Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Why do firms go dark? Causes and economic consequences of voluntary SEC deregistrations

Contents:

Author Info

  • Leuz, Christian
  • Triantis, Alexander
  • Yue Wang, Tracy

Abstract

We examine a comprehensive sample of going-dark deregistrations where companies cease SEC reporting, but continue to trade publicly. We document a spike in going dark that is largely attributable to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Firms experience large negative abnormal returns when going dark. We find that many firms go dark due to poor future prospects, distress and increased compliance costs after SOX. But we also find evidence suggesting that controlling insiders take their firms dark to protect private control benefits and decrease outside scrutiny, particularly when governance and investor protection are weak. Finally, we show that going dark and going private are distinct economic events.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V87-4RMFNVN-1/1/60ddc77190a9b2e01a3e4546b81e41b8
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Accounting and Economics.

Volume (Year): 45 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2-3 (August)
Pages: 181-208

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:jaecon:v:45:y:2008:i:2-3:p:181-208

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jae

Related research

Keywords:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. La Porta, Rafael & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Schleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert, 2001. "Investor Protection and Corporate Governance," Working Paper Series rwp01-017, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
  2. Kaplan, Steven, 1989. "The effects of management buyouts on operating performance and value," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 217-254.
  3. Brown, Stephen J. & Warner, Jerold B., 1985. "Using daily stock returns : The case of event studies," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-31, March.
  4. Joseph Fuller & Michael C. Jensen, 2002. "Just Say No To Wall Street: Putting A Stop To The Earnings Game," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 14(4), pages 41-46.
  5. Karolyi, G. Andrew, 2004. "The World of Cross-Listings and Cross-Listings of the World: Challenging Conventional Wisdom," Working Paper Series 2004-14, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
  6. Frank R Lichtenberg & Donald Siegel, 1989. "The Effects Of Leveraged Buyouts On Productivity And Related Aspects Of Firm Behavior," Working Papers 89-5, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
  7. Jensen, Michael C, 1986. "Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 323-29, May.
  8. DeAngelo, Harry & DeAngelo, Linda & Rice, Edward M, 1984. "Going Private: Minority Freezeouts and Stockholder Wealth," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 367-401, October.
  9. Merton, Robert C., 1987. "A simple model of capital market equilibrium with incomplete information," Working papers 1869-87., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
  10. David Easley & Soeren Hvidkjaer & Maureen O'Hara, 2002. "Is Information Risk a Determinant of Asset Returns?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(5), pages 2185-2221, October.
  11. Marshall Blume & Robert Stambaugh, . "Biases in Computed Returns: An Application to the Size Effect (Revision of 2-83)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 11-83, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
  12. Whitney K. Newey & Kenneth D. West, 1986. "A Simple, Positive Semi-Definite, Heteroskedasticity and AutocorrelationConsistent Covariance Matrix," NBER Technical Working Papers 0055, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. A. Craig MacKinlay, 1997. "Event Studies in Economics and Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(1), pages 13-39, March.
  14. John Y. Campbell, 1993. "Understanding Risk and Return," NBER Working Papers 4554, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Ljungqvist, Alexander & Boehmer, Ekkehart, 2004. "On the decision to go public: Evidence from privately-held firms," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2004,16, Deutsche Bundesbank, Research Centre.
  16. Leuz, Christian, 2007. "Was the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 really this costly? A discussion of evidence from event returns and going-private decisions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 146-165, September.
  17. Blume, Marshall E. & Stambaugh, Robert F., 1983. "Biases in computed returns : An application to the size effect," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 387-404, November.
  18. Nagpurnanand R. Prabhala, 1997. "Conditional Methods in Event-Studies and an Equilibrium Justification for Standard Event-Study Procedures," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm55, Yale School of Management.
  19. Edward C. Norton & Hua Wang & Chunrong Ai, 2004. "Computing interaction effects and standard errors in logit and probit models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 4(2), pages 154-167, June.
  20. Marosi, András & Massoud, Nadia, 2007. "Why Do Firms Go Dark?," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(02), pages 421-442, June.
  21. Craig Doidge & G. Andrew Karolyi & Rene M. Stulz, 2001. "Why are Foreign Firms Listed in the U.S. Worth More?," NBER Working Papers 8538, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  22. Lehn, Kenneth & Poulsen, Annette, 1989. " Free Cash Flow and Stockholder Gains in Going Private Transactions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 44(3), pages 771-87, July.
  23. Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2005. "The economic implications of corporate financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 3-73, December.
  24. Basak, Suleyman & Cuoco, Domenico, 1998. "An Equilibrium Model with Restricted Stock Market Participation," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 11(2), pages 309-41.
  25. Benninga, Simon & Helmantel, Mark & Sarig, Oded, 2005. "The timing of initial public offerings," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 115-132, January.
  26. Luzi Hail & Christian Leuz, 2006. "International Differences in the Cost of Equity Capital: Do Legal Institutions and Securities Regulation Matter?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 485-531, 06.
  27. Asli Demirgüç-Kunt & Vojislav Maksimovic, 1998. "Law, Finance, and Firm Growth," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 53(6), pages 2107-2137, December.
  28. Healy, Paul M. & Palepu, Krishna G., 2001. "Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 405-440, September.
  29. Bushee, Brian J. & Leuz, Christian, 2005. "Economic consequences of SEC disclosure regulation: evidence from the OTC bulletin board," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 233-264, June.
  30. Zhang, Ivy Xiying, 2007. "Economic consequences of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 74-115, September.
  31. Harris, Jeffrey H. & Panchapagesan, Venkatesh & Werner, Ingrid, 2008. "Off but Not Gone: A Study of Nasdaq Delistings," Working Paper Series 2008-6, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jaecon:v:45:y:2008:i:2-3:p:181-208. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.