Search results

The purpose of this paper is to empirically analyse the propensity to pay dividends and investigate whether the catering theory is valid in an emerging market.

The sample of this study comprises listed firms on the stock market of Turkey, Borsa Istanbul, with 2,438 observations during the period 1999–2015. In line with previous studies in the literature, appropriate control variables are used that may have an impact on Turkish firms' dividend policy. Control variables are examined in the likelihood of paying dividends by using Fama–Macbeth (1973) style cross-sectional logistic regressions. In addition, the linkage between the dividend premium and the propensity to pay is revealed to test the validity of the catering theory.

The findings of the study confirm the tenets of the catering theory for Turkey. When a positive dividend premium exists, that is when investors demand dividend, firms cater them and distribute dividend; on the contrary, when there is no demand, firms prefer not to pay. The effect of catering incentives on the dividend policy provides useful information for managers because the catering theory claims that investors' demand for dividends has an impact on the valuation of firms.

In the aftermath of the 2001 financial crisis, Turkey implemented far-reaching reforms and policy initiatives to improve the efficiency of capital markets and to overcome the obstacles sourcing from their culture and civil law origin. With the adoption of these major economic and structural reforms, as a civil law origin country, Turkey has managed to ameliorate the protection of investors as in common law countries. Ferris et al. (2009) state that the catering theory is applicable to firms in common law countries but not in civil law countries. In addition, prior research is not so extensive regarding the impact of catering incentives on the dividend policy of firms in emerging markets. The results of the analyses suggest that the catering theory is valid for Turkey as a civil law origin emerging country, and to the best of authors' knowledge, this study is the first to test the catering theory in the Turkish capital markets.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the dividend payout behavior of Indian firms and test whether the three prominent dividend policy theories (signaling, life-cycle and catering) explain the dividend policy of Indian firms.

The authors test the three theories using the methodology based on the studies of Nissim and Ziv (2001), DeAngelo et al. (2006) and Baker and Wurgler (2004). For testing the signaling theory, the authors regress the change in earnings on the rate of change in dividends using the pooled and Fama–Macbeth regressions. The life cycle theory is tested by running a logistic regression of the dividend payment decision on two proxies of life-cycle measured by the ratio of earned to total equity. Finally, the catering theory tests the relationship between the decision to pay a dividend and the dividend premium.

The results based on a sample of Indian firms from 1992 to 2017 show that the dividend policy of Indian firms can be explained using the life-cycle theory. However, there is no evidence in support of the signaling and catering theories.

It provides insights into the dividend policy of Indian firms. Though there have been a few studies examining the dividend payout in India, none of the existing studies tests these theories of dividend payout. The existing research using the Indian data provides indirect evidence about the life-cycle theory. This study is the first one to test the application of these theories for Indian firms.

This chapter presents both main arguments of dividend policy theories and their empirical evidence. According to Miller and Modigliani (1961), dividend decisions are not relevant to firm value in a perfect capital market. Nevertheless, there are several market frictions in the real world (e.g., information asymmetry, agency problems, transaction costs, firm maturity, catering incentives and taxes). Therefore, academics use them to develop theories which help them explain corporate dividend decisions. Particularly, signaling theory considers dividend payments as a signal about firms' future prospects since outside investors face information disadvantage. “Bird-in-hand” theory argues that investors prefer dividends to capital gains since the former have lower risk than the latter. Agency theory is developed from the conflict of interest between corporate managers and shareholders. Corporate managers have high incentives to restrict dividend payments. Furthermore, transaction cost theory and pecking order theory posit that firms prefer internal to external funds. This drives firms to hold more cash and pay less dividends. Life cycle theory explains dividend policy by firm maturity. Mature firms have fewer investment opportunities, and thus, they tend to pay more dividends. Catering theory states that dividend decisions are based on investors' demand. Firms pay more dividends since investors prefer dividends and assign higher value to dividend payers. Tax clientele theory argues that firms that have corporate dividend policy rely on the comparative income tax rates for dividends and capital gains. Under the tax discriminations against dividends, firms tend to restrict their dividends in order to increase their stock prices.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate new robust measures of investors’ preference for the form of regular corporate payout. Then, the paper adds to the empirical evidence on catering theory by examining managers’ catering to such preference.

The authors use the matching method to control for firm characteristics. The authors apply two robustness tests to validate the measures. The authors use the rigorous multivariate analysis.

US investors’ preference for regular dividends vs regular stock repurchases, being different forms of corporate payout, varies over time. Managers cater to investors’ preference for payout form. The findings are consistent with the catering theory of Baker and Wurgler (2004a). The number of firms that pay cash dividends regularly continue to outnumber the ones that purchase their shares regularly.

The study only uses US data. It does not cover other countries.

The measures can be used in several future research endeavors, such as examining investors’ payout-form preferences in other countries (see Booth and Zhou, 2017) and exploring their determinants, the corporate governance characteristics of firms that cater to investors’ preference vs firms that do not, etc.

The study contributes to understanding investors’ preferences and corporate payout behavior which is prerequisite to efficient policy formulation.

The proxies for investors’ payout-form preference control for firm characteristics and are unrelated to investors’ time-varying risk preferences. Also, they are robust to measurement issues. Moreover, the study covers a period of 40 years.

Cross-listed firms may face unique incentives for establishing dividend policies in comparison to US firms. This study aims to test the implications of the lifecycle and signaling theories of dividend policy in the context of non-US firms cross-listed on US stock exchanges via American depository receipts (ADRs).

ADRs are classified according to the firms' dividend paying histories as regular payers, non-payers, former payers, new payers and switchers. Multinomial logit regressions measure the likelihood of dividend payers to pay dividends, as well as the possibility of a dividend amount increase, decrease, or no change, based upon previously identified determinants of dividend payments and a measure of economic conditions in the home country.

The results indicate that firm size, growth opportunities, and the mix of earned and contributed capital partially explain observed dividend policies for ADR firms. Multinomial logit regressions reveal profitability and home-country macro-economic conditions significantly affect ADR firms' decisions to change their dividend policies.

The findings suggest macro-economic conditions affect dividend payment changes among ADR firms. The results also imply that the lifecycle and catering theories may help explain dividend changes among ADR firms.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview and synthesis of some important literature on dividend policy, chronicle changing perspectives and trends, provide stylized facts, offer practical implications, and suggest avenues for future research.

The authors provide a survey of literature surveys with a focus on insights for paying cash dividends.

The analysis of literature surveys on dividend policy provides some stylized facts. For example, US evidence indicates that the importance of cash dividends as a part of investors’ total returns has declined over time. Share repurchases now play an increasingly important role in payout policy in countries permitting stock buybacks. The popular view is that dividend policy is important, as evidenced by the large amount of money involved and the attention that firms, security analysts, and investors give to dividends. Firms tend to follow a managed dividend policy rather than a residual dividend policy, which involves paying dividends from earnings left over after meeting investment needs while maintaining its target capital structure. Certain determinants of cash dividends are consistently important over time in shaping actual dividend policies including the stability of past dividends and current and anticipated earnings. No universal set of factors is appropriate for all firms because dividend policy is sensitive to numerous factors including firm characteristics, market characteristics, and substitute forms of dividends. Universal or one-size-fits-all theories or explanations for why companies pay dividends are too simplistic.

The dividend puzzle remains an important topic in modern finance.

This is the first a survey of literature surveys on cash dividends.

This study aims to survey managers of dividend‐paying firms listed on the Indonesian Stock Exchange (IDX) to learn their views about the factors influencing dividend policy, dividend issues, and explanations for paying dividends. The study also aims to focus on Indonesia, the largest national economy in Southeast Asia, because relatively few studies examine why Indonesian firms pay dividends.

The primary means of gathering data is a mail survey. The two‐page survey instrument consists of three main sections: 22 factors for determining a firm's dividend policy; six questions that provide background information about the respondents and their firms; and 27 statements about dividend policy in general. Of the 163 firms surveyed, 52 firms responded, resulting in a response rate of 31.9 per cent.

The evidence shows that managers view the most important determinants of dividends as the stability of earnings and the level of current and expected future earnings. They also believe that the effects of dividends on stock prices and needs of current shareholders are important determinants. The evidence shows that managers of Indonesian firms perceive that dividend policy affects firm value. Managers seem to agree that multiple theories including signaling, catering, and life cycle explanations help to explain why their firms pay dividends.

The study focuses on a limited number of factors and issues involving dividend policy. While non‐response bias could potentially limit making generalizations to the population of IDX firms, statistical tests show no significant differences between respondents and non‐respondents on various firm characteristics.

The evidence suggests that no universal set of factors is likely to be applicable to all firms when setting dividend policy.

This study presents new evidence on the perceptions of managers of dividend‐paying IDX‐listed firms about the factors influencing dividend policy, dividend issues, and explanations for paying dividends.

This chapter provides an overview of the explanations and factors affecting dividend policy. This study employs a systematic literature review approach to review a large sample of studies related to the dividend puzzle. Although the analysis reveals mixed evidence involving the theories and determinants of dividend policy, some determinants appear in numerous studies. However, no consensus exists on an optimal dividend to resolve the dividend puzzle, and the authors propose a model to deal with the same. When examining dividend policy, researchers should consider the firm, market, behavior, and other determinants. When making significant dividend or stock decisions, managers and shareholders should also contemplate the factors, interactions, inadequacies, and consequences. Future researchers should strive to take a more comprehensive view when resolving the dividend puzzle. This study provides a current and complete picture of dividend policy's available theories and empirical determinants. Its significant contribution is identifying some of the more consistently essential determinants of dividend policy while proposing a holistic model to address the prevailing dividend dilemma.

The purpose of this paper is to survey managers of dividend-paying firms listed on the National Stock Exchange (NSE) in India to learn their views about the factors influencing dividend policy, dividend issues, and explanations for paying cash dividends and repurchasing shares. The authors compare the results to other dividend surveys based on firms in Indonesia, Canada, and the USA.

The authors use questionnaire to gather primary data from a sample of 500 firms listed on the NSE.

The most important determinants of dividends involve earnings (the stability of earnings as well as the level of current and expected future earnings) and the pattern of past dividends. Comparing the overall rankings of the 21 factors by respondents from Indian firms to those of Indonesian, Canadian, and US firms reveals statistically significant correlations. Respondents also perceive that dividend policy affects firm value. Respondents also view maintaining an uninterrupted record of dividends as important. The most highly supported explanations for paying cash dividends concern signaling, the firm life cycle, and catering. Although none of the theories of repurchasing shares is dominant, respondents provide little support for the agency explanation.

Although the tests suggest that the sample does not suffer from non-response bias, the findings should be viewed as suggestive rather than definitive because of the relatively low response rate.

The paper presents new evidence about dividend policy of Indian firms. To the knowledge, this is the most comprehensive survey of Indian firms to date that captures managerial perceptions on both cash dividends and share repurchases.

The purpose of this paper is to survey managers of firms listed on the Casablanca Stock Exchange (CSE) to learn their views about the factors influencing dividend policy, dividend issues, and explanations for paying dividends. It compares the results to similar dividend surveys in the USA, Canada, Indonesia, and India.

The study uses a mail survey of CSE listed firms that paid one or more cash dividends to common stock holders between June 1, 2010 and September 30, 2014 as the primary means of collecting data.

The evidence shows that the most important determinants of a firm’s dividend policy are the level of current earnings, stability of earnings, and needs of current shareholders. A significant correlation exists between the overall rankings of the 25 factors influencing dividend policy between managers of Moroccan firms and those of USA, Canadian, Indonesian, and Indian firms. Managers of Moroccan firms perceive that dividend policy affects firm value. Managers view multiple theories including signaling, agency, catering, and life cycle explanations as credible and contribute in explaining why their firms pay dividends.

Despite a high response rate of almost 55 percent, the number of responses limits the ability to divide the sample firms by size, industry, and other characteristics and to test for statistically significant differences between various groups.

This is the first survey-based research designed to document how Moroccan managers view dividends. Although evidence suggests that some factors are consistently more important than others, no universal set of factors is likely to be applicable to all firms.