We examine the effect of minority shareholder voting rights on labor investment efficiency using a sample of Chinese firms. Taking advantage of the difference-in-difference setting, our study reveals that the expansion of minority shareholder voting rights has a detrimental effect on labor investment efficiency. Through analysis of holding period and a managerial shortsightedness index based on textual analysis, we find that this outcome can be attributed to the fact that minority shareholders typically prioritize short-term gains over long-term corporate growth. Moreover, the impact of voting power is more pronounced in determining the investment efficiency of rank-andfileemployees. Our results are more significant for firms that face severe financial constraints, are non-state-owned enterprises, exhibit lower levels of internal control, possess fewer female managers, demonstrate lower human capital quality and higher labor intensity. Taken together, our paper suggests that minority shareholders could be myopia in making labor decisions.

The level of corporate risk-taking impacts debt default as a crucial investment decision. Hence, this must be examined considering resource allocation. This study uses A-share listed companies from 2007 to 2021 as samples to empirically explore the impact and mechanism of corporate risk-taking level on debt default risk. The results show that corporate risk-taking can significantly inhibit debt default and the risk of debt default by promoting total factor productivity. Further, the higher the level of enterprise financialization of the firm, the higher the stock liquidity, and the higher the level of managerial confidence, the stronger the inhibitory effect of corporate risktaking on debt default. The heterogeneity analysis reveals that the inhibitory effect of corporate risk-taking on debt default is more significant in large-scale enterprises, enterprises with lower regulatory shareholdings, and enterprises with standard unqualified audit opinions. The study provides guidance for enterprises to improve the level of risk-taking and resource allocation efficiency effectively. Moreover, it provides empirical support for regulators to effectively prevent "waves of defaults" and even "waves of bankruptcies" in the real economy.

The 2020 Holding Foreign Companies Accountable (HFCA) Act will force China-based firms to delist from U.S. exchanges if China fails to permit audit inspections during a two-year period. The Act also requires such firms, as soon as China blocks such inspections, to disclose ties to the Chinese party-state. We first explain why the delisting provisions, while well-intentioned, may well harm U.S. investors. We then turn to the disclosure provisions, explaining that they appear to be motivated by a desire to name-shame Chinese firms rather than to protect investors. While China-based firms do pose unique risks to U.S. investors, the Act fails to mitigate—and may well exacerbate—these risks.

As digital transformation strategies have emerged as a primary approach for enterprises to enhance their Total Factor Productivity (TFP), it is crucial to empirically examine the impact of these strategies on TFP. For this purpose, this study considers these transformation strategies as a quasi-natural experiment and employees a propensity score-weighted difference-indifferences methodology on data from Chinese firms listed on the A-share market between 2007 and 2020. The key findings include: (1) digital transformation has a significant positive influence on TFP; (2) Generalized boosted regression trees analysis reinforces this finding after controlling for other TFP determinants; (3) notably, non-state-owned and technology-intensive enterprises exhibit a more distinct enhancement in TFP following digital transformation. These results underscore the need for firms to increase investment in research and development capabilities and digital competencies.

We document a positive investment premium in the Chinese market, in contrast to the typical negative investment premium in other markets. The premium only exists when we measure investment by quarterly asset growth, not annual asset growth. A positive premium can be attributed to the fact that quarterly asset growth positively predicts future profitability and GDP growth in the Chinese market, whereas both relationships are negative in the U.S. market. Furthermore, Chinese firms have shorter operating cycles compared to those in the U.S., which explains why quarter data is more valuable.

This study provides the first empirical evidence on the relationship between the chairman of the board of directors (COB) and corporate financial performance. Using a sample of Chinese A listed firms between 2008-2017, we find reliable evidence that the COB turnover improves corporate financial performance. Moreover, the existence of a majority shareholder (Majority) positively influences corporate financial performance, while firm nature (private majority shareholder or public majority shareholder)(Private) may not.

This paper exploits China’s first default of state-owned enterprises to study the implicit government guarantee’s effect on SOEs’ trade credit financing. It finds that SOEs increase trade credit by 2.3% of total liabilities, on average, relative to non-SOEs after the first SOE default in China’s bond markets in 2015. The additional reliance on suppliers’ credit is more prominent among SOEs with higher information opacity. It is consistent with the literature where trade credit advantage lies in the suppliers’ superior information, as they can observe their clients through daily transactions. The current paper also finds that trade credits positively affect SOEs when IGG weakens. Overall, the results suggest that the reduction in IGG significantly affects Chinese firms’ financing decisions, highlighting the trade credit advantage against the backdrop of imperfect market institutions.

Recent research indicates that the relationship between state ownership, firm size, and technological innovation outcomes in Chinese firms is a complex and intriguing topic. However, we propose a new perspective based on institutional complexity and examine the combined effects of these two factors. By considering the interplay between the economic efficiency rationale and the institutional logic associated with state ownership and firm size within the context of Chinese firms, we argue that the effects of state ownership and firm size can counterbalance each other. In order to test our hypotheses, we analyze a sample of 385 publicly listed firms spanning the period from 2015 to 2019. The findings reveal that while state ownership and firm size individually exert a negative influence on both exploratory and exploitative innovation in Chinese firms, their interaction actually yields a positive impact. This study contributes to our comprehension of how state ownership influences exploratory and exploitative innovation in the presence of competing institutional logics, as well as the contingent effect of firm size.

This paper investigates the impact of Chinese firms’ ESG performance on their financial constraint and financing activities. We find a negative association between firms’ ESG performance and their financial constraint driven by the Chinese government’s commitment to tackling climate change. Compared with state-owned enterprises (SOEs), non-SOEs have alleviated their financial constraint through both equity and debt issuance, thanks to the stock price appreciation and green credit. High-pollution firms benefit from both equity and debt issuance, while low-pollution firms mainly finance through equity issuance. Our findings demonstrate the leading role of the Chinese government in its domestic capital markets.

Purpose – For Chinese companies that cross-list in Chinese A share and Hong Kong (H share) markets, the H share price has been consistently lower than the A share price by an average of 85% in recent years. This is puzzling because most institutional differences between the two markets have been eliminated since 2007. The purpose of this study is to explain the puzzle of the price difference of AþH companies. Design/methodology/approach – Using all A and H share Chinese firms in the period 2007–2013 and a simultaneous equations approach, this study identifies three new explanations for the recent price difference. Findings – First, utilizing a unique earning quality measure that is directly related to non-persistent components of fair value accounting under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), this study finds that the lower the earnings quality, the lower the H share price relative to the A share price, and hence the greaterthe price difference. Second, the higherthe myopic investor ownership in A share firms, the largerthe A share price relative to the H share price. Third, the short-selling mechanism introduced to the A share market since 2010 helps reduce the price difference. Originality/value – First, this study identifies three new explanations for the puzzle of the AH price difference which remains substantial even afterthe institutional and accounting standards differences between the two markets were eliminated. Second, we examine the impact of the implementation of fair value accounting under IFRS in an emerging market on the pricing difference of cross-listed shares and reveal that it can induce an unintended negative consequence on the pricing difference of cross-listed shares. Third, this study contributes to the literature on short sales by providing its mitigating role in pricing differences across two different markets. Finally, this study makes improvements in research design, which utilizes a unique measure of earnings quality that is directly related to the implementation of IFRS and a simultaneous equations approach that minimizes endogeneity concern.