The robustness of the Sarbanes Oxley effect on the U.S. capital market
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
We examine the incidence of new listings and delistings on U.S. stock exchanges and firms’ propensity to delist, as a function of general market conditions, firm fundamentals, and the costs of compliance with the Sarbanes Oxley Act (SOX). We find that both general market conditions and firm fundamentals explain the delisting incidence and firms’ delisting decisions; while SOX variables are positively associated with firms’ delisting likelihood only when general market conditions are not included in the analyses. Further analyses on the population partitioned into size quintiles suggest that the passage of SOX was not associated with an increase in the likelihood of delisting for any size quintile of firms and that the implementation of SOX section 404 is positively associated with the delisting likelihood for midsized and larger firms. Our empirical evidence is useful to regulators as they consider changes in the imposition and implementation of SOX section 404.
- Baker, M., & Wurgler, J. (2006). Investor sentiment and the cross section of stock returns. Journal of Finance, 61(4), 1645–1680. CrossRef
- Boehmer, E., & Ljungqvist, A. (2004). On the decision to go public: Evidence from privately-held firms. Working Paper, Texas A&M University and New York University.
- Cook, D., & Kieschnick, R. (2005). On the timing of going public and going private transactions. Working Paper, University of Alabama and University of Texas at allas.
- Doidge, C., Karolyi, A., & Stulz, R. (2007). Has New York become less competitive in global markets? Evaluating foreign listing choices over time. NBER, Ohio State University, and University of Toronto Working Paper.
- Engel, E., Hayes, R., & Wang, X. (2007). The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and firms’ going-private decisions. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 44(1–2), 116–145. CrossRef
- Fama, E., & French, K. (2004). New lists: Fundamentals and survival rates. Journal of Financial Economics, 73(2), 229–269. CrossRef
- Harris, J. H., Panchapagesan, V., & Werner, I. (2008). Off but not gone: A study of NASDAQ delistings. Working Paper, University of Delaware, Goldman-Sachs Group, Inc., and Ohio State University.
- Hostak, P., Karaoglu, E., Lys, T., & Yang, Y. (2007). An examination of the impact of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on the attractiveness of U.S. capital markets for foreign firms. Working Paper, University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, University of Southern California, Northwestern University, and The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
- Jensen, M. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. American Economic Review, 76(2), 323–329.
- Judge, E. (2006, December 13). America’s Alure Dented by Sarbanes-Oxley Law. TimesOnLine.
- Kamar, E., Karaca-Mandic, P., & Talley, E. (2007). Sarbanes-Oxley’s effects on small firms: What is the evidence. Working Paper, University of Southern California School of Law, Harvard Law School, RAND Corporation.
- Lehn, K., & Poulsen, A. (1989). Free cash flow and stockholder gains in going private transactions. Journal of Finance, 44, 771–787. CrossRef
- Leuz, C., Triantis, A., & Wang, T. (2008). Why do firms go dark? Causes and economic consequences of voluntary SEC deregistrations. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 45, 181–208. CrossRef
- Lowry, M. (2003). Why does IPO volume fluctuate so much? Journal of Financial Economics, 67, 3–40. CrossRef
- Pagano, M., Panetta, F., & Zingales, L. (1998). Why do companies go public? An empirical analysis. Journal of Finance, 53, 27–64. CrossRef
- Pastor, L., & Veronesi, P. (2005). Rational IPO waves. Journal of Finance, 60, 1713–1757. CrossRef
- Piotroski, J. D., & Srinivasan, S. (2008). Regulation and bonding: The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the flow of international listings. Journal of Accounting Research, 46(2), 383–425. CrossRef
- Rogers, W. (1993). Regression standard errors in clustered samples. Stata Technical Bulletin, 19–23.
- Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). (2008). Internal control over financial reporting in exchange act period reports of non-accelerated filers and newly public companies: Federal Register, 73(26), 7450–7455.
- Smith, P., & Cohen, N. (2007, January 2). Delisting wave hits London. Financial Times.
- Vulcheva, M. (2007). Effect of regulation on companies’ delisting decisions: Evidence from the Introduction of IFRS by the European Union. Working Paper, Emory University.
- Williams, R. (2000, June 2000). A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometris, 54, 645–646. CrossRef
- Woolner, A. (2006, October 13). What makes U.S. markets competitive (or not). Bloomberg.
- Yang, Y. (2007). Do at-risk firms with good prospects manage accruals to avoid delisting. Working Paper, University of Texas at Austin.
- The robustness of the Sarbanes Oxley effect on the U.S. capital market
Review of Accounting Studies
Volume 14, Issue 2-3 , pp 401-439
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- New listings
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Whittemore School of Business and Economics, University of New Hampshire, McConnell Hall, 15 Academic Way, Durham, NH, 03824, USA
- 2. Goizueta Business School, Emory University, 1300 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA