期刊文献+

监管信息披露与债权人定价决策——基于沪深交易所年报问询函的证据 被引量:54

Disclosure of Regulatory Information and Creditor Pricing Decision:Evidence from Chinese Comment Letters
原文传递
导出
摘要 本文检验交易所监管问询函及其公开披露与否对公司债务资金成本的影响。实证结果发现,交易所监管问询函显著提升了被问询公司的债务资金成本,并且问询函包含问题个数越多、需要第三方出具专业审核意见以及问询内容涉及相关风险事项时,债务资金成本上升程度越大,而当问询函未向市场公开披露时,被问询公司的债务资金成本不会受到影响。横截面测试发现,上市公司所在地市场化水平强化了风险与债务资金成本的正向关系,而国有产权属性、银企关系背景以及集团化经营模式则削弱了风险与债务资金成本的正向关系。本文从信息效应视角补充了监管问询函经济后果的相关研究,也揭示了半强式市场中监管信息公开披露的重要性。 Using Chinese comment letters data,we investigate the impact of the disclosure of comment letters on the cost of debt financing.Empirical results show that when the comment letters are publicly disclosed,creditors charge borrowers significantly higher cost of debt financing.Furthermore,when more questions or risk factors are contained in the comment letters or when professional opinions from a third party are requested to issue,the cost of debt financing is further higher.However,when the comment letters are not publicly disclosed,the cost of debt financing is not affected.In cross-sectional test,we find that the degree of regional market development and the characteristics of debtor both affect the relationship between cost of debt financing and comment letters.Our research not only supplements the literature on the economic consequences of comment letters from the perspective of information effect,but also reveals the importance of public disclosure of regulatory information in semi-strong efficient market.
作者 胡宁 曹雅楠 周楠 薛爽 Hu Ning
出处 《会计研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2020年第3期54-65,共12页 Accounting Research
基金 国家自然科学基金(71872107,71802123) 中央高校基本科研业务费项目(JBK2001010)资助
关键词 交易所一线监管 定期报告问询函 信息效应 债务资金成本 Front-line Regulation Comment Letters Information Effect Cost of Debt Financing
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献43

  • 1陈工孟,高宁.我国证券监管有效性的实证研究[J].管理世界,2005,21(7):40-47. 被引量:109
  • 2王化成,佟岩.控股股东与盈余质量——基于盈余反应系数的考察[J].会计研究,2006(2):66-74. 被引量:291
  • 3姚宏,李延喜,高锐,张晶晶.信息结构、风险偏好与盈余操纵行为——一次实验研究的结论[J].会计研究,2006(5):58-65. 被引量:14
  • 4Beneish, M. D., 1999, "Incentives and Penalties Related to Earnings Overstatements that Violate GAAP", The Accounting Review 74: pp.425-457.
  • 5Feroz, E. H., Park, K. and Pastena, V. S., 1991, " The Financial and Market Effects of the SEC's Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Releases", Journal of Accounting Research 29 (Supplement): pp.107-142.
  • 6Ferris, S., Kumar, R. and Wolfe, A. G., 1992, The Effects of SEC-ordered Suspensions on Returns, Volatility, and Trading Volume", The Financial Review 27: 1-34.
  • 7Howe, J. S. and Schlarbaum G., 1986, SEC Trading Suspensions: Empirical Evidence", Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 21, pp.323-333.
  • 8Kryzanowski, L., 1978, "Misinformation and Regulatory Actions in the Canadian Capital Markets: Some Empirical Evidence", Bell Journal of Economics 9: pp.355-368.
  • 9LaPorta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes,'F., Shleifer, A. and Vishny, R., 2000, "Investor Protection and Corporate Governance", Journal of Financial Economics 58: pp.3-28.
  • 10LaPorta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A. and Vishny, R., 2002, "Investor Protection and Corporate Protection", Journal of Finance 57: pp.1147-1170.

共引文献403

同被引文献788

引证文献54

二级引证文献126

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部