首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Accounting Research >Ultimate Ownership, Income Management, and Legal and Extra-Legal Institutions
【24h】

Ultimate Ownership, Income Management, and Legal and Extra-Legal Institutions

机译:最终所有权,收入管理以及法律和法外机构

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This study provides evidence of the role of both legal and extra-legal institutions in limiting the income management induced by the detachment of control rights from the cash flow rights of ultimate owners. The tests use a unique, comprehensive data set for firm-level control and ownership structures from 9 East Asian and 13 Western European countries. Univariate regressions show that income management that is induced by the wedge between control rights and cash flow rights is significantly limited in countries with high statutory protection of minority rights (proxied by legal tradition, minority rights protection, the efficiency of the judicial system, or disclosure standards) and effective extra-legal institutions (proxied by the effectiveness of competition laws, diffusion of the press, and tax compliance). Furthermore, multiple regression results show that a common law tradition and an efficient judicial system subsume the effects of the other legal institutions, and that a high rate of tax compliance subsumes the effects of the other extra-legal institutions in curbing insider income management. It is surprising that a high rate of tax compliance ultimately has a greater effect than legal tradition and the efficiency of the judicial system. Although this finding is unexpected, given prior evidence on the dominant roles of legal institutions in macroeco-nomic issues and corporate policies, it is consistent with the recent argument that effective tax enforcement is like a public good in that it can reduce insiders' private control benefits. An implication of this finding is that closer attention to extra-legal institutions has the potential to enhance our understanding of the institutional reforms needed to limit insider private control benefits.
机译:这项研究提供了法律和法外机构在限制收入控制中的作用的证据,这些收入管理是由于控制权与最终所有者的现金流量权分离而引起的。这些测试使用了唯一,全面的数据集,用于来自9个东亚和13个西欧国家的公司级控制和所有权结构。单变量回归显示,控制权和现金流量权之间的楔入所引起的收入管理在少数群体权利得到高度法定保护的国家(受法律传统,少数群体权利保护,司法制度的效率或披露的辅助)受到明显限制。标准)和有效的法外机构(以竞争法的效力,新闻传播和税收合规为后盾)。此外,多项回归结果表明,普通法传统和有效的司法体系包含了其他法律机构的影响,而高税收遵从率也包含了其他法外机构在抑制内部人收入管理方面的影响。令人惊讶的是,高税收遵守率最终会比法律传统和司法系统的效率产生更大的影响。尽管这一发现是出乎意料的,但是,鉴于先前证据表明法律机构在宏观经济问题和公司政策中的主导作用,这与最近的论点是一致的,即有效的税收执法就像一种公共物品,因为它可以减少内部人员的私人控制权。好处。这一发现的含义是,对法外制度的更密切关注有可能加深我们对限制内部人内部控制利益所需的制度改革的理解。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号