Corporate governance mechanisms designed to alleviate manager‐shareholder agency conflicts can worsen shareholder‐bondholder conflicts. This study examines how one such corporate governance mechanism, monitoring by large outside shareholders, influences the choice between public and private debt. I conjecture and find that firms with higher outside blockholdings are inclined to choose bank loans over public debt when they borrow, consistent with the notion that banks are better monitors than public debt markets. I also find that bank loans carry less price protection than corporate bonds against increased agency risk associated with outside blocks. Corroborating the monitoring story, I document that bank loans contain more accounting‐based covenants and dividend restriction provisions for firms with higher outside blockholdings than for those with lower blockholdings. I find no such relation for public debt covenants. This supports that banks' monitoring of their loans counters the agency risk caused by blockholders. This study extends prior research that associates governance mechanisms with agency costs of debt, by incorporating lenders' differential monitoring mechanisms in the overall corporate governance system.

We examine how regulatory restrictions on capital market activity affect the compensation contracting environment within firms. This study aims to expand our understanding of how financial market development affects firm risk‐taking via management compensation designs. Specifically, taking advantage of the staggered implementation of the Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act (IBBEA), which increases bank competition and loan geographical diversification, this study examines how borrowing firms' compensation structures change when banks increase risk tolerance in their loan portfolios. Using hand‐collected compensation data of firms with market capitalization less than $75 million, we hypothesize and find that borrowing firms are likely to increase risk incentives after IBBEA and that this increase is more pronounced for firms located in states with less banking competition in the pre‐IBBEA period. We also show the findings to be more significant for borrowers whose lenders acquire more diversification benefits after IBBEA. These findings suggest that following deregulation, when banks face increased competition as well as an enhanced ability to diversify their credit risk geographically, these same banks tend to increase their tolerance for borrowers' risk‐taking. That is, their clients—nonfinancial firms borrowing from them—adjust their compensation contracts that are previously constrained by bank distaste for risk. We also document that firms that increase their risk incentives the most invest more in R&D, suggesting that management compensation is a complementary channel through which IBBEA affects firm innovation.

We investigate how private information and monitoring affect the role of accounting quality in reducing the investment-cash flow sensitivity. We argue that access to private information and direct restrictions on investments are likely to affect the extent to which accounting quality reduces financing constraints. Our results suggest that for financially constrained firms, banks' access to private information decreases the value of accounting quality. We further find that, for both financially constrained and unconstrained firms, covenants directly restricting capital expenditures also mitigate the importance of accounting quality. Our results suggest that when information asymmetry problems are likely to be the largest, accounting quality is most important. However, the importance of accounting quality is mitigated if outside capital suppliers have access to private information and is eliminated if they impose contractual restrictions on investment. We also provide evidence that banks' access to private information reduces the cash flow sensitivity of cash and mitigates the importance of accounting quality in reducing this sensitivity. This additional evidence suggests that our investment-cash flow sensitivity results are not driven by measurement error of the investment opportunity set.

Les auteurs étudient comment l’information privilégiée et le contrôle continu influent sur le rôle de la qualité de la comptabilité dans la réduction de la sensibilité des investissements aux flux de trésorerie. Selon eux, l’accès à l’information privilégiée et les restrictions directes dont les investissements font l’objet sont susceptibles d’influer sur la mesure dans laquelle la qualité de la comptabilité réduit les contraintes financières. Les résultats de l’étude semblent indiquer que, dans le cas des sociétés soumises à des contraintes financières, l’accès des banques à l’information privilégiée atténue l’importance de la qualité de la comptabilité. Les auteurs constatent en outre que dans les sociétés, qu’elles soient ou non soumises à des contraintes financières, les clauses restrictives qui s’appliquent directement aux dépenses en immobilisations atténuent également l’importance de la qualité de la comptabilité. Les résultats de l’étude donnent à penser que, si les problèmes d’asymétrie de l’information sont susceptibles d’être très importants, la qualité de la comptabilité est elle aussi très importante. Toutefois, l’importance de la qualité de la comptabilité est moindre si les bailleurs de fonds externes ont accès à l’information privilégiée, et elle est nulle si ces bailleurs de fonds imposent à la société des restrictions contractuelles applicables aux investissements. Les auteurs démontrent également que l’accès des banques à l’information privilégiée réduit la sensibilité des liquidités aux flux de trésorerie et atténue l’importance de la qualité de la comptabilité dans la réduction de cette sensibilité. Cette preuve supplémentaire indique, semble‐t‐il, que les résultats obtenus par les auteurs en ce qui a trait à la sensibilité des investissements aux flux de trésorerie ne sont pas le fait d’une erreur de mesure de l’ensemble des occasions d’investissement.

We investigate how private information and monitoring affect the role of accounting quality in reducing the investment–cash flow sensitivity. We argue that access to private information and direct restrictions on investments are likely to affect the extent to which accounting quality reduces financing constraints. Our results suggest that, for financially constrained firms, banks’ access to private information decreases the value of accounting quality. We further find that, for both financially constrained and unconstrained firms, covenants directly restricting capital expenditures also mitigate the importance of accounting quality. Our results suggest that, when information asymmetry problems are likely to be the largest, accounting quality is most important. However, the importance of accounting quality is mitigated if outside capital suppliers have access to private information and is eliminated if they impose contractual restrictions on investment. We also provide evidence that banks’ access to private information reduces the cash flow sensitivity of cash and mitigates the importance of accounting quality in reducing this sensitivity. This additional evidence suggests that our investment–cash flow sensitivity results are not driven by measurement error of the investment opportunity set.

Based on a linear provision/charge-off association and V-shaped scatterplots of these variables against nonperforming loan changes, Basu et al. (2020) argue that nonperforming loan changes mis-measure credit quality and linear provision models are mis-specified. They conclude that residual asymmetry controlling for charge-offs results from loan heterogeneity and the real estate crisis. Using additions to nonaccruals to measure credit quality, we find a linear association with provisions, that controlling for charge-offs induces misspecification, and no evidence of provision asymmetry. These results highlight the importance of basing hypotheses and causal models on theoretical underpinnings rather than on plots subject to known fallacies.

We survey research on banks׳ financial accounting. After providing a brief background of the theoretical models and accounting and regulatory institutions underlying the bank accounting literature, we review three streams of empirical research. Specifically we review studies associating bank financial reporting with the valuation and risk assessments, associating bank financial reporting discretion with regulatory capital and earnings management, and examining banks’ economic decisions under differing accounting regimes. We discuss what we have already learned and about what else we would like to know. We also discuss methodological challenges associated with predicting the effects of alternative accounting and regulatory capital regimes.

Banks can decrease their future capital inadequacy concerns by reducing lending. The capital crunch theory predicts that lending is particularly sensitive to regulatory capital constraints during recessions, when regulatory capital declines and external-financing frictions increase. Regulators and policy makers argue that the current loan loss provisioning rules magnify this pro-cyclicality. Exploiting variation in the delay in expected loss recognition under the current incurred loss model, we find that reductions in lending during recessionary relative to expansionary periods are lower for banks that delay less. We also find that smaller delays reduce the recessionary capital crunch effect. These results hold across management quality partitions.

We investigate delegated monitoring by examining the determinants and effects of including cross-acceleration provisions in public debt contracts. We find that cross-acceleration provision use depends on borrowers' going concern relative to liquidation values, debt repayment structures, credit quality, and financial reporting quality. This suggests that the use of cross-acceleration provisions increases when the costs of cascading defaults are lower, the conflicts between creditor classes are higher, and the benefits of delegating monitoring to banks are higher. We also find a lower interest rate on public debt contracts with cross-acceleration provisions, but the rate reduction depends on borrowers' financial reporting quality.