The disciplinary role of the financial market could interact with a firm's choice of internal corporate governance. We prove that when the efficiency of the initial public offering (IPO) pricing improves, entrepreneurs choose stronger corporate governance structures as way of committing to extract fewer private benefits in exchange for higher prices. Using a difference-in-difference method that exploits the asymmetric impacts of the IPO pricing deregulation on the Chinese mainland and Hong Kong markets, we find that improving the efficiency of IPO pricing has a positive impact on a firm's corporate governance quality. This impact is more pronounced for firms with lower tangibility, for firms with higher market-to-book ratios, and for state-owned enterprises. Our findings demonstrate that the development of the financial market can promote economic development through improving corporate governance.

In this paper, we examine why Chinese reverse merger (RM) firms have lower financial reporting quality than U.S. IPO firms. We find that the financial reporting quality of U.S. RM firms is similar to that of matched U.S. IPO firms, but Chinese RM firms exhibit lower financial reporting quality than Chinese ADR firms. We also find that Chinese RM firms exhibit lower financial reporting quality than U.S. RM firms. These results indicate that the use of the RM process is associated with poor financial reporting quality only in firms from China, where legal enforcement and investor protection are weak. In addition, we find that compared with Chinese ADR firms, Chinese RM firms have weaker bonding incentives (as measured by CEO turnover-performance sensitivity) and poorer corporate governance. These factors, in turn, contribute to the lower financial reporting quality of Chinese RM firms. Overall, our results suggest that the less scrutinized RM process allows the Chinese firms with weak bonding incentives and poor governance to gain access to U.S. capital markets, resulting in poor financial reporting quality.