Risk Reporting Incentives: A Cross-Country Study

The current study aims to investigate empirically the main incentives for mandatory and voluntary risk reporting (MRR and VRR) across the USA, the UK and Germany, each of which has a unique approach towards risk reporting. While the UK approach encourages more voluntary risk reporting above imposing risk rules, the German approach formally requires firms to provide risk information in a certain place in their annual report narratives. The US approach is a compromise between these two approaches; it obligates and encourages firms to provide more information about their risks mandatorily and/or voluntarily, respectively. Investigating the incentives for risk reporting in such set of countries answers the calls of some prior research (e.g., Linsley and Shrives, 2006; Dobler, 2008; Dobler, Lajili and Zeghal, 2011) to deepen our understanding of what motivates firms to disclose their risks. To this end, computerised content analysis and multilevel analysis (MLA) on a large scale (compared with previous work e.g., Linsley and Shrives, 2005, 2006; Abraham and Cox, 2007) are utilised. The results are produced in four cumulative contexts through Chapters Six to Nine. These results are consistent with managers’ incentives theories (discussed in Chapter Two) and prior risk reporting literature (discussed in Chapter Three and Chapter Four). Based on 15 firms in each country during 2007 and 2008, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) results reveal significant differences between a firm’s risk levels and its risk disclosure levels across the USA, the UK and Germany. The correlation results indicate that these differences are statistically correlated, supporting the main argument of the current study that differences in a firm’s risk levels should be reflected in their risk reporting practices (Chapter Six). Based on 1160 firm-years of non-financial firms of the FTSE all share index over 2005-2008, linear mixed model (LMM) results document that firms with higher levels of systematic and financing risks are likely to exhibit significantly higher levels of aggregated and voluntary risk reporting, whereas firms with high variability of stock returns or lower levels of liquidity are likely to exhibit significantly lower levels of aggregated and voluntary risk reporting. The current study also finds, however, that MRR is associated significantly and positively with firm size rather than with risk levels. The results also indicate that managers of firms exhibiting greater compliance with UK risk reporting regulations have greater incentives to disclose voluntary risk information (Chapter Seven). When the study extends the scope to the other two countries, different patterns of relations are found. Based on 1270, 1410 and 1005 firm-year observations over 2005 to 2009 in the USA, the UK and Germany, respectively, repeated measures multilevel analysis (RMMLA) results suggest that, in the USA, MRR is more sensitive to firm risk levels (total, systematic and liquidity risks) than is VRR, which is more correlated to other firm characteristics. The UK results suggest that VRR is more sensitive to firm risk levels (systematic and liquidity risks) than is MRR, which is dominated by firm size, among other firm characteristics. In Germany, however, both MRR and VRR are significantly related to risk levels (total, systematic, un-systematic, financing and liquidity risks) (Chapter Eight). Based on 3685 firm-year observations during the period between 2005 and 2009, and concerning both firm- and country-level analyses, repeated measures multilevel analysis (RMMLA) results support that variations in MRR can be attributed to differences in the legal systems (country characteristics) and in firm size (firm characteristics). The variations in VRR are more associated with firm characteristics, especially a firm’s risk levels across the USA, the UK and Germany (Chapter Nine). These results have many implications and support the respective regulatory approach adopted within each country by interpreting the extent to which either MRR or VRR is more or less sensitive to underlying risks

Corporate governance, risk disclosure practices, and market liquidity: Comparative evidence from the UK and Italy

Research Question/Issue: This paper examines the influence of corporate governance on risk disclosure practices in the UK and Italy and also studies the impact of those practices on market liquidity. Research Findings/Insights: We find that governance factors principally influence the decisions of UK (Italian) firms over whether to exhibit risk information voluntarily (mandatorily) in their annual report narratives. When we distinguish between firms with strong and weak governance (in terms of board efficiency) in each country, we find that the factors that affect mandatory and voluntary risk disclosure appear to be driven more by strongly governed firms in both countries. Furthermore, strongly governed firms in the UK tend to provide more meaningful risk information to their investors than weakly governed firms. In Italy, however, we find that strongly rather than weakly governed firms exhibiting risk information voluntarily rather than mandatorily improves market liquidity significantly. Theoretical/Academic Implications: This paper emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between mandatory and voluntary risk disclosure when studying the impact of corporate governance. Our findings differ across strongly and weakly governed firms, in terms of both the factors that influence risk disclosure practices and the exact informativeness of those practices. Practitioner/Policy Implications: The results support the current regulatory trend in risk reporting within the UK that emphasizes the importance of directors and encourages rather than mandates risk disclosure. However, the results generally signal a need for further improvements in the Italian context. Our evidence also supports the value of the confidence in the UK governance system, compared to that in Italy, which motivates British firms to provide highly informative risk information more often than Italian firms

Why do over-deviated firms from target leverage undertake foreign acquisitions?

This paper examines how deviation from firms’ target leverage influences their decisions on undertaking foreign acquisitions. Using a sample of 5,746 completed bids by UK acquirers from 1987 to 2012, we observe that over-deviated firms are more likely to acquire foreign targets. Consistent with co-insurance theory, we find that over-deviated firms engage in foreign acquisition deals to relieve their financial constraints and to mitigate their financial distress risk. We also note that foreign acquisitions enhance over-deviated firms’ value and performance, measured by Tobin’s q and return on assets (ROA) respectively. These findings support the view that over-deviated firms pursue the most value-enhancing acquisitions. Overall, this paper suggests that co-insurance effects, value creation and performance improvements are the main incentives for over-deviated firms’ involvement in foreign acquisitions

Risk disclosures, international orientation, and share price informativeness: Evidence from China

yesThis paper examines the effect of textual risk disclosure on the amount of firm-specific information incorporated into share prices, as measured by stock price synchronicity, for Chinese listed firms during 2007-2011. We find that synchronicity is inversely associated with risk disclosure, suggesting that risk disclosure is firm specific and useful to investors. In addition, our results document that the usefulness of risk information is statistically and economically more pronounced among internationally oriented firms than their domestically oriented peers, consistent with the necessity for risk disclosure to be more meaningful when it relates to greater uncertainty. Finally, we find that internationally oriented firms tend to disclose more risk factors than their domestically oriented counterparts. Our findings are robust to a variety of specifications and the use of alternative measures of risk disclosure, stock price synchronicity and international orientation. Our paper has practical implications since its findings shed light on the current debate on whether or not narrative sections of annual reports convey useful information to investors

Environmental incentives for and usefulness of textual risk reporting: evidence from Germany

Drawing on distinct German institutional characteristics related to cultural, legal, financial, and regulatory features, this paper investigates the extent to which environmental incentives influence German non-financial firms in revealing risk information in their annual report narratives. The paper also examines whether risk-related disclosure (aggregate risk reporting and the tone of news about risk) is useful by investigating its impact on market liquidity and investor-perceived risk. We find that the decision to provide or withhold such risk information is less likely to be significantly associated with environmental incentives. Among those incentives, we find that German firms are significantly influenced by their underlying risks rather than other factors including ownership structure, capital structure, external equity finance, and borrowing. The decision to disclose is likely to be influenced by the size of the firm and whether or not it produces lengthy annual reports. The results also suggest that the impact of aggregate risk reporting levels was not observable until a distinction was made between bad and good news about risk. Specifically, we find that the German market tends to positively (negatively) price good (bad) news about risk by either improving (worsening) market liquidity through removing (creating) information asymmetries, or reducing (increasing) investor-perceived risk

Determinants and impacts of risk disclosure quality: evidence from China

Purpose Few studies have focused on emerging markets owing to difficulties in identifying the real effect of disclosures on these economies. To fill this gap, this paper investigates the main drivers for risk disclosure quality for Chinese financial firms, and further studies the impact of such disclosure on market liquidity. Design/methodology/approach The sample comprises all financial firms listed in the Shanghai A-shares market for the period 2013-2015. By relying on manual content analysis of annual reports, the risk disclosure quality is measured through a multidimensional approach which encompasses three factors: quantity of disclosure, coverage of disclosure, and the semantic properties of depth and outlook. The findings of this paper are based on ordinary least squares (OLS) and fixed-effects estimations. Findings Our findings suggest that firm characteristics (especially size) influence risk disclosure practices of Chinese financial companies. Furthermore, we found that risk disclosure quality has an impact on market liquidity, and when we analysed each year we noticed that the results were driven by the year 2013; moreover, we noticed no or little significance from the period of the emerging financial crisis. Research limitations/implications The sample of this paper is limited to financial firms in China. The usage of manual content analysis limits our ability to investigate risk reporting drivers and its impact on market liquidity on a large scale. Practical implications The importance of this paper stems from documenting several reporting incentives concerning not only firms’ quantity, but also firms’ quality of risk reporting. Collectively, our findings support activism for reforms and the enhancement of regulations in China in order to make the market more efficient. Originality/value This paper provides new evidence for financial companies in China on the principal drivers for risk disclosure quality and highlights how the quality of such disclosure impacts market liquidity. Furthermore, this paper confirms previous findings on the Chinese market (Ball et al., 2000; Zou and Adams, 2008) in which, given a decreasing but still strong state presence, there is higher stock volatility and weak corporate governance

Risk reporting: A review of the literature and implications for future research

YesThis paper provides a wide-ranging and up-to-date (1997-2016) review of the archival empirical risk-reporting literature. The reviewed papers are classified into two principal themes: the incentives for and/or informativeness of risk reporting. Our review demonstrates areas of significant divergence in the literature specifically: mandatory versus voluntary risk reporting, manual versus automated content analysis, within-country versus cross-country variations in risk reporting, and risk reporting in financial versus non-financial firms. Our paper identifies a number of issues which require further research. In particular we draw attention to two: first, a lack of clarity and consistency around the conceptualization of risk; and second, the potential costs and benefits of standard-setters’ involvemen

Comparative evidence on the value relevance of IFRS-based accounting information in Germany and the UK

This paper uses panel cointegration with a corresponding vector error correction model (VECM) to investigate the changes in the value relevance of accounting information before and after the mandatory adoption of IFRS in Germany and the UK under three different valuation models. First, a basic Ohlson model, where our results indicate that despite the value relevance of the book values of equity has declined, it has been replaced by the increasing prominence of earnings in both Germany and the UK after the switch to the IFRS. Second, a modified model, which shows that the incremental value relevance of both earnings and book values are considerably higher in the long term for firms in the UK than in Germany. Third, a simultaneous addition of accounting and macroeconomic variables in an extended model, which indicates a significant rise in the relative predictive power of the book value of equity in the UK compared with the more noticeable impact on the value relevance of earnings in Germany. Collectively, the results of these models indicate that: (i) the explanatory power of linear equity valuation models is higher in UK than in the Germany, (ii) a long-run Granger-causal relationship exists between accounting variables and share prices in common law countries like the UK. Nevertheless, the implications of our findings lie in the knowledge that the potential costs of switching to the IFRS is completely nullified within three years by the benefits arising from a reduction in information asymmetry and earning mismanagement among firms which are listed on the stock exchanges of both common law and code law-based EU countries

The effect of bidder conservatism on M&A decisions: text-based evidence from US 10-K filings

This paper examines whether and how bidders' conservative tone in 10-K filings influences the subsequent mergers and acquisitions (M&A) investment decisions of these US firms from 1996 to 2013. Based on 39,260 firm-year observations, we find, consistent with behavioural consistency theory, that conservative bidders are less likely to engage in M&A deals. Further, those that decide to engage in M&As are likely to acquire public targets and within-industry firms. These bidders are inclined to employ more stock acquisitions than cash acquisitions. Our results also indicate that conservative bidders experience abnormally poor stock returns around the announcements of M&A investments. This provides new insights on the mechanism through which bidders' sentiments influence shareholders' wealth. Overall, these findings highlight the implications of the textual sentiment of corporate disclosure for the forecasting of corporate investment and financing decisions. Our results have practical implications, since they shed light on the value relevance of the information content of major Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)-mandated 10-K filings

A novel measure of corporate carbon emission disclosure, the effect of capital expenditures and corporate governance

The UK's 2050 net-zero emission target is one of the most ambitious goals in the world. Organisations should play a vital role by communicating a sufficient level of carbon emission information with the stakeholders. Motivated by the necessity of measuring the level of carbon disclosure, this paper provides a unique carbon emission disclosure measurement based on a sample of UK firms from 2013 to 2019. We apply different methods to assess the validity and reliability of our developed measurement. The results suggest that our measurement captures the actual CO2 emission, including scope 1, scope 2, and also captures the environmental, social and governance (ESG) score. Additionally, we explore the association between capital expenditure, corporate governance and the level of carbon emission disclosure. Further, the results show a positive relationship between capital expenditure and carbon emission disclosure. Also, there is a significant positive relationship between internal governance and carbon emission disclosure. Moreover, the analysis suggests that internal governance strengthen the relationship between capital expenditure and carbon emission disclosure. We also use quantile regression, and the findings show that capital expenditure and internal governance have a positive impact on carbon emission disclosure under all quantiles. Our data suggest that capital expenditure declines within the UK by around 53% over the last six years. Following the reduction in capital expenditure, the results demonstrate 39% decline in the CO2 emission level. The results also indicate that for every $1 million capital expenditure, approximately 2.75 Metric tons of carbon dioxide (MtCO2) emissions increase. Business investment is around 70% of the UK's total investment. Therefore, the reduction in capital expenditure is one of the primary reasons that might explain the decrease in the UK's overall CO2 emission level. The unique findings of this paper are relevant to the government, management and standard-setters. bMahmoudElmarzouky