This paper studies firm-level factors shaping the enforcement of financial reporting regulation on private non-financial firms and propose bank lending as a particularly important one. Our tests are based on a rare combination of datasets, which allows us to construct unique measures of misreporting, notably underreporting of debt. We observe that firms with bank debt are more likely to file mandatory financial reports and less likely to file information with irregularities. While we also find evidence that the need for bank financing can induce firms to misreport, this concern is mitigated by additional tests suggesting that banks detect reporting issues at firms¿ financial statements. Critically, we observe that firms with reporting issues obtain significantly less credit, especially when the bank has previous exposure to debt misreporting and when the bank verifies debt information using the public credit registry. Collectively, our paper documents important firm-level determinants of private non-financial firms¿ misreporting and highlight that banks play a significant role in the enforcement of mandatory financial reporting on these firms

We study the effects of mandatory disclosure on competitive interactions in the setting of oil and gas (O&G) reserve disclosures by North American public firms. We document that reserve disclosures inform competitors: when one firm announces larger increases in O&G reserves, competitors experience lower announcement returns and higher real investments. To sharpen identification, we analyze several sources of cross-sectional variation in these patterns, the degree of competition, and the sign and the source of reserves changes. We also exploit two plausibly exogenous shocks: the tightening of the O&G reserve disclosure rules and the introduction of fracking technology. Additional tests more directly focused on the presence of proprietary costs confirm that the mandated reserve disclosures result in a relative loss of competitive edge for announcing firms. Our collective evidence highlights important trade-offs in the market-wide effects of disclosure regulation.

This paper provides early evidence on the effect of global regulation mandating a switch from loan loss provisioning (LLP) based on incurred credit losses (ICLs) to LLP based on expected credit losses (ECLs). Using a sample of systemically important banks from 74 countries, we find that ECL provisions are more predictive of future bank risk than ICL provisions. Corroborating that the switch to ECL provisioning results in more information to assess bank risk, we also observe that the announcement of a larger first-time impact of the accounting change elicits lower stock returns and higher changes in credit default swap spreads. Critically, these patterns are most pronounced when credit conditions deteriorate. Additional analyses show that the higher information content of the ECL model stems from the provisions for nondefaulted loans, which did not exist under ICL. Our study contributes to the debate on the effect of the ECL model on procyclicality, an especially pressing issue in the context of the current pandemic.

This paper examines the role of the "Big Three" (i.e., BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street Global Advisors) on the reduction of corporate carbon emissions around the world. Using novel data on engagements of the Big Three with individual firms, we find evidence that the Big Three focus their engagement effort on large firms with high CO2 emissions in which these investors hold a significant stake. Consistent with this engagement influence being effective, we observe a strong and robust negative association between Big Three ownership and subsequent carbon emissions among MSCI index constituents, a pattern that becomes stronger in the later years of the sample period as the three institutions publicly commit to tackle Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) issues. (c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

This paper examines the effect of disclosure regulation on the takeover market. We study the implementation of a recent European regulation that imposes tighter disclosure requirements regarding the financial and ownership information on public firms. We find a substantial drop in the number of control acquisitions after the implementation of the regulation, a decrease that is concentrated in countries with more dynamic takeover markets. Consistent with the idea that the disclosure requirements increased acquisition costs, we also observe that, under the new disclosure regime, target (acquirer) stock returns around the acquisition announcement are higher (lower), and toeholds are substantially smaller. Overall, our evidence suggests that tighter disclosure requirements can impose significant acquisition costs on bidders and thus slow down takeover activity.

The question we address is whether mandated disclosure about dispersion of nonfinancial asset values can provide information relevant to assessing firm risk. Using a sample of Canadian oil and gas (O&G) firms between 2004 and 2011, we find that the difference between the disclosed 10th and 50th percentiles from the O&G reserves distribution, which measures dispersion of the distribution, is positively associated with future total and idiosyncratic equity return volatility, systematic risk, and credit risk. We also find that disclosure of increased reserves dispersion is associated with weaker stock price reactions to increases in reserves and with increases in bid-ask spreads, both of which indicate the disclosures convey information about risk associated with reserves. Additional tests reveal little evidence of managerial opportunism in the reserves disclosures. Taken together, our evidence suggests that quantitative disclosures about the dispersion of nonfinancial asset values can provide information relevant to assessing firm risk.

We analyze the trading of corporate insiders at leading financial institutions during the 2007 to 2009 financial crisis. We find strong evidence of a relation between political connections and informed trading during the period in which Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds were disbursed, and that the relation is most pronounced among corporate insiders with recent direct connections. Notably, we find evidence of abnormal trading by politically connected insiders 30 days in advance of TARP infusions, and that these trades anticipate the market reaction to the infusion. Our results suggest that political connections can facilitate opportunistic behavior by corporate insiders.

We exploit two regulatory shocks to examine the informational effects of tightening preexisting mandatory disclosure rules. Canadian National Instrument 51-101 in 2003 and the U.S. rule "Modernization of Oil and Gas Reporting" in 2009 introduced quasi-identical amendments which effectively tightened the rules governing oil and gas reserve disclosures in both countries. We document significant changes in firms' reporting outcomes when the new regulations are introduced. We also find that the reserve disclosures filed under the new regulations are more closely associated with stock price changes and with decreases in bid-ask spreads. Our findings are robust to controlling for other confounding factors such as time trends, other information disclosed simultaneously, financial reporting incentives, mispricing, and monitoring efforts.

This paper documents that directors exhibit a strong tendency to resign from their riskiest directorships in the period subsequent to the financial crisis of 2007-2008. I also find that, in the post-crisis period, riskier directorships become more costly for directors and that the post-crisis director turnover alters board characteristics at riskier firms. While directors departing from their riskiest directorships are more experienced, hold more boards, and are better connected than other departing directors, no such pattern is observed among replacing directors. Finally, I find that departures from riskiest directorships are associated with lower announcement returns. Overall, my results suggest that, after the crisis, the costs of serving on risky boards have increased to the point of inducing board turnover that results in a non-trivial reshaping of corporate boards.

This paper presents a methodology to analyze decisions in the design of concrete structures. Specifically, we propose a multi-criteria approach to assess the value implications of precast concrete technologies versus in-situ concrete solutions. First, we emphasize the importance of careful decision-making in early stages of construction projects to enhance customer value. Second, we present a decision-making methodology that uses fuzzy logic to represent and synthesize information about risk-retum tradeoffs in the different kinds of variables involved in the evaluation of a project's value. To illustrate, we use our methodology to analyze precast vs. in-situ solutions in the design of drainage structures. The results of our analysis point at precast solutions as the most desirable design choice in this setting, and highlight the importance of value analysis in early stages of construction projects.