Mandatory vs. Contractual Disclosure in Securities Markets: Evidence from the 1930s

P. Mahoney, J. Mei
{"title":"Mandatory vs. Contractual Disclosure in Securities Markets: Evidence from the 1930s","authors":"P. Mahoney, J. Mei","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.883706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper studies mandatory disclosure documents filed during the period 1933-35 in response to the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Our sample companies are all listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and therefore subject to the NYSE’s disclosure requirements at the time of the regulatory filings. We ask whether the additional disclosures contained in the filed documents constitute information. Using newly-available daily price, volume, and bid and ask quotation data, we test whether the filings are associated with changes in bid-ask spreads, return autocovariance, turnover, volatility, or no-trade days. We find almost no evidence that the new disclosures required by the securities laws—principally having to do with management compensation and large shareholdings—reduced informational asymmetry. We also find no evidence that earnings reports were more informative after enactment of the securities laws.","PeriodicalId":336554,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Law: Securities Law","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Law: Securities Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.883706","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

This paper studies mandatory disclosure documents filed during the period 1933-35 in response to the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Our sample companies are all listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and therefore subject to the NYSE’s disclosure requirements at the time of the regulatory filings. We ask whether the additional disclosures contained in the filed documents constitute information. Using newly-available daily price, volume, and bid and ask quotation data, we test whether the filings are associated with changes in bid-ask spreads, return autocovariance, turnover, volatility, or no-trade days. We find almost no evidence that the new disclosures required by the securities laws—principally having to do with management compensation and large shareholdings—reduced informational asymmetry. We also find no evidence that earnings reports were more informative after enactment of the securities laws.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
证券市场的强制性披露与契约性披露:来自20世纪30年代的证据
本文研究1933-35年间根据1933年《证券法》和1934年《证券交易法》提交的强制性披露文件。我们的样本公司都在纽约证券交易所(NYSE)上市,因此在提交监管文件时要遵守纽约证券交易所的披露要求。我们询问提交的文件中包含的额外披露是否构成信息。使用最新的每日价格、成交量和买卖报价数据,我们测试这些文件是否与买卖价差、回报自协方差、周转率、波动性或无交易日的变化有关。我们发现几乎没有证据表明证券法要求的新披露——主要是与管理层薪酬和大股东有关——减少了信息不对称。我们也没有发现证据表明,在证券法颁布后,收益报告的信息更丰富。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How Should a Firm Go Public? A Dynamic Model of the Choice between Fixed-Price Offerings and Auctions in Ipos and Privatizations Do we need a European 'National Market System'? Competition, Arbitrage, and Suboptimal Executions Emergency Short Selling Restrictions in the Course of the Financial Crisis Litigation Governance: Taking Accountability Seriously The SEC and the Madoff Scandal: Three Narratives in Search of a Story
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1