IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jaecon/v57y2014i2p132-148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investors׳ reaction to the use of poison pills as a tax loss preservation tool

Author

Listed:
  • Sikes, Stephanie A.
  • Tian, Xiaoli (Shaolee)
  • Wilson, Ryan

Abstract

The recent economic downturn resulted in firms generating significant tax losses, which they risked losing if they experienced an ownership change. In response, a number of loss firms adopted poison pill plans. We document a significant negative market reaction to the announcement of 62 poison pill adoptions related to net operating losses (NOLs), suggesting that in general investors do not consider management׳s claim that the pills are adopted to preserve a valuable tax asset to be credible. However, we find cross-sectional variation consistent with investors considering whether a pill is legitimately adopted to preserve the NOL or to entrench management.

Suggested Citation

  • Sikes, Stephanie A. & Tian, Xiaoli (Shaolee) & Wilson, Ryan, 2014. "Investors׳ reaction to the use of poison pills as a tax loss preservation tool," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 132-148.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jaecon:v:57:y:2014:i:2:p:132-148
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jacceco.2014.02.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165410114000111
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jacceco.2014.02.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Low, Angie, 2009. "Managerial risk-taking behavior and equity-based compensation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 470-490, June.
    2. Comment, Robert & Schwert, G. William, 1995. "Poison or placebo? Evidence on the deterrence and wealth effects of modern antitakeover measures," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 3-43, September.
    3. Davidson, Russell & Flachaire, Emmanuel, 2008. "The wild bootstrap, tamed at last," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 162-169, September.
    4. Lucian Arye Bebchuk & John C. Coates IV & Guhan Subramanian, 2002. "The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Theory, Evidence and Policy," NBER Working Papers 8974, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Desai, Mihir A. & Dyck, Alexander & Zingales, Luigi, 2007. "Theft and taxes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 591-623, June.
    6. Gregory S. Miller, 2002. "Earnings Performance and Discretionary Disclosure," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 173-204, March.
    7. Brickley, James A. & Coles, Jeffrey L. & Terry, Rory L., 1994. "Outside directors and the adoption of poison pills," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 371-390, June.
    8. Lucian Bebchuk & Alma Cohen & Allen Ferrell, 2009. "What Matters in Corporate Governance?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(2), pages 783-827, February.
    9. MacKinnon, James G. & White, Halbert, 1985. "Some heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimators with improved finite sample properties," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 305-325, September.
    10. Malatesta, Paul H. & Walkling, Ralph A., 1988. "Poison pill securities : Stockholder wealth, profitability, and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 347-376, January.
    11. Ryngaert, Michael, 1988. "The effect of poison pill securities on shareholder wealth," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 377-417, January.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Aaron J. Mandell, 2022. "The value of tunneling: Evidence from master limited partnership formations," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1-2), pages 355-380, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gine, Mireia & Moussawi, Rabih & Sedunov, John, 2017. "Governance mechanisms and effective activism: Evidence from shareholder proposals on poison pills," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 185-202.
    2. Sokolyk, Tatyana, 2011. "The effects of antitakeover provisions on acquisition targets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 612-627, June.
    3. Danielson, Morris G. & Karpoff, Jonathan M., 2006. "Do pills poison operating performance?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 536-559, June.
    4. Lamoreaux, Phillip T. & Litov, Lubomir P. & Mauler, Landon M., 2019. "lead Independent Directors: Good governance or window dressing?," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 47-69.
    5. Morgan, Angela & Poulsen, Annette & Wolf, Jack & Yang, Tina, 2011. "Mutual funds as monitors: Evidence from mutual fund voting," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 914-928, September.
    6. Becker-Blease, John R., 2011. "Governance and innovation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 947-958, September.
    7. Laura Casares Field & Jonathan M. Karpoff, 2002. "Takeover Defenses of IPO Firms," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(5), pages 1857-1889, October.
    8. Al Dah, Bilal, 2018. "Monitoring or empowering CEOs? The moderating effect of shareholder rights," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 502-515.
    9. Randall Morck & Bernard Yeung, 2010. "Agency Problems and the Fate of Capitalism," NBER Working Papers 16490, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Karpoff, Jonathan M. & Schonlau, Robert & Wehrly, Eric, 2022. "Which antitakeover provisions deter takeovers?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    11. Bebchuk, Lucian A. & Cohen, Alma, 2005. "The costs of entrenched boards," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 409-433, November.
    12. Stráska, Miroslava & Waller, Gregory, 2010. "Do antitakeover provisions harm shareholders?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 487-497, September.
    13. Molin, Johan, 1996. "Optimal deterrence and inducement of takeovers: An analysis of poison pills and dilution," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 102, Stockholm School of Economics.
    14. Denis, David J. & Serrano, Jan M., 1996. "Active investors and management turnover following unsuccessful control contests," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 239-266, February.
    15. Al Dah, Bilal & Michael, Amir & Dixon, Rob, 2017. "Antitakeover provisions and CEO monetary benefits: Revisiting the E-index," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 992-1004.
    16. Guernsey, Scott & Sepe, Simone M. & Serfling, Matthew, 2022. "Blood in the water: The value of antitakeover provisions during market shocks," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 1070-1096.
    17. Frédéric Teulon & Bruno Laurent Moschetto, 2013. "Linear Voting Rule Limitation Strategy to Reduce the Power of a Unique New Comer in a Firm’s Capital," Working Papers 2013-1, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    18. James Forjan & Bonnie Van Ness, 2003. "An Investigation of Poison Pill Securities, Long-Term Debt, and the Wealth of Shareholders," American Journal of Business, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 18(2 Y), pages 17-22.
    19. Souther, Matthew E., 2016. "The effects of takeover defenses: Evidence from closed-end funds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 420-440.
    20. Heron, Randall A. & Lie, Erik, 2015. "The effect of poison pill adoptions and court rulings on firm entrenchment," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 286-296.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Taxes; Net operating losses; Poison pills;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • K34 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Tax Law
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jaecon:v:57:y:2014:i:2:p:132-148. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jae .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.