Based on the sample of Chinese A-listed firms from 2003 to 2020, this paper investigates the effect of common institutional ownership on labor income share. The result shows that common institutional ownership can significantly increase firms’ labor income share. Mechanism tests indicate that common ownership can: 1) alleviate financial constraints by reducing the debt financing costs and increasing the trade credit financing, thus increasing the labor income share; 2) improve corporate innovation and therefore enhances the demand for highly-skilled labor, which eventually boost labor income share. Competitive hypothesis test represents that common institutional ownership can reduce the monopoly power of enterprises and decrease monopoly rent, so as to increase the proportion of labor in the distribution. Further analyses present that the network formed by the common ownership can effectively exert the financing support role of SOEs and the knowledge spillover effect of innovative-advantage firms, which contributes to the labor income share increasing of other related firms in the network connection. This study not only enriches the economic consequences of common institutional ownership, but also provides policy guidance for the government to further optimize the income-distribution pattern by deepening the reform of the financial market.

Common institutional ownership can enhance knowledge spillovers by increasing portfolio firms’ awareness about each other’s innovation. By investigating listed electronic hardware firms in China for 2000-2016, we find that when common ownership by mutual funds is higher between a firm pair, it is more likely that these two firms cite each other’s patents. To confirm causality, we show that even the exogenous increase in firms’ common ownership following their inclusion into the stock index still positively influences the citing likelihood. We also find that such citations are taken place in a timely manner. Additionally, this positive effect is robust when the effects of overlapping board members and common ownership by other types of institutional investors are controlled for. This effect is more pronounced among nonneighboring firms, when non-neighboring firms are close to their common owners, when common owners hold shares longer, and when firms’ executives have lower incentive to communicate (i.e., SOEs). Last, we find that common ownership by mutual funds also enhances knowledge spillovers through third-party patents. This paper deepens the understanding of knowledge spillovers among firms in developing countries.

The existing literature studies the relationship between institutional investors and the risk of stock price crash from multiple dimensions. Based on the phenomenon that institutional investors hold the shares of several listed companies in the same industry, this paper takes the A-share listed companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets from 2008 to 2018 as the research samples to explore the relationship between institutional common ownership and stock price crash risk. The results show that: institutional common ownership significantly increases the risk of stock price crash. After a series of robustness tests, the conclusion remains unchanged. The impact mechanism test shows that institutional common ownership improves the stock price synchronization, investor sentiment and stock liquidity, and then aggravates the risk of stock price crash. Further tests show that the higher the product market competition, the more media coverage, and the weaker the protection of regional investors, the positive impact of institutional common ownership on the risk of stock price crash is more significant.