Search results

Cryptocurrency arose, and grew in popularity, following the financial crisis of 2008 built upon a promise of decentralizing money and payments. An examination of the history of money and banking in the United States demonstrates that stable money benefits from strict controls and commitments by a centralized government through chartering restrictions and a broad safety net, rather than decentralization. In addition, financial crises happen when the government allows money creation to occur outside of official channels. The US central bank is then forced into a policy of supporting a range of money-like assets in order to maintain a grip on monetary policy and some semblance of financial stability.

In addition, this chapter argues that cryptocurrency as a form of shadow money shares many of the problematic attributes of both the privately issued bank notes that created instability during the “free banking” era and the “shadow banking” activities that contributed to the 2008 crisis. In this sense, rather than being a novel and disruptive idea, cryptocurrency replicates many of the systemically destabilizing aspects of privately issued money and money-like instruments.

This chapter proposes that, rather than allowing a new, digital “free banking” era to emerge, there are better alternatives. Specifically, it argues that the Federal Reserve (Fed) should use its tools to improve public payment systems, enact robust utility-like regulations for private digital currencies and limit the likelihood of bubbles using prudential measures.

This study estimates the impact of changes in the mutual fund distributor incentive structure on distributor-advised mutual fund flows. The authors employ two recent major policy interventions by the Indian self-regulatory authority and the financial market regulator – one partial ban and another complete ban on upfront commissions – paid to mutual fund distributors on distributor-advised mutual fund flows.

The authors use novel distributor-level data across the 198 largest distributors in India between 2013 and 2020 and a series of pooled panel random-effect generalized least squares models with robust standard errors to explore the effect of changes of distributor commissions on distributor assets-under-management (AUM), gross sales, commissions and changes (%) in the number of investors in alternate investment avenues like portfolio management services (PMS).

Changes in the incentive structure have a significant negative effect on mutual fund flows at an aggregate level and within MF distributor categories. A significant diversion of investor funds toward PMS is noted, which paid higher upfront commissions to distributors during the same period.

The authors posit that these two developments are not mutually independent and that both fall out of the aforementioned policy changes by Securities and Exchange Board of India and Association of Mutual Funds in India. The study findings have implications for all stakeholders in the Indian mutual fund industry and, by extension, for Indian and global alternative investment avenues.

This study is the first to explore the effects of these two major policy interventions by regulators on mutual fund flows in India.

The authors examine the impact of employee litigation on Securities Action Lawsuits. The authors study whether frequently sued firms are more likely to be investigated by Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). The authors study how labor relations are crucial to corporate governance.

The authors use hand-collected datasets of employee violations, misconducts and lawsuits and test whether bad employee treatment increases the likelihood of SEC probe. The authors' methodology includes panel fixed effects, as well as alternative measures of employee mistreatment and SEC case.

The authors find that with each increase in employee dispute increases the likelihood of the firm being investigated by the SEC. The authors find that geographically dispersed firms are more likely to be investigated by the SEC when facing employee disputes and that more labor union coverage and a higher unemployment rate triggers more employee allegations and labor-related lawsuits.

The authors' study is the first to investigate how employee relations affect firms involving federal investigation. The authors aim to contribute to the literature by studying (i) the relation between employee mistreatment and legal challenges, (ii) how firm characteristics affect the path from employee disputes to securities class actions and (iii) the impact of employee mistreatment on the corporate governance.

This study quantified companies' views on the COVID-19 pandemic with sentiment analysis of US public companies' disclosures. The study aims to provide timely insights to shareholders, investors and consumers by exploring sentiment trends and changes in the industry and the relationship with stock price indices.

From more than 50,000 Form 10-K and Form 10-Q published between 2020 and 2021, over one million texts related to the COVID-19 pandemic were extracted. Applying the FinBERT fine-tuned for this study, the texts were classified into positive, negative and neutral sentiments. The correlations between sentiment trends, differences in sentiment distribution by industry and stock price indices were investigated by statistically testing the changes and distribution of quantified sentiments.

First, there were quantitative changes in texts related to the COVID-19 pandemic in the US companies' disclosures. In addition, the changes in the trend of positive and negative sentiments were found. Second, industry patterns of positive and negative sentiment changes were similar, but no similarities were found in neutral sentiments. Third, in analyzing the relationship between the representative US stock indices and the sentiment trends, the results indicated a positive relationship with positive sentiments and a negative relationship with negative sentiments.

Performing sentiment analysis on formal documents like Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings, this study was differentiated from previous studies by revealing the quantitative changes of sentiment implied in the documents and the trend over time. Moreover, an appropriate data preprocessing procedure and analysis method were presented for the time-series analysis of the SEC filings.

This study aims to examine the determinants of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations and consequences of FCPA enforcements.

This paper uses publicly available data from Compustat, I/B/E/S and Thomson Reuters databases, combined with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) cases, to extract insights on FCPA violations and enforcements using econometric approaches.

The main determinants of FCPA violations appear to be firm size, multinational structure, country corruption and Sarbanes-Oxley Act control weaknesses. Traditional misreporting risks (F-score and M-score) do not predict FCPA violations. This study discovers significant differences between FCPA violations by motivation, as in, sale generation, rent extraction or cost evasion. Bribes motivated by sale generation or rent extraction are partially driven by the extent of the firm’s global operations, whereas bribes motivated by cost evasion relate to internal influences. This study also finds that enforcement is more salient for criminal violations (DOJ enforcement), compared to civil violations (SEC enforcement).

This research provides new insights into the determinants of FCPA violations while underscoring the need for effective measures to combat bribery and promote ethical business practices. This research contributes to the ongoing efforts to curtail bribery, offering valuable insights into the characteristics of firms more likely to engage in bribery and contexts in which these activities occur. It provides critical implications for regulatory bodies, highlighting the differential responses of firms to varying types of enforcement, namely, criminal versus civil, as the authors observe greater decreases in internal control weaknesses following DOJ enforcement compared to SEC enforcement.

For enforcement agencies, the findings underscore the importance of rigorous criminal enforcement against FCPA violations, highlighting the improved control environments prompted by DOJ actions. Managers will find this research relevant, as it demonstrates that a firm’s entry into international markets substantially elevates the risk of its representatives engaging in bribery with foreign officials. In addition, the results are of interest to regulators, revealing that the underlying motivations driving a firm’s activities can significantly alter the factors to consider that might lead to an FCPA violation.

This paper is the original work of the authors and explores the determinants and consequences of FCPA violations and enforcement actions since 2002. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first to explore bribe determinants by their motive and documents industry-wide benefits arising from criminal enforcement.

The current study uses an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, this study aims to explore the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion.

The study uses an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables.

The paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism, the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors’ risk assessments.

The authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or pre- and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006.

The study has major public policy suggestions as it responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks such as climate change.

The study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US SEC, to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the IASB Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards.

This paper aims to investigate the determinants and consequences of using disclaimer language in the banks’ audit committee (AC) reports. This study aims to analyze the factors tempting AC members of banks to disclose disclaimer language in the AC reports and the effect of such language on the cost of equity.

The data cover the period from 2006 to 2015 and considers the top US bank holding companies. Voluntary disclosure in the AC report is manually coded by using a scoring grid. Multivariate regression analysis is mainly used in the study.

The findings suggest that the ACs are using the disclaimer language to protect themselves when disclosing a high level of voluntary information that describes their oversight activities or to reduce their liability exposure due to lower financial reporting quality. The findings also reveal that investors are requiring a higher return on their investments whenever ACs use disclaimer language in their reports.

The AC report provides useful information to shareholders who evaluate the AC’s performance and accordingly vote for or against AC members on annual basis. The paper sheds lights on the motives and consequences of disclaimer language in the ACs report. Thus, the study benefits shareholders by providing empirical evidence in regard to the usage of disclaimer language. Also, the findings benefit industry, corporate governance organizations, standard setters and regulators that analyze AC disclosures and issue recommendations or new standards for improving those disclosures.

The purpose of this paper is two-fold: to analyze the legal issues on disgorgement and disgorgement funds in Indonesia, the USA and the UK and to construct the ideal law regarding disgorgement and disgorgement fund.

The type of legal research in this paper is normative legal research. The research approach used is a comparative approach and a legal approach. The legal materials used are all regulations on the disgorgement law and the disgorgement fund that apply in Indonesia, the USA and the UK. The technique of collecting legal materials is done by using library research techniques.

The rapid growth of the capital market in Indonesia still faces various legal issues such as various market manipulations, insider trading and illegal investment management activities. Based on the results of a comparative study, Indonesia does not yet have a calculation mechanism regarding the imposition of disgorgement on violators. Unlike Indonesia, the USA has the rules of practice and rules on fair funds and exchange commissions, and the UK has the decision procedure and penalties manual, which regulates the mechanism for calculating the imposition of disgorgement. Indonesia is solely able to use administrative action in imposing disgorgement, while in the USA and the UK, it can be through courts or direct administrative actions. These legal issues have resulted due to the lack of confidence by international investors and the growth of the investment climate in Indonesia itself.

This study examines the regulation of disgorgement and disgorgement funds in Indonesia, the USA and the UK. However, the focus of research in this paper is limited to legal issues that occurred in Indonesia.

The results of this study may help to construct the ideal regulations on disgorgement and disgorgement funds in various countries and protect the capital market of the investors.

The results of this study are expected to be helpful for the investment climate in various countries, especially developing countries.

The ideal legal construction regarding disgorgement, namely, parties to the mechanism for imposing disgorgement; disgorgement filing mechanism; sanctions in disgorgement; disgorgement fund sources; provider of fundholding accounts; mechanism for calculating disgorgement imposition; disgorgement fund distribution mechanism.

The purpose of this paper is to scrutinise the effectiveness of four derivative exchanges’ enforcement efforts since 2007. These exchanges include the Commodity Exchange Inc. and ICE Futures US from the United States and ICE Futures Europe and the London Metal Exchange from the UK.

The paper examines 799 enforcement notices published by four exchanges through a behavioural science lens: HUMANS conceived by Hunt (2023) in Humanizing Rules: Bringing Behavioural Science to Ethics and Compliance.

The paper finds the effectiveness of the exchanges’ enforcement efforts to be a mixed picture as financial markets transition from the digital to artificial intelligence era. Humans remain a key cog in the wheel of market participants’ trading operations, albeit their roles have changed. Despite this, some elements of exchanges’ enforcement regimes have not kept pace with the move from floor to remote trading. However, in other respects, their efforts are or should be, effective, at least in behavioural terms.

The paper’s findings are arguably limited to exchanges based in Anglophone jurisdictions. The information published by the exchanges is variable, making “like-for-like” comparisons difficult in some areas.

The paper makes several recommendations that, if adopted, could help exchanges to increase the potency of their enforcement programmes.

A key aim of the paper is to shift the lens through which the debate concerning the efficacy of exchange-level oversight is conducted. Hitherto, a legal lens has been used, whereas this paper uses a behavioural lens.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact hosting the Super Bowl has on audit completion and financial reporting timeliness for companies headquartered in Super Bowl hosting cities.

Using 16 years of financial reporting data, this study uses the Super Bowl and related activities, combined with required filings during “busy season,” as a natural experiment to examine how audit firms navigate short-term, exogenously imposed but anticipated, audit team capacity constraints.

Companies headquartered in a city hosting the Super Bowl, during busy season, have longer audit report lags (by approximately three days, in comparison to non-hosting busy season audits) and less timely securities and exchange commission (SEC) (10-K) filings. The authors find no evidence that Super Bowl hosting affects audit fees or earnings announcement timeliness.

When confronted with anticipated capacity shocks, audit firms take longer to complete the audit, absorbing the financial costs of the delay and maintaining audit quality, resulting in less timely financial reporting.

This study demonstrates the costs of Super Bowl-related inefficiencies and contributes to our understanding of how auditors navigate capacity shocks. This study provides evidence that auditors can effectively manage business risk and continue to facilitate providing timely and accurate information to financial statement users in the face of a capacity shock.