We find that the controlling family holds both the chief executive officer and chair positions in 79% of Norwegian family firms. The family holds more governance positions when it owns large stakes in small, profitable, low-risk firms. This result suggests that the family trades off expected costs and benefits by conditioning participation intensity on observable firm characteristics. We find that the positive effect of performance on participation is twice as strong as the positive effect of participation on performance. The endogeneity of participation, therefore, should be carefully accounted for when analyzing the effect of family governance on the family firm’s behavior.
We find that potential conflicts between majority and minority shareholders strongly influence how dividends respond to taxes. When the controlling shareholder has a smaller stake, the incentives to extract private benefits are stronger – a shareholder conflict that can be mitigated by dividend payout. We study a large and clean regulatory shock in Norway that increases the dividend tax rate for all individuals from 0% to 28%. We find that dividends drop less the higher the potential shareholder conflict, suggesting that dividend policy trades off tax and agency considerations. The average payout ratio falls by 30 percentage points when the conflict potential is low, but by only 18 points when it is high. These lower dividends cannot be explained by higher salaries to shareholders or diverse liquidity needs. We also observe a strong increase in indirect ownership of high-conflict firms through tax-exempt holding companies and suggest policy implications for intercorporate dividend taxation.
We examine how dividend policy is used to mitigate potential conflicts of interest between majority and minority shareholders in private Norwegian firms. The average payout is 50% higher if the majority shareholder’s equity stake is 55% (high conflict potential) rather than 95% (low conflict potential). Such minority-friendly payout is also associated with higher subsequent minority shareholder investment. These results suggest that controlling shareholders voluntarily use dividends to reduce agency conflicts and build trust, rather than opportunistically preferring private benefits to dividends. We show that our results are unlikely to arise from liquidity or signaling motives.
Karapetyan, Artashes & Stacescu, Bogdan (2014)
Does information sharing reduce the role of collateral as a screening device?
Information sharing and collateral are both devices that help banks reduce the cost of adverse selection. We examine whether they are likely to be used as substitutes (information sharing reduces the need for collateral) or complements. We show that information sharing via a credit bureaus and registers may increase, rather than decrease, the role of collateral: it can be required in loans to high-risk borrowers in cases when it is not in the absence of information sharing. Higher adverse selection makes the use of collateral more likely both with and without information sharing. Our results are in line with recent empirical evidence.
Karapetyan, Artashes & Stacescu, Bogdan (2013)
Information Sharing and Information Acquisition in Credit Markets
We examine the effect of information sharing via credit bureaus or credit registers on banks’ incentives to collect information about their borrowers. Information asymmetries have been identified as an important source of bank profits, and sharing knowledge about borrowers can reduce those rents. Despite that, we show that banks’ incentives to collect information actually increase in the presence of information sharing. The reason is that when hard, standardized information is shared, banks’ incentives to invest in soft, nonverifiable information increase. The result can be more accurate lending decisions and improved welfare
