian investors. Using a vector autoregression framework with stochastic volatility (SV) in market returns and predictor variables, we assess a broad set of twenty-six predictors with both in-sample and out-of-sample designs. Volatility and horizon are critically important for assessing return predictors, as these factors affect how an investor learns about predictability and how she chooses to invest based on return forecasts. We find that statistically strong predictors can be economically unimportant if they tend to take extreme values in high volatility periods, have low persistence, or follow distributions with fat tails. Several popular predictors exhibit these properties such that their impressive statistical results do not translate into large economic gains. We also demonstrate that incorporating SV leads to substantial utility gains in real-time forecasting.

This study examines the stock market reaction to the unprecedented leaks of confidential advance tax rulings between Luxembourg and multinational corporations—also known as the “LuxLeaks.” Contrary to the negative market reaction to tax shelter news documented in prior research, we find that investors responded positively to these leaks. This reaction is concentrated among U.S. firms. Furthermore, we document a positive association between abnormal returns and the reduction in firms' tax uncertainty, consistent with a downward revision in investors' perception of the tax uncertainty associated with the firms' Luxembourg operations. We also investigate other firm characteristics and find that, among U.S. firms, investors' reaction is weaker for those over-invested in tax avoidance. Among non-U.S. firms, the market response is muted by concerns about the quality of governance. In summary, our results suggest that investors' reaction to tax shelter news is conditional on their reassessment of the firms' tax uncertainty.

ABSTRACT Stock exchanges are important intermediaries in how firm information enters price. Trading halts are a key tool, often exercised at the exchanges' discretion, to prevent extraordinary price volatility when new information arrives. We investigate how exchanges use discretion and whether the discretion alters the effectiveness of the halts. We provide evidence consistent with halts reflecting the preferences of listed firms rather than the stated exchange objectives (i.e., minimizing excess volatility and off‐equilibrium trades). Furthermore, when exchanges exercise more discretion (unexplained by firm and information characteristics), the halts are less effective. Specifically, halts with more discretion are less likely to resume trading with efficient prices and are more likely to have been called unnecessarily (i.e., little to no price movement during the halt). These findings are consistent with exchanges using halts to cater to listed firms rather than to meet exchange objectives such as minimizing excess volatility or avoiding trades at off‐equilibrium prices.

We study the roles of the head office (HO) and the business units (BUs) of a multinational corporation (MNC) in reducing income tax and tariff payments through internal transfer prices in international trades. Using confidential transfer price data of a large MNC, we analyze how the different elements of internal transfer prices set by the HO and BUs vary differently from external prices with income tax rates, tariff rates, and the tradeoff between the two. Absent severe agency conflicts, we find that the BUs contribute more to tax planning than the HO, despite that explicit incentives to do so are not included in the compensation schemes. The roles of the HO and BUs vary with product market competition, the risk of conflicts with tax and customs authorities, and agency problems within the firm. Moreover, we provide evidence of strategic trade cost allocations among BUs to reduce income taxes.

Can fintech close the gender gap in access to financial services? Using novel survey data for 28 countries, this paper finds a large and ubiquitous ‘fintech gender gap’: while 29% of men use fintech products, only 21% of women do. This difference exceeds the gender gap in bank account ownership at traditional financial institutions. While country characteristics and individual-level controls explain about a third of the fintech gender gap, the residual gap declines by 60% when accounting for gender differences in the willingness to use new financial technology, the suitability of fintech products, and the willingness to use fintech entrants if they offer cheaper products. The paper concludes by discussing drivers of differences in attitudes and implications for policy to foster financial inclusion with new technology.

Abstract The vast majority of managers’ earnings forecasts are issued concurrently (i.e., bundled) with their firm’s current earnings announcement. We document a predictable bias in these forecasts—the forecasts fail to fully reflect the persistence of the current earnings surprise. Specifically, we find that managers issue (1) optimistically biased forecasts alongside negative earnings surprises and (2) pessimistically biased forecasts alongside large positive earnings surprises. Bayesian updating implies this bias could be unintentional, but we find that the bias is stronger when managers have greater incentives and fewer constraints to issue biased forecasts, suggesting that, to some extent, the bias might be intentional. Relatedly, although managers typically have better information about their firm’s earnings than analysts, we show that analyst reliance on these biased management forecasts represents a mechanism (and an alternative interpretation) for a similar analyst underreaction to current earnings attributed in the literature to analysts’ cognitive bias. We also find that, on average, investors do not appear to initially understand the bias in these forecasts but do unravel it over longer windows. However, investors more quickly unravel the bias when the manager has a history of issuing biased forecasts and when the firm has more sophisticated investors. Overall, we document that managers’ forecasts appear to repeatedly underweight the persistence of current earnings surprises, are biased in ways that improve investors’ perceptions of managers’ ability, and that this behavior concentrates in subsamples where outsiders have a harder time recognizing any bias.