We examine the impact of geographical proximity on the acquisition decisions of US public firms over the period 1990–2003. Transactions where the acquirer and target firms are located within 100 km of each other are classified as local transactions. We find that acquirer returns in local transactions are more than twice that in non-local transactions. The higher return to local acquirer is not explained by related, either horizontal or vertical, industry transactions, and appears to be related to information advantages arising from geographical proximity. These information advantages facilitate acquisition of targets that, on average, create higher overall return. The higher return to local acquirers is preserved by the use of target termination fee contracts.

Several recent papers document that the magnitude of potential gains from stock-based compensation is positively related to the likelihood of misreporting. In a sample of firms that announce restatements of their financial statements from 1997 to 2002, we examine whether managers realize these potential gains occurring from their accounting choices. After controlling for diversification needs and stock price impact, we find no significant evidence of higher option exercises by executives in the misreported years. However, for firms that are more likely to have made deliberate aggressive accounting choices, we find significant evidence of higher option exercises. For these firms, option exercises are higher by 20–60% in comparison to industry and size matched nonrestating firms. Options exercises by executives are also increasing in the magnitude of the restatement as captured by the effect of the restatement on net income. These higher option exercises tend to be more pervasive and are not just confined to the CEO and CFO of the firm.