Advertisement

Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting

, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 845–869 | Cite as

Asymmetric sensitivity of executive bonus compensation to earnings and the effect of regulatory changes

  • Sung S. Kwon
  • Jennifer YinEmail author
  • Gordian A. Ndubizu
Original Research
  • 139 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper we examine the sensitivity of CEO bonus to earnings in the cases of good news and bad news, and compare these relationships in the periods before and after SOX. We find an asymmetric sensitivity of bonus to earnings. We also find that the asymmetric sensitivity of bonus to earnings exists before SOX but disappears post SOX. Regulatory changes brought forth by SOX, including personal certifications of financial reporting by CEOs and CFOs, the claw back provision, annual evaluation of internal controls and disclosure of any material weakness, and increased level of conservatism in firms and their auditors after SOX, offer an alternative mechanism to monitor executives, potentially reducing the ex post settling up problem. The findings show that regulatory changes affect compensation contracts and have implications for regulators, managers, politicians, investors, and academics in their assessment of the equitable relationship between executive efforts and executive bonus compensation.

Keywords

Executive compensation The Sarbanes–Oxley Act Ex post settling up Asymmetric sensitivity 

JEL Classification

J33 L2 M41 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We’d like to thank Steve Balsam, Patrice Gelinas, David Kwon, Gerry Lobo, Bharat Sarath, Inho Suk, and participants at the 2018 Annual Conference on Pacific Basin Finance, Economics, Accounting, and Management, 2015 Canadian Academic Accounting Association Annual Meeting, and 2012 American Accounting Association Annual Conference for their helpful comments.

Data Availability

Data used in this study are available from public sources identified in the paper.

References

  1. Baber W, Janakiraman S, Kang S (1996) Investment opportunities and the structure of executive compensation. J Acc Econ 21(3):297–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baber W, Kang SH, Kumar KR (1998) Accounting earnings and executive compensation: the role of earnings persistence. J Acc Econ 25:169–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baber W, Kang SH, Kumar KR (1999) The explanatory power of earnings levels versus earnings changes in the context of executive compensation. Acc Rev 74(4):459–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball R, Brown P (1968) Empirical evaluation of accounting income numbers. J Account Res 6(2):159–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balsam S, Ryan D (1996) Response to tax law changes involving the deductibility of executive compensation: A model explaining behavior. J Am Tax Assoc 18:1–12Google Scholar
  6. Balsam S, Ryan D (2007) Limiting executive compensation: the case of CEOs hired after the imposition of 162(m). J Acc Audit Finance 22:599–621Google Scholar
  7. Balsam S, Boone J, Liu H, Yin J (2016) The impact of say-on-pay on executive compensation. J Account Public Pol 35(2):162–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Banker RD, Datar SM (1989) Sensitivity, precision, and linear aggregation of signals for performance evaluation. J Account Res 27(1):21–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barth ME, Elliott JA, Finn MW (1999) Market rewards associated with patterns of increasing earnings. J Account Res 37(2):387–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bartov E, Givoly D, Hayn C (2002) The rewards to meeting or beating earnings expectations. J Acc Econ 33(2):173–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carter ME, Lynch LJ, Zechman SL (2009) Changes in bonus contracts in the post-Sarbanes-Oxley era. Rev Acc Stud 14:480–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen D, Dey A, Lys T (2008) Real and accrual-based earnings management in the pre- and post-Sarbanes-Oxley periods. Acc Rev 83(3):757–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conyon M, Sadler G (2010) Shareholder voting and directors’ remuneration report legislation: say on pay in the UK. Corp Gov 18(4):296–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Core J, Guay W (1999) The use of equity grants to manage optimal incentive levels. J Account Econ 28(2):151–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Demerjian P, Lev B, McVay S (2012) Quantifying managerial ability: a new measure and validity tests. Manage Sci 58(7):1229–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dikolli SS, Kulp SL, Sedatole KL (2009) Transient institutional ownership and CEO contracting. Acc Rev 84(3):737–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Feldmann D, Read W (2010) Auditor conservatism after Enron. Audit J Pract Theory 29(1):267–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ferri F, Maber D (2013) Say on pay votes and CEO compensation: evidence from the UK. Rev Finance 17(2):527–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Garvey GT, Milbourn TT (2006) Asymmetric benchmarking in compensation: executives are rewarded for good luck but not penalized for bad. J Financ Econ 82:197–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gaver JJ, Gaver KM (1998) The relation between nonrecurring accounting transactions and CEO compensation. Acc Rev 73(2):235–253Google Scholar
  21. Givoly D, Hayn C (2000) The changing time-series properties of earnings, cash flows and accruals: Has financial reporting become more conservative? J Acc Econ 29:287–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson M, Porter S, Shackell M (2001) Stakeholder pressure and the structure of executive compensation. Working paper, University of MichiganGoogle Scholar
  23. Khan M, Watts RL (2009) Estimation and empirical properties of a firm-year measure of accounting conservatism. J Acc Econ 48(2–3):132–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kwon SS, Yin J (2006) Executive compensation, investment opportunities, and earnings management: high-tech versus low-tech firms. J Acc Audit Financ 21(2):119–148Google Scholar
  25. Kwon SS, Yin QJ, Han J (2006) The effects of differential accounting conservatism on the ‘over-valuation of high-tech firms relative to low-tech firms. Rev Quant Financ Account 27:143–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lambert R, Larcker D (1987) An analysis of the use of accounting and market measures of performance in executive compensation contracts. J Account Res 25:85–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leone AJ, Wu JS, Zimmerman J (2006) Asymmetric sensitivity of CEO compensation to stock returns. J Acc Econ 42:167–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Li H, Pincus M, Rego S (2008) Market reaction to events surrounding the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and earnings management. J Law Econ 51(1):111–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lobo G, Zhou J (2006) Did conservatism in financial reporting increase after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act? Initial evidence. Account Horiz 20(1):57–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Perry T, Zenner M (2001) Pay for performance? Government regulation and the structure of compensation contracts. J Financ Econ 62(3):453–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rose N, Wolfram C (2000) Has the “million-dollar cap” affected CEO pay? Am Econ Rev 90(2):197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Scott W (2006) Financial accounting theory, 4th edn. Pearson and Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  33. Shaw KW, Zhang MH (2010) Is CEO cash compensation punished for poor firm performance? Acc Rev 85(3):1065–1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Skinner DJ, Sloan RG (2002) Earnings surprises, growth expectations, and stock returns or don’t let an earnings torpedo sink your portfolio. Rev Acc Stud 7:289–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sloan RG (1993) Accounting earnings and top executive compensation. J Acc Econ 16:55–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Watts R (2003) Conservatism in accounting part I: explanations and implications. Accout Horiz 17:207–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. White H (1980) Heteroskedasticity consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test of heteroskedasticity. Econometrica 48:817–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Administrative Studies, Faculty of Liberal Arts and Professional StudiesYork UniversityTorontoCanada
  2. 2.College of BusinessUniversity of Texas at San AntonioSan AntonioUSA
  3. 3.LeBow College of BusinessDrexel UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations