Journal of Corporate Finance最新文献

Using a sample of Chinese firms from 2000 to 2018, we document that hometown firms (firms with hometown chairpersons) engage in less green innovation than non-hometown firms. Evidence suggests that local stakeholders offer hometown chairpersons more protection from environmental consequences than non-hometown chairpersons. We identify two possible mechanisms: government patronage and accommodation by local supply chain partners. Furthermore, we find that the double standards are alleviated with insignificant difference in corporate green innovation when non-hometown chairpersons marry hometown spouses or build local political relationships. Additional analyses suggest that (1) the double standards drive hometown firms to emit more pollutants than non-hometown firms, (2) when a firm is under government scrutiny for environmental issues, located in the city with severe air pollution, or in heavily polluting industries, the adverse effect of a chairperson's hometown on green innovation is minimal, and (3) our findings on green innovation also extend to a decrease in the number of pollutant treatment facilities and treatment capacity in a firm.

This paper presents evidence that the reduction in option tick size enhances equity price efficiency. To address the endogeneity issue, I employ an exogenous event, namely the Penny Pilot program. The findings indicate that option trading mitigates equity misvaluation, reduces price delay, accelerates the incorporation of future earnings into equity prices, and eliminates the well-known Post-Earnings Announcement Drift (PEAD). The pilot program significantly increases trading volume and reduces trading costs during the pilot period. Furthermore, the effect of options-to-stock volume on future stock returns is stronger in firms with high short-sale costs. This evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that informed trading boosts trading volume in the options market and integrates information from the options market into equity prices, thereby enhancing equity price efficiency.

Political uncertainty represents a key determinant of corporate investment decisions. In this paper, we study the relation between political uncertainty and investment from the perspective of institutional investors. Using U.S. equity holdings data from 13F filings, we find that institutional investors herd during politically uncertain times. This trading behavior is stronger when U.S. presidents are unpopular, due to their proclivity for controversial policies, and among riskier stocks. We also find that this mechanism, despite generating some excess trading, helps incorporate a risk premium into stock prices. Overall, the findings unveil a new channel through which political uncertainty affects financial markets.

Using a sample of U.S. IPOs from 2000–2019, we show that IPOs with at least one female director experience significantly greater underpricing on the first trading day. The effect is not attributable to the previously documented determinants of underpricing or other firm or director characteristics. The underpricing effect is the strongest after 2010—when pressures were placed on firms to diversify their boards—and the effect is mitigated in the very last years of the sample—where we find that gender-diverse board IPOs realize greater offer price revisions and final offer prices, relative to non-diverse board IPOs. The dynamic relation between board gender diversity and IPO price formation coincides with the timing of the diversity campaigns of BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard, suggesting that investor demand for board gender diversity was not fully incorporated into IPO offer prices until this demand was widely publicized.

We find that Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) with greater career concerns are more diligent and conservative in preparing financial statements during an Initial Public Offering (IPO). Additional tests exploiting exogenous variation in managerial career concerns suggest that our documented relations are not sensitive to unobservable omitted factors. Furthermore, we document that CFOs who are relatively more concerned about their future job prospects are more sensitive when there is greater scrutiny or higher litigation risk and are less likely to succumb to undue pressures from influential shareholders to exaggerate the firm's prospects. Finally, we show that CFOs with longer decision horizons prefer more transparency during the IPO process, which in turn, translates to superior post-IPO performance and better labor market outcomes than their counterparts. Overall, our findings indicate that career concerns play a disciplining role during IPOs and that CFOs exploit these high-visibility events to accelerate their career trajectory.

We analyze PIPE (Private Investments in Public Equity) transactions in which the issuer experienced class action lawsuits. We explain the associated information effects measured by the announcement wealth effects and the discounts. Using a comprehensive, hand-gathered dataset, we show that the more severely litigated PIPEs are associated with higher announcement wealth effects and higher levels of discounts. We find that the issuer's voluntary disclosure positively influences PIPE information effects particularly when coupled with auditor changes. We report that certain mitigation actions affect the pricing of PIPEs along with their associated wealth effects while facing ongoing litigation. We posit that confidentiality in privately negotiated securities is the key in litigated transactions as issuers efficiently share the operational details of mitigation efforts. PIPE transactions are not necessarily costlier funding venues even when securities class action lawsuits are ongoing compared to the PIPE transactions that did not experience any prior litigation action.

We examine the impact of incentive fees paid to IPO underwriters at issuers' discretion on IPO pricing and short-term performance. We expect that better-incentivized underwriters produce more information required for IPO pricing reducing underwriters' reliance on investors' information production which requires compensation through IPO underpricing. Using a novel dataset, we find that incentive compensation mitigates the partial-adjustment phenomenon. IPOs with stronger incentives have more informative price ranges, higher price revisions, longer road shows and lower initial returns largely due to interaction effects between underwriters' incentives and their information-production capabilities. Using a battery of tests and addressing endogeneity, our results remain robust.

We construct and compare aggregate measures of profits for the U.S. non-financial corporate sector over the period 1946–2016. The measures commonly show that the profit share is declining from 1946 to the early 1980s and has been increasing since. As a share of gross value added, profits today are higher than they were in 1984, but lower than their value in the years after World War II.

We develop a continuous-time model in which an ESG investor hires a manager to run a project and incentivizes the manager to fulfill ESG responsibilities. The manager’s private efforts and ESG investing determine the project’s cash flow and ESG performance subject to random shocks. We derive the optimal contract and its implementation after introducing carbon credits following the cap-and-trade program in practice. We provide comparative static analysis and empirical implications. The results demonstrate that ESG investing enhances contract efficiency. The more significant the carbon emission reduction, or the less the cost of ESG investing, the higher the contract efficiency, the average $q$, the marginal $q$, and the optimal investment–capital ratios, implying that ESG investing mitigates inefficiencies arising from information asymmetry and enhances investment values. Our model predictions are partially verified by empirical facts.

We develop a search model of mergers and acquisitions (M&A), intermediated by private equity (PE) funds which may face pressure to sell. The selling pressure leads to the development of a secondary buyout (SBO) market, enabling PE funds to bail each other out. Interestingly, an increase in the number of PE funds can improve each fund’s value, because the enhanced benefits of SBOs can prevail over the reduction in value from narrower buy-sell spreads due to more intense competition. We calibrate the model using data for the US middle market and find that PE funds could lose 64% of their valuation without SBOs. Moreover, the increase in the number of funds from 2000 to 2017 contributes to a 48% increase in fund valuation due to the complementarity among funds. Nevertheless, our model predicts that this mechanism might have peaked in 2021, and more PE funds could decrease their value.