This paper investigates whether Chinese equity investors price major earnings components correctly. Total earnings are decomposed into core and non-core earnings according to a classification framework of Chinese accounting principles. The results show that, as expected, core earnings are more persistent than non-core earnings. Most importantly, the market underestimates (overestimates) the value implications of changes in current core (non-core) earnings for future earnings changes. Therefore, future stock returns can be predicted based on the information that is contained in the components of current earnings. Both portfolio tests and regression analysis generate economically significant abnormal returns that are robust to sensitivity checks.

Using a 2004 Chinese securities regulation that required equity offering proposals and other major corporate decisions to seek the separate approval of minority shareholders, we empirically test the effect of a regulatory increase in minority shareholders’ control over corporate decisions on shareholder value. While the overall stock market reaction to the announcement of the regulation is insignificant, the stock market reaction is more positive for firms with higher institutional (especially mutual fund) block ownership and more negative for firms with higher individual block ownership. The regulation helps deter management from submitting value decreasing equity offering proposals, especially for firms with higher mutual fund block ownership. In addition, value reducing equity offering proposals submitted in the post-regulation period are more likely to be vetoed in firms with higher block ownership of institutional and individual minority shareholders. Overall, our results suggest that the 2004 regulation increases shareholder value, especially in firms with higher mutual fund block ownership.

This paper investigates the value effect of large investors through their impact on corporate investment policy using a sample of listed firms in the Chinese stock market where large shareholdings and concentrated ownership are a norm. We find that the impact of capital expenditures on firm value is closely related to the level of large shareholdings (non-tradable or state shareholdings). Capital expenditures are negatively associated with firm value if firms are controlled by entrenched large shareholders. Although there is a general tendency of over-investment, the negative impact of over-investment is cancelled out if firms are controlled by incentive-aligned large shareholders. We also find that, the incentive-alignment effect of large investors is stronger in scenarios where agency conflicts are more intensified. Our findings suggest that capital investment is an important channel through which the value effect of large investors is achieved.

This study examines the relation between political connections and investment efficiency in China. For listed state-owned enterprises (SOEs), we find that the sensitivity of investment expenditure to investment opportunities is significantly weaker for those with than without political connections. Politically connected SOEs over-invest significantly more than non-connected SOEs. This negative impact of political connections is primarily observed in SOEs controlled by local governments and/or in SOEs without sufficient investment opportunities. However, for private enterprises, investment expenditure is significantly more sensitive to investment opportunities and over-investment is significantly less in politically connected firms than in those without such connections. We further show that over-investment reduces firm value across the board for both SOEs and private enterprises. Taken together, our findings suggest that political connections distort investment behavior, reduce investment efficiency, and damage firm value in listed SOEs in China, but for listed private enterprises, political connections improve investment efficiency, reduce over-investment, and consequently enhance firm value.

Until recently, Chinese companies publicly listed in domestic stock exchanges had two classes of stock: tradable and non-tradable shares. These two classes of stock had the same voting, cash flow, and all other legal rights except that non-tradable shares cannot be transferred at the open markets. From 2005 to mid-2007, Chinese government completed the ownership reform, so-called the Split Share Structure Reform (SSSR), to convert all non-tradable shares into tradable shares. Under this reform process, the holders of non-tradable shares had to negotiate with those of tradable shares to determine how much liquidity premium, or the compensation ratio, non-tradable shareholders have to pay to tradable shareholders in order to obtain the liquidity right. This paper starts with a theoretical model to identify the fundamental factors, including price discount before and after the SSSR reform, the percentage of non-tradable shares in total shares, the volatility of tradable share price, and the lockup period, that should determine the compensation ratio. We show that those factors except price discount before the reform are statistically significant in determining the compensation ratio proposed by non-tradable shareholders. We further show that the agency problems also reveal themselves in the compensation ratios. Specifically, when a firm is controlled by a governmental agency, the compensation is higher. However, the compensation is lower when more concentrated in the top ten holders, especially when shares are held by mutual funds. Thus, the evidence is consistent with the notion that the agency problem exists in China’s fund managers. Finally, we show that the existence of agency problems also reduce the importance of fundamental factors in determining the compensation ratios.

本文以2002-2007年我国“系族企业”所涉及的280家/年的上市成员企业为研究样本，通过对其内部资本市场效率进行的实证检验，我们发现：从总体上看，市场化环境好的地区，其内部资本市场是有效率的。相比于非国有的系族企业，国有系族的内部资本市场是无效率的。即使是在金融业市场化程度高的地区，国有系族企业的内部资本市场也是无效率的。而国有系族企业内部，由地方政府控制的系族企业的内部资本市场是无效率的。

This paper empirically investigates the determinants of financing decisions in Chinese listed firms, using 3,196 firm-year observations from the Shanghai Stock Exchange during the period 2001–2005. Thereby, we investigate the effects of differences in institutions across Chinese provinces and municipalities, and compare the financing choices of state-owned and private-controlled enterprises. We find that a better legal environment negatively affects the debt ratio and the proportion of debt that consists of bank loans in SOEs as well as private-controlled enterprises. Conversely, regional banking development positively influences these two variables. If anything, these effects of the rule of law and regional banking development on leverage are stronger for private-controlled firms. SOEs have lower debt ratios in regions with better stock market access, while private-controlled firms rely less on bank loans in regions with more government intervention in business. Finally, we document that SOEs’ overall debt ratio and composition of debt are comparable to those of private-controlled firms.

We investigate the role of managers’ country of origin in leverage decisions using data on foreign joint ventures in China. By focusing on foreign joint ventures in a single country, we are able to hold constant the financing environment, eliminate the effects of formal institutions in the foreign managers’ home country, and consequently reveal the effects of informal institutions such as national culture on corporate finance decisions. Using cultural values of embeddedness, mastery, and uncertainty avoidance to explain country of origin effects, we find that national culture has significant explanatory power in the financial leverage decisions of foreign joint ventures in China. Country-level variation is evident in capital structure and appears to work through choices of firm characteristics, industry affiliation, ownership structure, and region of investment.

We investigate the choice problem in the massive Chinese restructuring campaign that has been described as “grasping the large and letting go of the small,” in which a third of the million or so Chinese state-owned enterprises were either corporatized or privatized. Corporatization differs from privatization in the Chinese context, as in the former case the state remains a large shareholder, whereas in the latter case it has little or no ownership. Using a panel of provincial level statistics, we show that greater local employment pressure, less local fiscal pressure, and a more corrupt local business environment all lead to a lesser likelihood that privatization will be chosen over corporatization. Privatization is found to yield consistent efficiency gains over corporatization in terms of employment and firm profitability. Our evidence is supportive of the theoretical framework of Boycko, Shleifer, and Vishny (1996), who model privatization as an endogenous decision in which politicians trade off employment pressure against public fiscal interest.

终极所有权结构如何影响公司的债务期限结构是公司治理研究中的一个重要问题。以2003-2005年只发行A股的824家非金融上市公司的平衡面板数据为样本，通过随机效应模型实证检验终极所有权结构与债务期限结构之间的关系。总的说来，实证结果支持这样的结论：（1）终极控制股东的现金流权越大，掠夺的成本也越大，上市公司会使用更多的长期债务；（2）两权偏离度越大，债务融资的代理成本会越大，上市公司会使用更多的短期债务；（3）随着两权偏离度的增大，家族式终极控制股东对财务困境担心的壕沟效应会促使公司延长债务期限，使用更多的长期债务，而差的公司治理使得债权人仅愿意为政府终极控制的公司提供更多的短期债务。