Using panel data on U.S. public firms, we document a positive effect of board independence on corporate innovation. This effect is concentrated in firms that are larger in size, in the non-technical industries, facing less product market competition, and using more debt, where managers are more likely to be excessively risk averse. We establish causality of board independence on innovation using a difference-in-difference approach that exploits an exogenous shock to board composition, namely, the mandate of a majority of outside directors on company boards by NYSE and NASDAQ in response to the passage of Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002. We further examine incentive compensation as a possible mechanism. We show that firms with more independent boards use more equity-based compensation, especially stock options, to promote managerial risk-taking.

Banks play a central role in creating liquidity for the economy by financing illiquid assets with liquid liabilities. This paper examines the effect of accounting restatements on bank liquidity creation. Using a difference-in-differences research design, I show that restatements trigger a significant reduction in liquidity creation. This effect derives mainly from banks shifting away from illiquid assets and toward liquid assets. Further analysis reveals that restatements affect liquidity creation through supervisory enforcement actions and unravelling of risk exposures accumulated in the misreporting period. Government deposit insurance blunts the effect of an information asymmetry channel.

A key distinction between some models of IPO pricing (e.g., auctions and bookbuilding) and others (e.g., fixed-priced models) is whether price discovery occurs in the primary or secondary market. Higher investment bank reputation is associated with 1) more active filing price revisions and 2) reduced secondary market volatility, indicating greater resolution of uncertainty before trading begins. Revisions of nonreputable banks cluster on exactly zero dollars. Finally, the “partial adjustment” phenomenon – often attributed to information aggregation – is primarily due to the behavior of reputable underwriters. We conclude that theoretical models of primary market information aggregation are better suited for reputable underwriters.

Compared with the previous literature on external FinTech, this paper is more interested in the role played by bank FinTech. On the basis of panel data from Chinese commercial banks spanning 2010–2021, this paper investigates the impact of digital transformation on bank soundness and its potential mechanisms. The empirical findings demonstrate a positive association between digital transformation and bank soundness, driven primarily by strategic and management digitization. Mechanistic analysis indicates that digital transformation improves bank soundness by mitigating risk-taking behavior and promoting diversification. The positive effect of digital transformation is more pronounced in state-owned and joint-stock banks, banks with higher liquidity mismatch and in the subsamples with greater levels of external FinTech development and economic policy uncertainty. Additional analysis suggests that digital transformation can still enhance bank soundness even in the presence of relatively lenient monetary and macroprudential policies, highlighting the harmonization and complementarity between internal innovation from digital transformation and external regulatory policies in maintaining banking stability. Overall, this paper contributes to the literature on bank FinTech, which focuses on the factors influencing bank stability. This study also provides a novel explanation for the relationship between financial innovation and financial stability.

This paper provides new evidence on the roles and strategies adopted by different types of debtor-in-possession (DIP) lenders: “loan-to-loan” (LTL) lenders—prepetition secured bank lenders providing DIP financing, and “loan-to-own” (LTO) lenders—activist investors (i.e., hedge funds or private equity funds) providing DIP financing. We find that LTL is more likely in Chapter 11 firms with better operating performance, when prepetition bank lenders' stakes are at risk, or when they have prior lending relationships with the distressed borrower. In contrast, LTO is more likely in small firms or when prepetition bank lenders' loans are over-collateralized. Finally, we show that much of the governance improvement at the emergence is attributed to LTO lenders. We conclude that creditors of different institutional types adopt distinct strategies to enforce their control rights under Chapter 11 reorganization and to have contrasting effects on the governance outcomes of emerged firms.

We show that when banks and borrowers share the same audit firm, borrowers receive lower interest rates, after controlling for potentially confounding director connectedness. The common auditor effect is observed only for opaque borrowers, and is greatest when the same audit engagement office audits the bank and borrower. A common auditor connection also matters more for longer‐tenured auditors, for geographically proximate borrowers, and when the syndicate involves fewer lenders. The effect does not hold for auditors recently sanctioned by the PCAOB. Finally, the interest rate discount is not the consequence of homophily or biased decision making, based on a comparison of postloan performance of firms with common auditor loans versus those with noncommon auditor loans.

Large net loan charge-offs are frequently associated with large decreases in nonperforming loans and large increases in loan loss provisions, inducing a V-shaped relation between loan loss provisions and nonperforming loan changes. Failure to model the asymmetry attributable to net loan charge-offs can change inferences about the presence of earnings management and the effects of delayed loan loss recognition in prior papers that assumed linearity. Future researchers should either include net loan charge-offs in linear models of loan loss provisions or explicitly model the asymmetry induced by omitting net loan charge-offs.

Exploiting the staggered enactment of country‐level mergers and acquisitions (M&A) law as an exogenous increase in corporate takeover threat, this paper examines how a disciplinary market for corporate control affects accounting conservatism. Following M&A law adoption, we find increased accounting conservatism, with more pronounced effects in countries with weak shareholder protection and in those experiencing larger growth in takeover activity. Further analysis reveals that elevated takeover threats increase conservatism through changes in capital structure and investment decisions as well as improvements in board monitoring. Our findings highlight the importance of the market for corporate control in shaping financial‐reporting outcome.

We examine whether firms exploit enforcement heterogeneity in response to a heightened risk of investigation by regional Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) enforcement offices. We find that firms facing high SEC scrutiny risks are more likely to relocate outside the jurisdiction of the SEC regional office. The likelihood of out-of-SEC relocation becomes at least two times higher after exogenous shocks to local SEC enforcement. High scrutiny-risk firms tend to migrate to regions with weaker SEC enforcement history and regions with more peers engaging in misbehavior. Scrutiny shopping is more salient for firms with lower costs of relocation.

We show that banks with high environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings issue fewer mortgages in poor localities—in number and dollar amount—than banks with low ESG ratings. This lending disparity happens at both the county and census tract level, worsens in disaster areas of severe hurricane strikes, is robust to alternative ESG ratings (including using only the social (S) component), and cannot be explained by banks’ differential deposit networks. We find no difference in mortgage default rates between high- and low-ESG banks, rejecting an alternative explanation based on differential credit screening quality. We report a complementary, not substitution, relation between high-ESG banks’ mortgage lending and their community development investments (like affordable housing projects) in poor localities. Loan-application-level analyses confirm that high-ESG banks are more likely than low-ESG banks to reject mortgage loans in poor neighborhoods. The evidence hints at social wash: banks deploy prosocial rhetoric and symbolic actions while not lending much in disadvantaged communities, the social function they arguably ought to perform. Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) examinations partially undo the social wash effect.