Are courts effective monitors of corporate decisions? In a controversial landmark case,
the Delaware Supreme Court held directors personally liable for breaching their fiduciary
duties, signalling a sharp increase in Delaware?s scrutiny over corporate decisions. In our
event study, low-growth Delaware firms outperformed matched non-Delaware firms by 1% in the three day event window.
In contrast, high-growth Delaware firms under-performed by 1%. Contrary to previous literature, we conclude that court decisions can have large, significant and heterogeneous effects on firm value, and that rules insulating directors from court scrutiny benefit the fastest growing sectors of the economy.
This study examines the challenge of implicit communications - qualitative statements, tone, and non-verbal cues - to the effectiveness of enforcing corporate disclosure regulations. We use Regulation FD setting, given that SEC adopted the...Read more
Auditors play a major role in corporate governance and capital markets. Ex ante, auditors facilitate firms’ access to finance by fostering trust among public investors. Ex post, auditors can prevent misbehavior and financial fraud by corporate...Read more
Regulators generally have tried to address the problems posed by the excessive risk-taking of Systemically Important Financial Institutions (SIFIs) by placing restrictions on the activities in which SIFIs engage. However, the complexity of these...Read more
Retirement investing in the United States has changed dramatically. The classic defined-benefit (DB) plan has largely been replaced by the defined contribution (DC) plan. With the latter, individual employees’ decisions about how much to save for...Read more