Debt-financed share buybacks generate positive short-term and long-run abnormal stock returns. Leveraged buyback firms have more debt capacity, higher marginal tax rate, lower excess cash and lower growth prospects ex ante, increase leverage and reduce investments more sharply ex post than cash-financed buyback firms. Firms that are over-levered ex-ante are associated with lower returns and real investments following leveraged buybacks. The lower announcement returns of over-levered firms are concentrated on firms with weaker corporate governance. The evidence is consistent with leveraged buybacks enabling firms to optimize their leverage, on average benefiting shareholders. The benefits decrease with a firm's leverage ex ante.

Using Internet search volume of dividend-related keywords to measure investor preference for dividends that varies over time and across states, we show that dividend sentiment affects corporate policies and asset prices. Investors search more for dividends when economic conditions are poor, with the peak volume reached during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Firms initiate or increase dividends when dividend sentiment is stronger, especially in regions with strong dividend sentiment. Shifts in dividend sentiment predict higher investor demand for dividends and higher returns for high dividend stocks. Further, mutual funds that pay high dividends receive more inflows when dividend sentiment is stronger.

We investigate whether chief financial officers (CFOs) serving on U.S. corporate boards benefit shareholders in M&A transactions. We find that acquisitions made by firms with CFOs on boards have significantly better acquirer announcement returns. This is due to the CFO director’s ability to select targets with better strategic and financial fit. CFO board membership can create shareholder value if there are effective governance regimes restraining managerial entrenchment and CFOs’ interests are closely aligned with those of shareholders through equity ownership. Furthermore, sitting on boards enables CFOs to secure more and cheaper financing for their acquisitions.

This paper analyzes the effect that the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision on Citizens United vs. FEC had on corporate political activism. The decision opened the door for corporate treasuries to engage in independent political spending. Politically connected firms have lower announcement returns at the ruling than non-connected firms. The estimates suggest that the value of a political connection decreases by $6.9 million. To evaluate the effect of Citizens United on corporate political activism, we explore the fact that Citizens United also lifts bans on independent political spending in states where such bans existed. After the ruling, firms headquartered in states where bans are lifted have fewer state-level connections relative to firms in other states. Overall, our evidence supports the hypothesis that independent political spending crowds out political connections. We do not find any significant crowding-out effects of independent political expenditures on lobbying activity, executive contributions, and political action committees (PAC) contributions.

We examine the association between CEO birthplace proximity and financial misconduct. We find that CEOs managing firms near their birthplaces (home CEOs) are associated with less financial misconduct compared to other CEOs. This association is not attributable to differences in corporate governance. The relationship strengthens in areas with a strong local investment presence and greater religious commitment as well as among CEOs with longer tenures in their home state. Our findings are robust to addressing potential selection and omitted variable biases as well as to conducting multiple robustness tests, including analyses of involuntary CEO changes and headquarters relocations. We also find a similar association for CFOs, with firms employing home CFOs exhibiting less financial misconduct.

We examine the relation between home CEOs and corporate social responsibility (CSR). Our analysis shows home CEOs are associated with higher CSR engagement and increased firm value. These firms exhibit higher asset turnover, lower cost of equity , improved productivity, sales, and profit margins. Home CEOs focus more on community, environmental, and employee-related CSR, and are linked to reduced carbon emissions . This relationship is stronger in firms with higher local business concentration and investor monitoring. Firms led by home CEOs earn higher returns during recent crises. Our results suggest the value increase is not primarily due to agency effects and remain robust to endogeneity concerns. The study indicates a CEO’s community connection may influence CSR effectiveness, suggesting that mere CSR engagement may not suffice to boost trust and value. These results highlight the potential importance of local ties in corporate leadership and CSR strategy.