Borrowers from the same state as the chairman of the US Senate Banking Committee (“connected borrowers”) are able to borrow at spreads 19 bps lower than other borrowers. Banks that provide connected loans enjoy regulatory relief in the form of fewer future investigations. Connected borrowers' contributions toward the chairman are influenced by their cost of loans, but the same is not true for nonconnected borrowers. Findings suggest the chairman is incentivized by re-election to help connected borrowers obtain cheaper loans. Results are largely consistent with the existence of an indirect triangular quid pro quo relationship between firms, banks, and politicians.

The opening of equity markets to foreign investment by developing countries appears to generate an enormously large positive growth effect (see Bekaert, Harvey, and Lundblad (2005), Journal of Financial Economics 77, 3–55) in spite of a relatively small role of such markets for financing investment in most economies. We propose a spillover channel from equity market opening to lower costs of bank loans, which helps to explain this puzzle. From analyzing bank loan data associated with China’s introduction of the Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors program, we find significant support for this channel. Furthermore, we show that a reduction in the risk premium in loans is an important mechanism.

This paper examines the benefits of having an executive or director elected as a fellow of the Chinese Academies of Sciences and Engineering (i.e., a star academician). Evidence indicates that markets react positively to news of company executives/directors being elected. We further document that having a fellow spurs innovation, brings additional government subsidy, increases Tobin's q, lowers costs of capital, attracts analyst attention, and suppresses audit fees in the years following successful elections. These outcomes appear to be largely driven by fellows who (i) are executives rather than non-executive directors, and (ii) have held no government office.

We exploit Donald Trump’s nonpolitical background and surprise election victory to identify the value of sudden presidential ties among S&P 500 firms. In our setting firms did not choose to become politically connected, so we identify treatment effects comparatively free of selection bias prevalent in this literature. Firms with presidential ties enjoyed greater abnormal returns around the 2016 election. Since Trump’s inauguration, connected firms had better performance, received more government contracts, and were less subject to unfavorable regulatory actions. We rule out a number of confounding factors, including industry designation, sensitivity to Republican platforms, campaign finance, and lobbying expenditures.