Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether large blockholders are associated with financial statement fraud at their companies. Although a substantial body of prior studies has focused on chief executive officers’ motivations to manipulate financial statements, the correlation between majority shareholders and financial statement fraud has received little attention. This paper aims to fill this gap by investigating whether the sample firms have controlling shareholders or executives (i.e. blockholders vs management) and whether financial statement fraud schemes, motivations and consequences differ between blockholder- and management-controlled firms.

Using a clinical approach, the authors Study 12 Canadian financial statement fraud cases uncovered by the Ontario Securities Commission between 1997 and 2020.

First, the authors find blockholder control in six cases. These findings infer that these large shareholders received private benefits at the expense of minority shareholders. The comparative analyzes suggest that fraudulent firms controlled by blockholders go bankrupt more often than those controlled by managers. The authors also find that improper disclosure is the most common fraud scheme in blockholder-controlled firms.

The authors conduct a deep analysis of financial statement fraud cases to examine the of blockholder control on the likelihood of financial statement fraud. This paper adds new insights to the research on financial crime by investigating whether large shareholders affect the probability of fraud and the extent to which they might do so.

The purpose of this paper is to complement existing research of the relationship between concentrated ownership and firm performance by theoretically exploring the impact of outside blockholders on the firm, primarily from the perspective of voting power.

This paper proposes theoretical propositions based on analyses and logical extension of results of the existing theoretical and empirical studies.

This paper proposes three theoretical predictions: First, voting power provides outside blockholders a necessary condition to pursue shared and private benefits of control, and it is positively correlated with blockholders’ capability of influencing firm value. Second, everything else being equal, an outside blockholder is more (less) likely to pursue private benefits than shared benefits when the equity market is efficient and when the blockholder’s voting power is less (more) than 50 per cent. Third, controlling outside blockholders can capitalize on their voting power to appoint managerial delegates and board representatives to the invested firms for the purpose of pursuing private benefits of control.

This paper tries to make two contributions to the corporate governance literature. First, this research relies on a new perspective to explore the relationship between ownership structure and firm value. Second, this paper presents the first theoretical argument which states that controlling outside blockholders rely on their managerial delegates and board representatives to pursue their private benefits of control.

The study examines how blockholding, blockholding nationality and multiple blockholder structures (MBS) are related to agency cost in Nigeria.

Data sourced from the annual reports of 84 non-financial services firms listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE) from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2015, were analyzed using the hybrid model in Stata 15.

Blockholding showed a significant negative relationship with the expense ratio (ER) measure of agency cost at the between-firm level but not significantly related to asset utilization ratio (AUR). This result was driven more by foreign blockholding and concentration of control, which were negatively and significantly related to the ER. Concentration of control is negatively related to the AUR. Domestic blockholding and the number of blockholders were not significantly related to agency cost. Foreign-blockholder-firms had a significantly greater concentration of control (lesser contest for control) than domestic-blockholder-firms.

The findings suggest that foreign blockholding would be more effective in controlling agency costs in Nigeria. While the concentration of control (lesser contest for control) appears to be an efficient governance mechanism for reducing agency costs associated with expenses in Nigeria, it seems to exacerbate agency costs associated with asset utilization.

Previous researchers have not studied how foreign and domestic blockholding are related to agency cost. They also have not studied how MBS and the contest for control are related to agency cost and explain differences in the foreign/domestic blockholding-agency cost relationships in the Nigerian context.

This paper aims to investigate the relationship between external regulation pressure and corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting decision and comprehensiveness and the relationship between block ownership and CSR in China.

This paper provides descriptive statistics of the current state of CSR reporting in China. In addition, regression models are utilized to analyze the behavior of CSR reporting of a sample of 5,334 listed firms in China.

Our paper records a significant increase of CSR reporting in the period of 2008-2010. Using a sample of 5,334 listed firms in China, we find a positive yet weak association between centrally controlled state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and CSR reports. Moreover, we find that firms with more concentrated block ownership are less likely to issue CSR reports.

Taken as a whole, our analyses suggest that the entrenchment effect from blockholders seems to dominate the incentive effect and this depresses the quality of CSR reports.

Despite the well-known effect of economic factors on CSR decision, corporate governance such as ownership structure could complicate the final results. Furthermore, the institutional background of the country and its implications for corporate governance should be considered jointly and concurrently.

The positive effect from regulatory pressure on centrally owned SOEs suggests that regulation remains an effective tool to encourage CSR reporting in emerging markets.

First, our study confirms prior research that CSR disclosure decision is primarily driven by economic and strategic considerations. Moreover, our results suggest that a country’s institutional background, in addition to economic and strategic considerations, influences the decision and quality of CSR disclosures. Second, we extend the literature on ownership structure, particularly with respect to blockholders. Third, our research design addresses a weakness in earlier studies which are biased exclusively on state ownership to the exclusion of all other blockholders.

Proper empirical tests of the effect of blockholders’ monitoring incentives on corporate governance are scant in the literature because the relationship between ownership structure and enforcement of corporate governance mechanisms is bidirectional. This study aims to address the endogeneity issue by examining the effect of blockholding on executive turnover–performance sensitivity, using the split-share-structure (SSS) reform in China as an exogenous shock to blockholders’ monitoring incentives.

This study uses a logit model for estimating the change in executive turnover–performance sensitivity around the SSS reform. Sub-sample analysis is conducted to examine whether the impact of SSS reform on the turnover-performance sensitivity is stronger for firms with more contestable blockholders who might consider stock liquidity, risk sharing and diversification in their monitoring/trading decisions.

Top executive turnover, defined as CEO or board chair turnover, becomes less sensitive to firm operating performance after the reform, mainly for firms with contestable blockholders prior to the reform. Stock liquidity and blockholders’ demand for diversification can explain the impact of contestable blockholding. Moreover, blockholding is sensitive to firm operating performance after the reform but not before it.

With few exceptions, most studies in the blockholding literature focus on the effect of blockholder monitoring on firm value. Examining an exogenous shock to blockholding, this paper provides a set of new evidence for the impact of blockholding on executive turnover–performance sensitivity. The results call for more evidence of the impact of blockholding on executive turnover from other markets.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the firm’s capital market benefits in a high-quality information setting. More specifically, the authors address the question of whether the commonly documented IFRS benefits are capable of influencing inducing shareholders to increase their equity investment in adopting firms.

This study is performed on publicly listed firms in three emerging countries, namely, Morocco, South Africa and Turkey. The design of the ownership database allows a panel analysis for the years 2001 through 2011. The trend approach is suitable to account for concurrent effects that are unrelated to financial reporting while controlling for time-lasting behavior of investors. Overall, a minimum of four-year periods before and after the IFRS adoption date are warranted.

Overall, the findings support evidence of increases in equity holdings following a firm’s IFRS adoption. More specifically, institutional investors and institutional blockholders (both domestic and foreign) invest more heavily in the stocks of the firms that have committed to IFRS. By contrast, the authors fail to report evidence for ownership by blockholders and controlling shareholders.

The current empirical work should be of value to international investors, policy makers and market authorities. As for international investors facing reduced information disadvantage and comparable financial information across worldwide markets, they will find it easier to select and invest in value-creating stocks. This study may be useful for policy makers in acquiring a clear view of advantages, challenges and relevance of IFRS adoption to emerging markets. In particular, this study contributes to an understanding of potential capital market consequences of IFRS adoption. Furthermore, market authorities should be aware of the importance of institutional framework to enhance IFRS implementation and usage.

This work contributes to the ongoing empirical research on the intended capital market benefits of IFRS. The authors provide deeper insight into shareholdings changes of a number of key investors in a context where supply and demand of information are stained with asymmetry and mostly, influenced by differences in accounting practices. A major contribution of this study is the use of a methodological approach that outperforms commonly used approaches in the way how it considers concurrent events (compared to the shift specification) and time-lasting investor behavior (compared to the difference-in-differences analysis).

The purpose of this paper is to review recent research on the structure of equity ownership and its impact on firm value. In doing so, the paper outlines the main issues, surveys the more recent work, and highlights the most promising developments on this topic.

The paper is a survey – as such there is no relevant research design.

The paper commences from multiple surveys done a decade ago that find that the evidence on this topic is inconclusive. Since then, researchers have developed several promising lines of inquiry. These approaches – specifically the new focus on the identity of the blockholders, multiple blockholder interactions, as well as the use of structural modeling, and the use of changes in insider ownership – hold some promise of being able to provide more definitive answers.

The paper suggests that current researchers focus on newer approaches to analyzing the structure of equity ownership. Specifically, for research on blockholder ownership, the identity of blockholders as well as the interaction between blockholders are promising approaches to this topic. For research on insider ownership, structural models that have become recently popular as well as an emphasis on changes rather than levels of insider ownership are promising avenues of inquiry.

The paper summarizes the state of research on the structure of equity ownership and in doing so provides a quick introduction to a researcher new to this topic. In addition, the paper highlights the most promising areas of inquiry on this topic.

This paper seeks to explore such questions as: “What are the impacts of foreign investors and what are the channels through which foreign investors contribute to or detracts from firm value in Korea?” It aims to discuss how foreign investors and foreign outside directors interact to enhance firm value.

Using longitudinal data from the KOSPI200 index in Korea during 2004‐2007, the study examined the direct and interaction effect of foreign blockholders and foreign board members. To address the representativeness of foreign investors, the authors verified the mandates of foreign board members though telephone interviews.

Foreign block shareholders and foreign outside directors respectively provide expertise and independent monitoring over management. Foreign blockholders' management control via board membership is likely to mitigate leverage of value enhancement when foreign outside directors represent private interests of foreign blockholders. The moderating effect is also supported since foreign ownership concentration has an inverted U‐shaped relationship with value enhancement. The paper confirms that board independence reinforces the positive impact of foreign outside directors on firm value.

This study offers a key to understanding corporate governance in that mutual monitoring and a balance among various types of stakeholders are crucial to value enhancement.

The paper provides clues to the extant diverse findings concerning the impact of foreign investors on firm value. It applies an integrated perspective to the empirical analyses of the impact of foreign investors by giving consideration to the agency – foreign outside directors – to implement management control on behalf of foreign blockholders.

We examine the effect of institutional blockholders on the variability of firm performance.

We use OLS regression models to estimate the effect of institutional blockholders on within-firm, over-time variability of firm performance.

We find that firms with more institutional blockholders experience less variable firm performance. In particular, more institutional blockholders are associated with less variability of annual stock returns, ROA and the market-to-book ratio. We further explore several underlying mechanisms through with institutional blockholders reduce firm performance variability. We find that more institutional blockholders are associated with less variable capital expenditures and R&D investments, and less frequent acquisition activities.

A limitation of this paper is that our sample period only covers 1996–2006. Future studies can extend our research to a more recent period (e.g. 2009–2019) to test whether our findings remain valid in other periods.

We document a significant relation between institutional blockholders and firm performance variability in this paper. However, we do not make any judgment as to whether firms should increase their institutional blockholders as it is unclear whether the caused reduction in risk-taking is socially efficient. We argue that the value implication of institutional blockholders depends on the existing blockholder structure and the different levels of risk appetite between the CEO and shareholders. Thus, the decision on the increase or decrease of institutional blockholders should be carefully made based on a firm’s specific characteristics.

This paper is a first study which examines the impact of the presence of institutional blockholders on the variability of firm performance, while most prior studies focus on the stock ownership of institutional blockholders and examine its impact on the level of firm performance.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the differential effects of institutional non‐blockholders (NONB) and active institutional blockholders (ACTB) on earnings management behavior, as measured by discretionary accruals.

This paper also proposes that the hypothesized influence of NONB and ACTB on earnings management behavior is affected by earnings pressure (EP) (i.e. the gap between target earnings and pre‐managed earnings). In particular, it believes that the stimulating effect of NONB on earnings management may not manifest when the stimulating effect of EPs is already strong and the mitigating effect of ACTB may manifest only when the stimulating effect of EP is there. The sample into three EP conditions: pressure to increase earnings, neutral pressure and pressure to decrease earnings is grouped. Consistent with the expectations, the paper finds that NONB stimulates earnings management, but only when EP is not strong and that ACTB mitigates earnings management, but only when there is pressure to increase earnings.

This paper also predicts that ACTB will need to exercise their monitoring power only when EP is strong. The results confirm this prediction, but only when there is strong pressure to increase earnings. When there is strong pressure to decrease earnings, inconclusive evidence regarding the effect of ACTB is found. This may imply that ACTB are conservative since they appear to be more likely to limit income‐increasing accruals than they are to limit income‐decreasing accruals.

This paper's contributions to the literature are twofold: the paper shows that the characteristics of institutional investors (INSTs) should be considered when examining the relationship between INSTs and earnings management; the paper shows that the direction and level of EP should be considered when evaluating the relationship between INSTs and earnings management.