Search results

This study aims to investigate the relationship among liquidity, information asymmetry and political risk for non-US stocks listed on the NYSE. Additionally, the study aims to explore the impact of political tension on market quality.

This research adopts a quantitative methodology to examine the interplay between liquidity, information asymmetry and political risk in non-US stocks on the NYSE. A comprehensive analysis encompasses stocks from countries with varying political risk levels, demonstrating a correlation between lower political risk and improved market quality. In assessing the impact of US–China trade conflicts on Chinese stocks, political shocks are scrutinized. Results indicate that heightened political tension exacerbates information asymmetry and diminishes market liquidity, underscoring the susceptibility of stocks in politically strained environments to adverse shocks.

Non-US stocks from countries with lower political risk show higher liquidity and market efficiency, with narrower bid-ask spreads and smaller price impacts of trades. These stocks also demonstrate a higher market quality index, indicating improved overall market performance. In addition, during periods of escalated US –China political tension over trade policy, the liquidity of non-US stocks from China worsens, leading to wider bid-ask spreads and increased information asymmetry.

This study provides novel insights into the impact of political risk on stock market dynamics for non-US stocks listed on the NYSE, with a particular emphasis on the US –China trade conflict's effect on Chinese stocks.

This paper investigates the effect of political uncertainty on the decision to cross-list in the United States (US).

To reach our paper aim, we use a sample of 589 non-US firms cross-listed in the US for the period from 2000 to 2019. We perform logit regression and use several political uncertainty proxies, including US election presidential years, political voting margin and the political uncertainty index from Baker et al. (2002), as a continuous measure of general political condition (Francis et al., 2021).

We find the following results. Non-US firms are less likely to cross-list their shares when US political uncertainty is high. We also find that the decision to cross-list is driven by price informativeness as a channel that can explain the role of political uncertainty. Our results are robust to the endogeneity concern. In addition, we find that political administration (Democrats vs Republicans) significantly affects the decision to cross-list. More particularly, we show that firms are more likely to cross-list their shares in the US when Democrats win the elections. Moreover, we find that cross-listed firms exhibit lower valuation compared to their non-cross-listed peers when US political uncertainty is high.

Using a unified framework of non-US firms cross-listed in the US, this paper contributes to different strands of the literature. Our first main contribution adds to the literature on cross-listing by providing, in our knowledge, the first evidence regarding the relation between cross-listing and political uncertainty. We add to the existing literature by showing that US political uncertainty significantly determines the decision to cross-list and value creation for cross-listed firms. Whether and how managers alter their strategic decision behavior in such settings is less clear. Hence, our paper contributes to the literature by documenting how political uncertainty impacts cross-listing decision and shapes management guidance decisions. Second, this study joins a growing body of literature that examines the real impact of economic policy uncertainty (EPU) on economic outcomes. We provide empirical evidence suggesting that cross-listed firms exhibit lower valuation during period of high political uncertainty due to decreased price informativeness.

This paper investigates the distinctive role of the US stock exchanges in the process of international consolidation. Besides the USA's leading role in financial markets, the focus on the country is motivated by its uniqueness within the stock exchange consolidation landscape, since, on the one hand, it has been involved in two different stock exchange mergers – with Nasdaq and NYSE – and, on the other hand, it has experienced a “reversal”, having joined and then left the Euronext-NYSE platform.

To investigate the effect of the NYSE-Euronext split on cross-border holdings and the role of the US as a member of the consolidated platform, we adopt a feasible Generalized Least Squares specification correcting for both heteroskedasticity and general correlation of observations across destination-countries, with standard errors adjusted for two-way clustering at the investing-country and year levels.

Differently from other mergers, we find a weak sensitivity of US inward and outward cross-border investments to stock exchange consolidation, and, consequently, to its reversal. The data suggest that the larger, the more liquid and the more visible the involved stock exchanges are, the less sensitive cross-border investment is to consolidation. Drawing on the cross-listing and cross-delisting literature, we formulate the conjecture that this evidence can be explained by decreasing returns of foreign investment to consolidation: the extraordinary large size, liquidity and visibility of the US stock exchanges diminishes the value of the role played by stock exchange consolidation in reducing cross-border barriers among member countries, so that it makes also the effects of its retreat non-significant.

This paper is the first, to best of our knowledge, to investigate the mirror phenomenon, that is, the “consolidation reversal” process of the NYSE stock exchange, the purpose being to understand its consequences for cross-border holdings. In the first part of this paper, we document no significant effect of the 2014 reversal on cross-border investments. The apparent absence of this effect could be due either to a level of cross-border investments remaining equally high (denoting persistence in investors' behavior) or to an equally non-significant effect of consolidation and reversal of the US stock exchanges on cross-border equity investments. The evidence supports the latter hypothesis and reveals an overall weak sensitivity of US cross-border investments (inward or outward) to stock exchange consolidation and, consequently, to its reversal. We formulate the conjecture, tested in the second part of the paper, that this evidence is due to the presence of diminishing returns of exchange consolidation's scale for foreign investors: the extraordinary large size, liquidity and visibility of the US stock exchanges makes the role of stock exchange consolidation less valuable in dampening cross-border barriers; consequently, also the reversal phenomenon presents no sizeable effects.

This paper analyzed the effect of voluntary corporate disclosure on firm value and how audit quality and cross-border stock market listing moderate this relationship.

The paper analyzed S&P BSE index constituents’ 90 Indian enterprises for 2017–2019. The India Disclosure Index Report was used to fetch the voluntary disclosure scores. Further, the study was conducted in two parts using six different panel-data regression models in the framework of legitimacy, agency, signaling and market segmentation theory. First, the study investigated the direct impact of voluntary disclosures on return on assets (ROA) and Tobin’s Q. Second, the moderating effect of the “Big 4” was tested. Third, the paper also examined the moderating role of “cross-border stock market listing” in the direction of voluntary disclosure-firm value relationships.

Primarily, the results postulate a significant positive impact of voluntary disclosures on ROA and Tobin’s Q. A higher voluntary disclosure leads to a higher ROA and Tobin’s Q for firms. Moreover, the improvement effect of such disclosures on ROA and Tobin’s Q is more pronounced for companies “listed abroad” and audited by “Big 4.”

The findings will enhance managers’ learning about the financial impact of voluntary disclosures. The choice of a “Big 4” and “Cross border stock market listing” indicates firms’ future positive perspectives, strengthening investor trust in the market.

The results suggest that companies’ potential auditing, agency and litigation issues could be addressed through fairness in the information content of voluntary disclosures.

This examination presents a firm valuation model in which voluntary disclosure tackles an ethical issue, the resolution of which depends on the “audit quality” and “cross-border stock market listing.”

This study aims to examine the impact of digital transformation on firms’ value and explore the mediating impact of ESG performance and moderating impact of information interaction.

Data was collected from companies listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchange between 2012 and 2020 with 21,488 observational samples, featuring a selection of 3,348 companies. Panel data regression techniques were used to test the mediating role of ESG performance and the moderating role of information interaction.

The study found that digital transformation can improve firms’ ESG performance, which in turn positively affects their value. The firms that engage in more interaction with outsiders benefit more from digital transformation and have a higher value.

This study provides new theoretical insight into improving firms’ value through digital transformation and ESG performance. It is the first to discuss and study the moderating role of information interaction in the relationship between digital transformation and firms’ value.

This study aims to examine the association between institutional investors’ ownership (IOW), politically connected firms (POCF) and audit report lag (AUDRL).

This study employs a feasible generalised least squares (FGLS) model for panel data to examine the association between IOW, POCF and AUDRL for Malaysian publicly listed companies.

The findings reveal a statistically significant negative relationship between IOW and AUDRL, with this negative relationship being more pronounced amongst POCF. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the relationship between IOW and AUDRL varies depending on the domicile of IIs (local vs. foreign). Specifically, local institutional investors exhibit a negative and statistically significant relationship with AUDRL, whilst foreign institutional investors show a positive and statistically significant relationship with AUDRL.

The results of this study provide a new understanding of auditor responses to institutional investor monitoring and political connections (PCs) in an emerging economy.

This paper aims to investigate whether Brazilian firms that legally bond to stricter enforcement and commit to stringent corporate governance requirements experience increased value relevance of discretionary fair value measurements (Levels 2 and 3), and how different measurement levels are associated with firms’ systematic risk.

The Brazilian data’s distinctive feature helps in analyzing fair value’s relevance in an emerging market with heterogeneous enforcement regimes. Given the inherent self-selection in corporate governance levels and cross-listing decisions, the authors use a two-step generalized method of moments approach. Building upon Song et al.’s (2010) framework, the authors carefully address potential selection biases. Furthermore, the authors expand Riedl and Serafeim’s (2011) model, based on Ohlson’s (1995) model, to explore whether the negative correlation between Level 1 net assets (assets minus liabilities) and firms’ beta is more pronounced compared to Levels 2 or 3 net assets. Additionally, the authors investigate whether this relationship intensifies when firms align themselves with enhanced governance structures and stricter enforcement regimes.

Fair value measurements which require more judgment (Levels 2 and 3) are more value-relevant when a firm is legally bonded to higher enforcement and better corporate governance. Level 1 fair values of these firms’ net assets are associated with lower systematic risk, while Levels 2 and 3 fair values (high subjectivity valuation) are not.

The authors show that firms that bond to better corporate governance and stricter enforcement regimes mitigate the information risk involved in subjective fair-value measurements.

This paper aims to investigate whether the two dominant financial reporting regimes, US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), are associated with audit pricing and audit report lags.

In 2007, the US SEC eliminated the requirement for foreign registrants to reconcile their financial statements to US GAAP from IFRS. In this post-reconciliation setting in the USA, the authors use panel ordinary least square regressions to examine a sample of foreign firms cross-listed in the USA reporting under IFRS and US domestic firms reporting under US GAAP during the fiscal year 2007–2019.

The authors find that the firms reporting under IFRS have longer audit report lags than firms reporting under US GAAP. In addition, the authors find that firms reporting under IFRS pay higher audit fees than their US GAAP counterparts. The results are robust after controlling for the firm- and country-specific characteristics as well as using propensity-score matching.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to provide empirical evidence that the differences between the two reporting regimes are associated with auditor behavior, possibly through additional audit efforts and audit complexity associated with auditing the principle-based IFRS relative to the rule-based US GAAP.

This paper examines how firms respond to local government’s environment initiatives through textual analysis of government work reports (GWRs). This study aims to provide insights into how firms strategically respond to government’s environmental initiatives through their disclosure and investment practices.

This study uses a textual analysis of GWRs from China’s provinces. The frequency and change rate of environmental keywords in these reports are used as a measure of the government’s environmental initiatives.

This study finds that environmental disclosure scores in environmental, social and governance (ESG) reports increase with the frequency or change rate of environmental keywords in provincial GWRs. This effect is more pronounced for non-state-owned enterprises, firms in highly marketized provinces or those listed in a single capital market. However, there is no significant relationship between firms’ environmental investments and government initiatives, except for cross-listed firms in provinces with consistently high frequency of environmental keywords in their GWRs.

The findings indicate that government environmental initiatives can shape firms’ disclosure behaviors, yet have limited influence on investment decisions, suggesting that environmental disclosure could potentially be opportunistic. This underscores the need for more effective strategies to stimulate firms’ environmental investments.

This study provides valuable insights into the differential impacts of government environmental initiatives on firms’ disclosure and investment behaviors, contributing to the understanding of corporate environmental responsibility in the context of government initiatives.

Foreign directors from developed nations are significant brain gains for Chinese firms because they improve board competency and board diversity. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between foreign directors from developed countries on Chinese listed firms and firms’ green commitment.

For the empirical analysis, first, this study applies ordinary least square regression and firm fixed model to explore the relationship between foreign directors and green commitment. For the endogeneity concerns, this study first added more control variable in the main model, then applied instrumental variable approach and propensity score matching technique.

This study predicts and finds that percentage of foreign directors from developed countries on Chinese listed firms’ board positively enhances the firms’ green commitment. Furthermore, this study also finds that the positive relationship between foreign directors and firms’ green commitment is more significant when firms are in a low competitive industry, have no financial constraints and are overseas-listed. This study’s findings are robust after controlling for endogeneity concerns.

This is new research on the impact of foreign directors on corporate green commitment.