以股换股收购中的购买与集中:为什么公司会在意

David Aboody, Ron Kasznik, Michael Williams
{"title":"以股换股收购中的购买与集中:为什么公司会在意","authors":"David Aboody, Ron Kasznik, Michael Williams","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.246775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We investigate firms' financial reporting policies with respect to business combinations, particularly the choice between the purchase and pooling-of-interests methods. To control for potentially confounding effects related to the method of acquisition financing, we focus on a sample of stock-for stock acquisitions. We provide evidence that the accounting method choice is jointly determined by the size of the step-up, i.e., the premium paid over the book value of the acquired firm and which is recognized under the purchase method, and proxies for economic benefits derived from accounting-based contracts. In particular, we find that, when the business combination involves a large step-up to the target's net assets, CEOs with earnings-based compensation plans are more likely than others to incur the costs of qualifying for pooling and avoid the earnings 'penalty' associated with the purchase method. However, we find no association between stock-based compensation and the purchase-pooling choice, suggesting managers are not concerned about implications of large step-ups for firms' equity values. We also find no support for the prediction that top executives' preference for pooling is greater when their job security is relatively low. Finally, consistent with the favorable balance sheet effects of the purchase method, we find that the likelihood of pooling decreases with the acquirer's debt-equity ratio, a proxy for debt contracting costs. We also predict and find an association between the purchase-pooling choice and potential costs related to meeting the restrictive pooling criteria. In particular, we find that firms for which the pooling requirement of no share repurchases appears to be binding (firms that have already announced a share repurchase plan and/or have a large number of outstanding employee stock options) are less likely than others to use pooling. However, we do not find that firms for which the requirement of no post-acquisition divestitures of the target's assets may be binding are less likely to use pooling.","PeriodicalId":180033,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting Abstracts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"105","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Purchase Versus Pooling in Stock-for-Stock Acquisitions: Why Do Firms Care\",\"authors\":\"David Aboody, Ron Kasznik, Michael Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.246775\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We investigate firms' financial reporting policies with respect to business combinations, particularly the choice between the purchase and pooling-of-interests methods. To control for potentially confounding effects related to the method of acquisition financing, we focus on a sample of stock-for stock acquisitions. We provide evidence that the accounting method choice is jointly determined by the size of the step-up, i.e., the premium paid over the book value of the acquired firm and which is recognized under the purchase method, and proxies for economic benefits derived from accounting-based contracts. In particular, we find that, when the business combination involves a large step-up to the target's net assets, CEOs with earnings-based compensation plans are more likely than others to incur the costs of qualifying for pooling and avoid the earnings 'penalty' associated with the purchase method. However, we find no association between stock-based compensation and the purchase-pooling choice, suggesting managers are not concerned about implications of large step-ups for firms' equity values. We also find no support for the prediction that top executives' preference for pooling is greater when their job security is relatively low. Finally, consistent with the favorable balance sheet effects of the purchase method, we find that the likelihood of pooling decreases with the acquirer's debt-equity ratio, a proxy for debt contracting costs. We also predict and find an association between the purchase-pooling choice and potential costs related to meeting the restrictive pooling criteria. In particular, we find that firms for which the pooling requirement of no share repurchases appears to be binding (firms that have already announced a share repurchase plan and/or have a large number of outstanding employee stock options) are less likely than others to use pooling. However, we do not find that firms for which the requirement of no post-acquisition divestitures of the target's assets may be binding are less likely to use pooling.\",\"PeriodicalId\":180033,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Accounting Abstracts\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"105\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Accounting Abstracts\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.246775\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting Abstracts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.246775","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 105

摘要

我们调查公司的财务报告政策与企业合并,特别是购买和利益集中方法之间的选择。为了控制与收购融资方法相关的潜在混淆效应,我们将重点放在股票收购的股票样本上。我们提供的证据表明,会计方法的选择是由上升的规模共同决定的,即根据购买方法确认的支付超过被收购公司账面价值的溢价,以及从基于会计的合同中获得的经济利益的代理。特别是,我们发现,当企业合并涉及到目标公司净资产的大幅增加时,拥有基于收益的薪酬计划的首席执行官比其他人更有可能承担合并资格的成本,并避免与购买方法相关的收益“惩罚”。然而,我们发现基于股票的薪酬与购买池选择之间没有关联,这表明管理者并不关心公司股权价值大幅提升的影响。我们也没有发现当工作保障相对较低时,高管更倾向于池化的预测得到支持。最后,与收购方法对资产负债表的有利影响相一致,我们发现合并的可能性随着收购方的债务权益比率(债务承包成本的代表)而降低。我们还预测并发现了采购池选择与满足限制性池标准相关的潜在成本之间的关联。特别是,我们发现,对于那些没有股票回购的合并要求似乎具有约束力的公司(已经宣布了股票回购计划和/或拥有大量未偿还员工股票期权的公司),使用合并的可能性比其他公司要小。然而,我们并没有发现那些在收购后不剥离目标资产的要求可能具有约束力的公司不太可能使用池化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Purchase Versus Pooling in Stock-for-Stock Acquisitions: Why Do Firms Care
We investigate firms' financial reporting policies with respect to business combinations, particularly the choice between the purchase and pooling-of-interests methods. To control for potentially confounding effects related to the method of acquisition financing, we focus on a sample of stock-for stock acquisitions. We provide evidence that the accounting method choice is jointly determined by the size of the step-up, i.e., the premium paid over the book value of the acquired firm and which is recognized under the purchase method, and proxies for economic benefits derived from accounting-based contracts. In particular, we find that, when the business combination involves a large step-up to the target's net assets, CEOs with earnings-based compensation plans are more likely than others to incur the costs of qualifying for pooling and avoid the earnings 'penalty' associated with the purchase method. However, we find no association between stock-based compensation and the purchase-pooling choice, suggesting managers are not concerned about implications of large step-ups for firms' equity values. We also find no support for the prediction that top executives' preference for pooling is greater when their job security is relatively low. Finally, consistent with the favorable balance sheet effects of the purchase method, we find that the likelihood of pooling decreases with the acquirer's debt-equity ratio, a proxy for debt contracting costs. We also predict and find an association between the purchase-pooling choice and potential costs related to meeting the restrictive pooling criteria. In particular, we find that firms for which the pooling requirement of no share repurchases appears to be binding (firms that have already announced a share repurchase plan and/or have a large number of outstanding employee stock options) are less likely than others to use pooling. However, we do not find that firms for which the requirement of no post-acquisition divestitures of the target's assets may be binding are less likely to use pooling.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Managerial Risk-Taking Incentives and Executive Stock Option Repricing: A Study of Us Casino Executives Determinants of Revenue Reporting Practices for Internet Firms Differences in Commercial Database Reported Earnings: Implications for Empirical Research The Association between Stock/Compensation Mix and Earnings Usefulness Evidence from Auditors About Managers' and Auditors' Earnings-Management Decisions
×
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