Search results

Prior studies suggest that most expropriation of firm’s resources is conducted through related party transactions (RPTs). Based on the conflict of interest view, related parties opportunistically use their authorities to expropriate firms’ resources for their own benefits via RPTs subsequently increasing agency costs and reduce firm value. One important monitoring system suggested by agency theory to reduce the agency problem is corporate governance (CG). CG monitors firm’s performance to align the interests of those who control and those who own the residual claims in a firm. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the moderating effect of CG characteristics on the relationship between RPTs and firm value.

In order to clarify the distinct effect of RPTs, this study categorises RPTs into two groups including beneficial and detrimental RPTs (DRPTs). Applying “proportionate stratified random sampling”, this study covers a panel of 271 firms listed on Bursa Malaysia over the period of 2009–2011, using a moderated multiple regression model.

This study documents that firm value is positively associated with beneficial RPTs (BRPTs) and negatively related to detrimental RPTs (DRPTs). In addition, results show that divergence can intensify the negative relationship between DRPTs and firm value. Findings support the necessity for more scrutiny by regulators, policy makers and standard setters to monitor the conflict of interests in RPTs and restrain the power of related parties to protect the firm’s wealth by introducing stricter regulations for RPTs and improve CG practices especially to monitor RPTs in order to limit the opportunistic behaviour of related parties.

Research implications have been presented in Section 10. It has also been summarised in practical implications and social implications sections.

The findings of this study indicate that investors, creditors and policy makers should not consider all RPTs as harmful transactions and it seems necessary to categorise RPTs into different groups including transactions which are detrimental and transactions which are beneficial to the firm.

The findings of this study support the necessity for more scrutiny by regulators, policy makers and standard setters to monitor the conflict of interests in RPTs. They should restrain the power of related parties to protect the firm’s wealth by introducing stricter regulations for RPTs and improving CG practices especially to monitor RPTs in order to limit the opportunistic behaviour of related parties.

This study contributes to the RPTs literature by showing that the effect of RPTs on firm value depends on the types of RPTs, and market participants allocate different values to different types of RPTs. Therefore, to fill the gap and clarify the distinct effect of RPTs, this study categorizes RPTs into two groups including beneficial and detrimental RPTs.

The aim of this study is to understand a family firm's choice of related-party transaction (RPT) types and analyze their value impacts to separate the abusive from benign RPTs.

It uses a 10-year panel of BSE-listed 378 family (and 200 non-family) firms. The fixed effects, logit and difference-in-difference (DID) models help examine value effects, propensity and persistence of harmful RPTs.

Loans/guarantees (irrespective of counterparties) destroy firm value. Capital asset RPTs decrease the firm value but enhance value when undertaken with holding parties. Operating RPTs increase firm value and profitability. They improve asset utilization and reduce discretionary expenses (especially when made with controlled entities). Family firms have larger loans/guarantees and capital asset volumes but have smaller operating RPTs than non-family firms. They are less likely to undertake loans/guarantees (and even operating RPTs) and more capital RPTs vis-à-vis non-family firms. Family firms persist with dubious loans/guarantees but hold back beneficial operating RPTs, despite RPTs being in investor cross-hairs amid the Satyam scam.

Rent extractability and counterparty incentives supplement each other. (1) The higher extractability of related-party loans and guarantees (RPLGs) dominates the lower extraction incentives of controlled parties. (2) Holding parties' bringing assets, providing a growth engine and adding value dominate their higher extraction incentives (3) The big gains to the operational efficiency come from operating RPTs with controlled parties, generally operating companies in the family house. (4) Dubious RPTs seem more integral to family firms' choices than non-family firms. (5) Counterparty incentives behind the divergent use of RPTs deserve more research attention. Future studies can give more attention to how family characteristics affect divergent motives behind RPTs.

First, the study does not single out family firms for dubious use of all RPTs. Second, investors, auditors or creditors must pay close attention to RPLGs as a special expropriation mechanism. Third, operating RPTs (and capital RPTs with holding parties) benefit family firms. However, solid procedural safeguards are necessary. Overall, results may help clarify the dilemma Indian regulators face in balancing the abusive and business sides of RPTs.

The study fills the gap by arguing why some RPTs may be dubious or benign and then shows how RPTs' misuse depends on counterparty types. It shows operating RPTs enhance operating efficiencies on several dimensions and that benefits may vary with counterparty types. It also presents the first evidence that family firms favor dubious RPTs more and efficient RPTs less than non-family firms.

This study aims to examine the effect of the auditor-client relationship (ACR) on related party transaction (RPT) types of disclosure, either RPT-efficient or RPT-conflict. This study also examines whether family controlling shareholders (FCS) negatively affect the ACR in RPT types of disclosure.

This study uses multivariate regression on 2,203 year-observations of companies listed in Malaysia during the period 2014–2017.

This study finds weak evidence that auditors can mitigate companies’ RPT type (RPT-efficient and RPT-conflict) disclosure while maintaining a close ACR. However, an interaction between FCS and ACR reduces the RPT-conflict disclosure. Additionally, the Big 4 auditors slightly increase the RPT-conflict disclosure, however, the relationships are inversed if the close ACR involves the FCS. The Big 4 auditors also increase RPT-efficient disclosure although in a close ACR with FCS. Meanwhile, an interaction between non-Big 4 auditors and FCS in close ACR reduces both types of RPT disclosures.

The findings suggest that a close relationship between auditors and clients in firms with significant family control could compromise auditor’s skepticism. The FCS can easily influence the auditors to agree with the ways they treat the RPT disclosure. Therefore, policymakers may have to revisit auditors’ rotation policies in Malaysia, especially those involving FCS.

Trust, familiarity and future fee dependency are significant threats to auditor independence in a close ACR. This study contributes to the literature by examining the effect of a close ACR on RPT types of disclosure from a network theory perspective.

The author examines the role of board structure and institutional investors in dealing with the agency issues for the Indian firms by taking the data of NSE-500 nonfinancial firms for the period 2010–2019.

The author applies dynamic panel data methodology to deal with endogeneity concerns prevalent in corporate finance variables.

The agency view is consistent with the board size in the context of India. The author observed that the board size has a harmful effect on agency cost. A larger board size may create a coordination problem, or CEO may find it easy to thrust his or her decisions on board. The author also noticed that firms should have sizeable institutional ownership, particularly pressure-insensitive investors, in equity as they can reduce agency-related issues.

This study focuses on one of the largest emerging economies, i.e. India.

Under IAS 24 a related party transaction (RPT) is a “transfer of resources, services or obligations between related parties, regardless of whether a price is charged” (IASB). The purpose of this paper is to consider the interest of the business group and the directing activity of the parent company for the interpretation of the RPT. Considering the interest of the group means to interpret the intra-group transactions not as isolated transactions, as usually done by the empirical studies, but in a wider perspective, that of the group.

This paper builds on explanatory multiple case studies in order to answer the following research questions: why the interest of the business group and the directing activity of the subsidiaries by the parent company are important in the interpretation of RPTs. How RPTs can be interpreted in the light of the directing activity of the holding company.

Dominant shareholder tends to demonstrate that the group it is not managed as a single economic entity and sometimes that subsidiaries are not really controlled. The case studies show that a regulation that imposes the transparency of the directing activity has at least two effects: the controlling shareholder finds it convenient to delegate the decision-making power and to not carry out RPTs among firms that do not present clear economic links. Thus, the transparency of the directing activity seems to be a disincentive to the establishment of a pyramidal group with expropriation purposes.

It is appropriate that the interpretation of the RPT take into account not only the disclosure of the RPT (e.g. type and nature), but also the following disclosure: the reason and the business purpose that lead to RPT; the interest of the company in engaging such transactions; and the procedures for their approval. The independence of subsidiaries directors is necessary to ensure the management autonomy of the boards, and in the case of directing activity they have to protect outsiders in the case of detrimental transactions ordered by the controlling and directing company that are not carried out in the interest of the group.

Unlike what has been done so far by the literature on RPT, this paper considers the interest of the group to interpret the intra-group transactions and the separation between control and direction. It means do not interpret RPT as isolated transactions, as usually done by the empirical studies, but in a wider perspective, that of the group.

This chapter investigates the relationship between related party transactions (RPTs), corporate governance, and firm performance. Specifically, this chapters examines the moderating effect of corporate governance on the RPTs–performance relationship. On the basis of 448 firm-year sample for 2005–2007, we find evidence that related transactions are detrimental to shareholders and thus reducing firm performance. However, the negative effect is mitigated with the presence of good governance, namely level of board independence and executive remuneration. Furthermore, we find auditor size as an external governance mechanism could also reduce the negative impact of RPTs.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

The Howard Shuttering Contractors case throws considerable light on the importance which the tribunals attach to warnings before dismissing an employee. In this case the tribunal took great pains to interpret the intention of the parties to the different site agreements, and it came to the conclusion that the agreed procedure was not followed. One other matter, which must be particularly noted by employers, is that where a final warning is required, this final warning must be “a warning”, and not the actual dismissal. So that where, for example, three warnings are to be given, the third must be a “warning”. It is after the employee has misconducted himself thereafter that the employer may dismiss.

This study aims to examine the effect of ownership concentration and foreign ownership on tunneling activities in Indonesia.

The population in this study were manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesian Stock Exchange from 2014 to 2018. The total observations used in this study were 557 observations. This study used three measurements to assess tunneling activities in a company, namely, related party receivables (TUL1), related party payables (TUL2) and related party receivables-payables (TUL3).

The results of this study indicated that ownership concentration and foreign ownership had a negative effect on tunneling activity of TUL1. Meanwhile, the effect of ownership concentration and foreign ownership on TUL2 and TUL3 showed a positive effect. This indicated that manufacturing companies in Indonesia preferred to carry out tunneling activities through related party payables compared with related party receivables. Foreign ownership was also effective in controlling the company’s tunneling activities when the company conducted tunneling transactions of related party receivables. Small companies and companies with positive return on assets were more susceptible to tunneling activities carried out by the companies.

The results of this study can be used as a consideration for investors in making decisions by looking at tunneling activities carried out by companies in Indonesia.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no previous study in the tunneling literature has compared the results of the effect of the concentration of foreign ownership and ownership on tunneling using three measurements at once. This is useful to see the company’s behavior of tunneling activities from a different perspective.

The present study aims to assess the potential effects of intellectual capital (IC) and disclosure of firms' affiliate transactions on contractual costs (CC).

The statistical population of the study includes 768 firm-year observations listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange during 2012–2017. According to Pulic's model, the authors divide IC into three components, such as human capital (HC), relational capital and structural capital (SC). CC is also measured by utilising two variables of board cash compensation and unexpected reward of managers.

The results show that there is a negative and significant relationship between HC and CC. In contrast, the authors find that relational capital and SC have a positive impact on CC. The authors’ further analyses also demonstrate that disclosure of transactions with affiliates has a negative effect on unexpected rewards of managers.

Since there is no conducted study, which discusses the relationship between IC and contractual cost, this paper might be considered the primary studies conducted in this line of literature, specifically in emerging markets. Moreover, to the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study investigating the potential impact of disclosure of selling and purchasing transactions, separately, on the director's unexpected reward.