Search results

This study aims to apply unit root test to investigate the behavior of Chinese firms toward their leverage policy. The study is based on two influential and competing theories of capital structure.

This study applies unit root test to investigate the behavior of Chinese firms toward their leverage policy. The study is based on two influential and competing theories of capital structure. Trade off theory advocates that firms have a target level of leverage ratio and that firms try to achieve that optimal leverage ratio, whereas pecking order theory argues that firms have no target level of leverage and that they follow a specific pattern of leverage. For this purpose, this study applies a Fisher type unit root test to 12,808 firm level observations. The data are unbalanced and cover a period from 1991 to 2014.

The results reveal the presence of a stationary behavior across short-term, long-term and total leverage policies. For short-term leverage policy, 21 per cent firms show stationary behavior, while for long-term, 20 per cent show a targeting behavior; for the total leverage policy 17 per cent of firms are found to follow a tradeoff model. To make the findings more interesting sample was further classified into profit and loss making firms. The study finds that loss making firms do not follow a target level of leverage in China. Furthermore, unit root is applied to all firms before and after crises-2008. It is revealed that stationary behavior is more prevalent before crises-2008.

This study is highly important from the point of view that it quantifies firms into distinct categories of following specific model of capital structure. To the best of the author’s knowledge, the findings of this study add to current research knowledge about Chinese firms with respect to adjustment behavior toward a target capital structure.

The present study aims to verify whether there is a positive (negative) role being played by the institutional investors on the loss-making companies' performance.

The authors employ panel data regression and two-step system generalised method of moments (SYS-GMM) to test the above objective.

The empirical results clearly show that no positive relation is found between institutional investors and loss-making companies' performance.

The findings of the study might have significant implications for firms to improve the firms' operational performance [return on assets (ROA)]. Also, the firm's financial performance [return on equity (ROE)] could be improved by increasing profitability which will reflect in the share prices of the firms whereby the performance can build the investors' confidence over the firm. Market performance (Tobin's Q) could be increased by providing more attractive offers and discounts to customers to capture the business opportunities available in the market.

The overall findings might have for reaching implications in the manufacturing sector with regard to allowing (disallowing) institutional investors.

The results of the study may help both companies and institutional investors.

This is the maiden attempt to study whether loss-making companies could be positively (negatively) impacted by the arrival of sophisticated institutional investors [foreign institutional investors (FIIs) and domestic institutional investors (DIIs)]. Further, this study is largely different from previous studies in terms of using new variables which are related to firm characteristics and valuation multiples. Further, seeing if the institutional investors tend to enhance the firm performance is curious.

Recent research examines the implications of components of accruals for future profitability. Because the persistence of earnings varies with the level of company profitability, we expect differences between profitable and loss‐making companies in the association between components of accruals and future profitability. Using the approach adopted by Richardson, Sloan, Soliman and Tuna (2006) we find evidence suggesting that the components of accruals related to revenue growth and to change in asset turnover are less persistent than the cash flow component of earnings for profitable Australian companies. For loss‐making companies, however, the persistence of the accrual component of earnings is found to be higher than for the cash flow component of earnings, suggesting that the accrual component is more informative than the cash flow component in explaining period ahead profitability for many currently unprofitable companies.

The study examines the IPO resilience grounded on the firm’s intrinsic factors.

We examine the association of IPO performance and post-listing firm’s performance with issuers' pre-listing financial and qualitative traits using panel data regression.

IPOs floated in the Indian market from July 2009 to March 31, 2022, evince the notable influence of issuers' pre-IPO fundamentals and legitimacy traits on IPO returns and post-listing earning power. Where the pandemic’s favorable impact is discerned on the post-listing year earning power of the issuer firms, the loss-making issuers appear to be adversely affected by the Covid disruption. Perhaps, the successful listing equipped the issuers with the financial flexibility to combat market challenges vis-à-vis failed issuers deprived of desired IPO proceeds.

High initial returns followed by a declining pattern substantiate the retail investors to be less informed vis-à-vis initial investors, valuers and underwriters, who exit post-listing after profit booking. Investing in the shares of the newly listed ventures post-listing in the secondary market can shield retail investors from the uncertainty losses of being uninformed. The IPO market needs stringent regulations ensuring the verification of the listing valuation, the firm’s credentials and the intent of utilizing IPO proceeds. Healthy development of the IPO market merits reconsidering the listing of ventures with weak fundamentals suspected to withstand the market challenges.

Given the tremendous rise in the new firm venturing into the primary market and the spike in IPOs countering the losses immediately post-opening, the study examines the loss-making and young firms IPOs separately, adding novelty to the study.

This study aims to investigate how the intangible intensive nature of firms affects the value relevance of earnings and the book value of equity between profit- and loss-reporting firms. The study also examines how firms’ intangible intensity affects the value relevance of R&D outlays between profit- and loss-reporting firms.

An empirical analysis based on Ohlson’s (1995) framework is used. A total of 54,421 firm-year observations of Indian listed firms from financial years 1992–2016 constitute the study sample.

The findings suggest that the difference in the value relevance of earnings and the book value of equity between profit- and loss-reporting firms is more significant in non-intangible intensive firms than in intangible firms. Specifically, earnings are more value relevant in profit-reporting and non-intangible intensive firms, whereas book value of equity is more value relevant in loss-reporting and intangible intensive firms. The results also suggest that the difference in the incremental value relevance of R&D information between profit- and loss-making firms is higher in intangible intensive firms than in non-intangible intensive firms.

The findings of this study can help managers, standard-setters and investors make effective decisions.

This study offers insights into the impact of intangible intensity on the value relevance of aggregated and disaggregated accounting information between profit- and loss-making firms in institutional settings where capitalization of R&D expenditures is allowed.

This paper aims to investigate the effect of firms’ sustainability practices on firm performance and valuation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Using a sample of Australian listed firms from 2011 to 2021, the authors perform textual analysis on sustainability practices from annual reports and sustainability report disclosures and include this variable in various regression models that assess firm valuation. The authors also use propensity score matching and Heckman two-stage regression methodology to address endogeneity concerns.

The authors find that firms disclosing sustainability practices exhibit higher market valuations relative to other firms. Specifically, loss-making firms exhibit higher market valuation during the COVID-19 crisis relative to prior period. The authors also observe a negative association between sustainability practices and firm performance proxied by return on assets. The findings suggest that engagement in sustainable practices helps loss-making firms remain resilient during the pandemic. In addition, the authors find that the positive relation between sustainability practices and firm value is stronger among firms with a higher level of annual report readability.

Considering the conflicting evidence in the literature on the economic benefits of sustainability practices, this study takes advantage of the heterogeneity in corporate practices and provides empirical evidence that a firm’s sustainability practices can build economic resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis. The authors believe the findings of the study is timely in informing the regulators and standard-setters on changes in reporting required to increase sustainability in the business practices.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the stock market in India is efficient in the semi-strong form.

The study uses financial and stock market data of 1,135 listed Indian companies (non-financial) during 2003–2011 collected from Capital IQ to estimate discretionary accruals (DA) using modified Jones model (1995). The study also examines using the widely used Mishkin (1983) test to whether equity market prices accruals in India. The study is conducted for profit/loss-making firms separately as well as for a hedge portfolio of firms based on the lowest to highest accruals.

The empirical study of DA of 1,135 listed Indian companies (non-financial) during 2003–2011 shows that the estimated average DA of the corporate sector in India comes to 1 percent of the total assets of these firms. An empirical analysis whether equity market prices DA in India finds no evidence of investors/market pricing DA. Empirical evidence also finds that the results are invariant for profit/loss-making firms as well as portfolio of firms based on the lowest to highest accruals in the Indian context. The empirical evidence shows that the Indian equity market is inefficient with regard to the incorporation of accruals in expected returns of stocks.

This study builds on the previous literature on accrual pricing in the context of the USA and developed markets. The study extends the empirics to the one of the largest emerging market economy – India. This issue is important not only to investors, but also to policy makers and researchers because the mispricing of accruals could potentially lead to misallocation of capital. The study has implications for stock/firm valuations and cost of equity/capital.

This is the first study for the pricing of accruals and test of semi-strong efficiency of the Indian stock market.

Using a meta-regression analysis, we quantitatively review the empirical literature on the relation between effective tax rate (ETR) and firm size. Accounting literature offers two competing theories on this relation: The political cost theory, suggesting a positive size-ETR relation, and the political power theory, suggesting a negative size-ETR relation. Using a unique data set of 56 studies that do not show a clear tendency towards either of the two theories, we contribute to the discussion on the size-ETR relation in three ways: First, applying meta-regression analysis on a US meta-data set, we provide evidence supporting the political cost theory. Second, our analysis reveals factors that are possible sources of variation and bias in previous empirical studies; these findings can improve future empirical and analytical models. Third, we extend our analysis to a cross-country meta-data set; this extension enables us to investigate explanations for the two competing theories in more detail. We find that Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory, a transparency index and a corruption index explain variation in the size-ETR relation. Independent of the two theories, we also find that tax planning aspects potentially affect the size-ETR relation. To our knowledge, these explanations have not yet been investigated in our research context.

The purpose of this paper is to test the persistence and pricing of earnings, free cash flows (FCF) and accruals using Australian data. In response to arguments concerning omitted variables in the Mishkin test, it seeks to explore asymmetric effects by incorporating categoric variables capturing firm size (microcap, small, medium and large); industry (industrial/mining); profit making (profit/loss); and dividend paying (contemporaneous dividend/no contemporaneous dividend) into forecasting and pricing equations.

The paper examines a large sample of hand‐checked Australian earnings, accruals and cash flow data. It analyses these data using a series of piecewise linear regressions.

The results indicate that asymmetry is a valid concern since the extent and nature of mispricing of earnings components vary considerably across the categories included in the model. For example, the base case firms (microcap, loss‐making, resource companies that pay no contemporaneous dividends) exhibit no evidence of significant differences between the actual and implied persistence of FCF and accruals. Conversely, for industrial firms, the implied persistence of FCF and accruals from the pricing equation significantly underestimates the persistence of both earnings components as shown in the forecasting equation.

The study extends the research investigating the accruals anomaly by accommodating different factors that might induce asymmetric effects. Based on the evidence, such effects represent an important consideration for work conducted in this and related accounting research areas.

This study aims to evaluate the earnings forecasting models of Hou et al. (J Account Econ, 53:504–526, 2012) and Li and Mohanram (Rev Account Stud, 19:1152–1185, 2014) in terms of bias and accuracy and validity of the implied cost of capital (ICC) estimates for a sample of initial public offerings (IPOs).

The authors use a sample of 1,657 NYSE, Amex and Nasdaq IPOs from 1972 to 2013.

The models of Hou et al. and Li and Mohanram produce relatively inaccurate and biased earnings forecasts, leading to unreliable ICC estimates, particularly for small and loss-making IPOs that constitute the bulk of new listings. As a remedy, the authors propose a new earnings forecasting model, a combination of Hou et al.’s and Li and Mohanram’s earnings persistence models, and show that it produces more accurate and less biased earnings forecasts and more valid ICC estimates.

The study contributes novel results to the literature on the validity of cross-sectional earnings models in forecasting IPO firm earnings and estimating the ICC. The findings are directly relevant for practitioners, who can improve their earnings forecasting accuracy for IPO firms and related ICC estimates. The insights can be extended to other settings where investors have limited access to financial information, such as acquisitions of private targets.