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

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

Value relevance of accounting information: Evidence from an emerging market.

noWithout making any distinction of the applicable accounting standards, this paper investigates, firstly, the value relevance of accounting information from 1999 to 2012 in different segments of the Chinese stock market. This investigation includes A-shares, prepared under Chinese Accounting Standards (CAS) for domestic firms; B-shares, prepared under either the International Accounting Standards (IAS) or International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) for both domestic and overseas firms; and H-shares prepared under either the IAS or Hong Kong GAAP for Hong Kong and overseas firms. Then, the paper examines whether or not the converged IFRS with CAS, applicable from 2007 onwards, is more value relevant when compared with prior to the 2007's standards (CAS, IAS, Hong Kong GAAP for A-share, B-share, and H-share markets, respectively). Based on 34,020 firm-year observations and after controlling for industry- and year-fixed effects, the findings suggest that accounting information is value relevant with A- and B-share markets, while it is partially relevant with the H-share market. The paper finds that the converged IFRS with CAS is more value relevant in A-shares and B-shares and it is partially more value relevant with the H-share market. These findings have implications for both policymakers and investors since they provide further empirical evidence for the current policy procedure which harmonizes local GAAP with IFRS