I study the driving forces behind dividend smoothing by developing a dynamic agency model in which dividends signal the earnings persistence of firms. In equilibrium, managers treat dividends and earnings as informational substitutes. They smooth dividends relative to earnings to smooth negative news releases and lower their turnover risk. Empirical estimates of the model parameters imply that 39% of observed dividend smoothness among U.S. firms is driven by managers’ own career concerns, not shareholders’ preferences. Managers cut investments and adjust external financing policies to accommodate this career-concern-based dividend smoothing. These effects lead to a 2% decline in firm value. Received May 28, 2016; editorial decision September 13, 2017 by Editor David Denis.

We quantify the importance of collateral versus taxes for firms' capital structures. We estimate a dynamic model in which a taxable firm seeks financing for investment, and a dynamic contracting environment motivates endogenous collateral constraints. Optimal leverage stays a safe distance from the constraint, balancing the tax benefit of debt with the cost of lost financial flexibility. We estimate this flexibility cost to be 7.2% of firm assets, a percentage that is comparable to the tax benefit. Models with different tax rates fit the data equally well, and leverage responds to the tax rate only when taxes are low.

How and to what extent do managerial control benefits shape the efficiency of the takeover market? We revisit this question by estimating both the dark and bright sides of managerial control benefits in an industry equilibrium model. On the dark side, managers’ private benefits of control distort firms’ takeover incentives and hinder the reallocation role of the takeover market. On the bright side, fear of a takeover induces underperforming managers to exert more effort and enhances the disciplinary role of the takeover market. Our estimates suggest that the bright-side effect increases the value created by an active takeover market by 21%, comparable in magnitude to the dark-side effect. It is also important to account for this bright-side effect in explaining certain features of the takeover market, including a low takeover-performance sensitivity.

How does firm-specific human capital shape careers in the finance industry? We build a dynamic model where workers accumulate portable and nonportable (firm-specific) human capital and learn about their match quality with employers. Estimating the model using granular data on M&A advisory bankers, we show that a large fraction of bankers’ human capital is nonportable, ranging from 12% to 46% across different firm types. Bankers make a dynamic trade-off between portability and returns on human capital, leading to time-varying job preferences over their life cycle. Our results have broad implications for careers in finance and the provision of financial services.

We quantify the importance of collateral versus taxes for firms' capital structures. We estimate a dynamic model in which a taxable firm seeks financing for investment, and a dynamic contracting environment motivates endogenous collateral constraints. Optimal leverage stays a safe distance from the constraint, balancing the tax benefit of debt with the cost of lost financial flexibility. We estimate this flexibility cost to be 7.2% of firm assets, a percentage that is comparable to the tax benefit. Models with different tax rates fit the data equally well, and leverage responds to the tax rate only when taxes are low.

Fluctuations in investor demand significantly affect firms’ valuation and access to capital. To quantify their real effects, we develop a dynamic investment model, incorporating both the demand and supply sides of capital. Strong investor demand relaxes financial constraints and facilitates equity issuance and investment, while weak demand encourages opportunistic share repurchases, crowding out investment. We estimate the model using indirect inference, matching the endogenous relationship between investor demand and firm policies. Our estimation reveals that demand fluctuations are important drivers of firm-level investment and economy-wide capital misallocation, accounting for 26.9% of dispersion in MPK and 23.4% of productivity losses.

We quantify the impact of bank market power on monetary policy transmission through banks to borrowers. We estimate a dynamic banking model in which monetary policy affects imperfectly competitive banks' funding costs. Banks optimize the pass‐through of these costs to borrowers and depositors, while facing capital and reserve regulation. We find that bank market power explains much of the transmission of monetary policy to borrowers, with an effect comparable to that of bank capital regulation. When the federal funds rate falls below 0.9%, market power interacts with bank capital regulation to produce a reversal of the effect of monetary policy.

This paper studies the value of a firm’s internal information when the firm faces an adverse selection problem arising from unobservable managerial abilities. Although more precise information allows the firm to make ex post more efficient investment decisions, noisier information has an ex ante screening effect that allows the firm to attract on-average better managers. The tradeoff between more effective screening of managers and more informed investment implies a nonmonotonic relationship between firm value and information quality. A marginal improvement in information quality does not necessarily lead to an overall improvement in firm value.