Hedging on the Hill: Does Political Hedging Reduce Firm Risk?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dane M. Christensen ◽  
Hengda Jin ◽  
Suhas A. Sridharan ◽  
Laura A. Wellman

We examine whether firms’ political hedging activities are effective at mitigating political risk. Focusing on the risk induced by partisan politics, we measure political hedging as the degree to which firms’ political connections are balanced across Republican and Democratic candidates. We find that greater political hedging is associated with reduced stock return volatility, particularly during periods of higher policy uncertainty. Similarly, greater political hedging is associated with reduced crash risk, investment volatility, and earnings volatility. Moreover, the reduction in earnings volatility appears to relate to both a firm’s taxes and its operating activities, as we find that greater political hedging is associated with reduced cash effective tax rate volatility and pretax income volatility. We further find investors are better able to anticipate future earnings for firms that engage in political hedging, suggesting that political hedging helps improve firms’ information environments. Lastly, we perform an event study using President Obama’s Clean Power Plan. We find that on the days this policy proposal was debated in Congress, energy and utility firms experienced heightened intraday return volatility (relative to other firms and nonevent days). However, this heightened volatility is mitigated for energy and utility firms that are more politically hedged. Overall, we conclude that political hedging is an effective risk management tool that helps mitigate firm risk. This paper was accepted by Suraj Srinivasan, accounting.

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. 212
Author(s):  
Joonhyun Kim

This study investigates the volatility of book income and taxable income, and their relevance to stock returns variability. Book income is recognized under the financial accounting principle whereas taxable income is determined on the basis of legal right. Thus, the two types of earnings can provide different sets of information to investors. Particularly related to the role of earnings as a risk measure, this study shows that book income is more volatile than taxable income, which indicates that taxable income is relatively more consistent and predictable. Further, the volatility of book income is strongly positively related to stock return variability while the taxable income volatility is insignificantly associated with the stock returns volatility. Additional analysis shows that the earnings volatility is more closely linked to the systematic risk of stock prices than the idiosyncratic risk. In conclusion, this study suggests that book income and taxable income is mutually different in terms of earnings variability and its relevance to firm risk. The findings also indicate that those two sets of earnings information are complementary to each other and provides investors with useful information to assess underlying firm risk.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Spencer Pierce

ABSTRACTFinancial accounting standards require derivatives to be recognized at fair value with changes in value recognized immediately in earnings. However, if specified criteria are met, firms may use an alternative accounting treatment, hedge accounting, which is intended to better represent the underlying economics of firms' derivative use. Using FAS 161 disclosures, I examine determinants of hedge accounting use and the effects of hedge accounting on financial reporting and capital markets. I find variation in firms' hedge accounting use and provide evidence that compliance costs of applying hedge accounting affect firms' decision to use hedge accounting. Firms decrease their reported earnings volatility via derivatives that receive hedge accounting and could further decrease their earnings volatility if hedge accounting were applied to all their derivatives. Inconsistent with arguments given for using hedge accounting, I fail to find a decrease in investors' assessments of firm risk from using hedge accounting.JEL Classifications: M40; M41; G32.


2021 ◽  
pp. 101695
Author(s):  
Weijie Luo ◽  
Yong Wang ◽  
Xiaoge Zhang

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 278-281
Author(s):  
Seyedeh Fatemeh Razmi ◽  
Bahareh Ramezanian Bajgiran ◽  
Seyed Mohammad Javad Razmi ◽  
Kiana Baensaf Oroumieh

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-177
Author(s):  
Matthew W Clance ◽  
Riza Demirer ◽  
Rangan Gupta ◽  
Clement Kweku Kyei

Theoretically, there is exists a strong link between monetary policy rate uncertainty and equity return volatility, since asset pricing models assume the risk-free rate to be a key factor for equity prices. Most studies, however, focus on aggregate volatility proxies, ignoring the evidence that idiosyncratic risk could also be an important consideration, particularly for under-diversified investors and arbitrageurs. Given this, we examine firm-level annual data for the United States over 1997 to 2016, and show that monetary policy uncertainty does indeed contain significant predictive information over realized and implied volatilities at both the firm- and industry-level. The predictive power of monetary policy uncertainty is found to be robust across the low and high quantiles of volatility with higher policy uncertainty predicting higher firm-level volatility in subsequent periods. While the strongest possible volatility effect is observed in the case of Retail Trade, we observe opposite resuThis paper provides novel evidence for the This paper provides novel evidence for the predictive power of monetary policy uncertainty (MPU) over stock return volatility at the firm level based on a dataset constructed from 9,458 U.S. firms. Our findings show that monetary policy uncertainty contains significant predictive information over realized and implied volatilities at both the firm- and industry-level, with higher policy uncertainty predicting higher volatility in subsequent periods. While the strongest possible volatility effect is observed in the case of Retail Trade, we observe opposite results for Mining with high policy uncertainty predicting lower volatility in this sector. We argue that the dual nature of the underlying commodity for Mining companies, both as a consumption and investment asset, drives the negative effect of policy uncertainty on volatility in this sector. Nevertheless, the findings highlight the predictive information captured by monetary policy actions on the idiosyncratic component of equity market volatility.predictive power of monetary policy uncertainty (MPU) over stock return volatility at the firm level based on a dataset constructed from 9,458 U.S. firms. Our findings show that monetary policy uncertainty contains significant predictive information over realized and implied volatilities at both the firm- and industry-level, with higher policy uncertainty predicting higher volatility in subsequent periods. While the strongest possible volatility effect is observed in the case of Retail Trade, we observe opposite results for Mining with high policy uncertainty predicting lower volatility in this sector. We argue that the dual nature of the underlying commodity for Mining companies, both as a consumption and investment asset, drives the negative effect of policy uncertainty on volatility in this sector. Nevertheless, the findings highlight the predictive information captured by monetary policy actions on the idiosyncratic component of equity market volatility.lts for Mining with high policy uncertainty predicting lower volatility in this sector. We argue that the dual nature of the underlying commodity for Mining companies, both as a consumption and investment asset, drives the negative effect of policy uncertainty on volatility in this sector. Nevertheless, the findings highlight the predictive information captured by monetary policy actions on the idiosyncratic component of equity market volatility.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Rubeena Tashfeen

<p>This study investigates whether there is a relationship between corporate governance and derivatives, whether corporate governance influence in firms impacts the association between derivatives and firm value, and whether corporate governance influence affects the association between derivatives and cash flow volatility, stock return volatility and market risk. This study uses two different data samples of publicly traded firms listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The first sample comprises a panel of 6900 firm year observations and the other consists of a panel of 6234 firm year observations both over the eight-year period from 2004-2011.  With regard to whether there is a relationship between corporate governance and derivatives, the findings from the empirical results show that corporate governance does influence derivatives and therefore is an important determinant in the firm’s decisions to use derivatives. Of the thirteen corporate governance variables examined, board size, institutional shareholders, CEO age, CEO bonus, CEO salary, insider shareholders and total CEO compensation show significant association with derivatives.  This study finds that derivative users exhibit higher firm value on account of the corporate governance influence, which is correspondingly largely insignificant for derivative non-users. Further the research indicates that the impact of corporate governance varies according to the different types of risks examined. Generally, the board of directors and CEO governance mechanisms reduce stock return volatility to achieve hedging effectiveness. This supports the view that directors and management take actions to reduce stock return volatility to protect their personal portfolios without having to bear the costs of hedging themselves.  With respect to cash flow volatility, the board of directors and CEO related corporate governance mechanisms largely exhibit increased risk to show evidence of speculative behavior. It supports the perceptions that managers and directors have a strong motivation to show higher earnings to protect jobs and reputation and to enhance compensation.  All the shareholder governance mechanisms encourage risk taking with respect to stock return volatility, without any increase in firm value. This is in line with research findings of market granularity by institutional and other larger block holders to indicate that these investors increase stock price volatilities and play the markets for their own financial gain. Besides they have little interest in diversifying firm risk as they already have well protected portfolios and would not want to incur additional costs of hedging.  The study finds evidence of association between corporate governance and hedging, speculation and selective hedging. Of the thirteen corporate governance variables examined in the study board diversity consistently shows hedging effectiveness, with accompanying increase in firm value. While board meetings, institutional shareholders, block shareholders, CEO age, CEO base salary and CEO compensation exhibit exclusive speculative behavior. The remaining corporate governance mechanisms: board size, insider shareholding, CEO tenure, CEO bonus and audit committee size, show evidence of selective hedging behavior.  The concurrent hedging and speculative behavior evidenced in this study supports literature in respect of selective hedging by non-financial firms. It also validates the idea that corporate governance delves in risk allocation strategies that have been evidenced by past research. The results remain unchanged, after using alternative measures for firm value and firm risk, and alternative methods of analyses.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Rubeena Tashfeen

<p>This study investigates whether there is a relationship between corporate governance and derivatives, whether corporate governance influence in firms impacts the association between derivatives and firm value, and whether corporate governance influence affects the association between derivatives and cash flow volatility, stock return volatility and market risk. This study uses two different data samples of publicly traded firms listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The first sample comprises a panel of 6900 firm year observations and the other consists of a panel of 6234 firm year observations both over the eight-year period from 2004-2011.  With regard to whether there is a relationship between corporate governance and derivatives, the findings from the empirical results show that corporate governance does influence derivatives and therefore is an important determinant in the firm’s decisions to use derivatives. Of the thirteen corporate governance variables examined, board size, institutional shareholders, CEO age, CEO bonus, CEO salary, insider shareholders and total CEO compensation show significant association with derivatives.  This study finds that derivative users exhibit higher firm value on account of the corporate governance influence, which is correspondingly largely insignificant for derivative non-users. Further the research indicates that the impact of corporate governance varies according to the different types of risks examined. Generally, the board of directors and CEO governance mechanisms reduce stock return volatility to achieve hedging effectiveness. This supports the view that directors and management take actions to reduce stock return volatility to protect their personal portfolios without having to bear the costs of hedging themselves.  With respect to cash flow volatility, the board of directors and CEO related corporate governance mechanisms largely exhibit increased risk to show evidence of speculative behavior. It supports the perceptions that managers and directors have a strong motivation to show higher earnings to protect jobs and reputation and to enhance compensation.  All the shareholder governance mechanisms encourage risk taking with respect to stock return volatility, without any increase in firm value. This is in line with research findings of market granularity by institutional and other larger block holders to indicate that these investors increase stock price volatilities and play the markets for their own financial gain. Besides they have little interest in diversifying firm risk as they already have well protected portfolios and would not want to incur additional costs of hedging.  The study finds evidence of association between corporate governance and hedging, speculation and selective hedging. Of the thirteen corporate governance variables examined in the study board diversity consistently shows hedging effectiveness, with accompanying increase in firm value. While board meetings, institutional shareholders, block shareholders, CEO age, CEO base salary and CEO compensation exhibit exclusive speculative behavior. The remaining corporate governance mechanisms: board size, insider shareholding, CEO tenure, CEO bonus and audit committee size, show evidence of selective hedging behavior.  The concurrent hedging and speculative behavior evidenced in this study supports literature in respect of selective hedging by non-financial firms. It also validates the idea that corporate governance delves in risk allocation strategies that have been evidenced by past research. The results remain unchanged, after using alternative measures for firm value and firm risk, and alternative methods of analyses.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tho Anh To ◽  
Yoshihisa Suzuki ◽  
Hong Thu Thi Ho ◽  
Siem Thi Tran ◽  
Tuan Quoc Tran

PurposeThis study investigates the impact of board independence on firm risk of Vietnamese listed firms and the moderating effect of capital expenditure on this relationship.Design/methodology/approachThis paper applies fixed effects and dynamic generalized method of moments (GMM) models to examine hypothesized associations between the proportion of nonexecutive directors and stock return volatility, as well as the moderating effect of capital expenditure. The robustness tests are implemented by applying alternative measures of overinvestment and firm risk.FindingsThe results show that the presence of nonexecutive directors on board increases firm risk. However, the combination of nonexecutive ratio and capital expenditure ratio has a significant negative impact on firm risk. The result is also confirmed by the difference between the monitoring role of nonexecutive directors in overinvesting and underinvesting firms.Research limitations/implicationsThe results imply that Vietnamese listed firms take stock return volatility into consideration before nominating and appointing nonexecutive directors into their board, especially in overinvesting firms. From another perspective, the shift toward having a majority of nonexecutive directors on boards can play a significant role in pursuing a stable or risky business strategy.Originality/valueThis paper investigates the influences of nonexecutive directors on firm risk in the context of Vietnam.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document