IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reaccs/v29y2024i4d10.1007_s11142-023-09802-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory spillover effects in OTC markets

Author

Listed:
  • Richard A. Cazier

    (The University of North Texas)

  • Jianning Huang

    (University of Manitoba)

  • Fuzhao Zhou

    (Bowling Green State University)

Abstract

We assess a recent SEC initiative that suspends inactive shell companies from trading in over-the-counter (OTC) stock markets. Critics argue these suspensions do little to reduce fraud in OTC markets because they simply redirect fraudsters’ efforts to other OTC targets. Building on research that finds regulatory intervention among exchange-listed firms often produces positive spillovers, we test whether shell company suspensions are associated with fraud deterrence among other OTC firms operating within the same regulatory jurisdiction as the suspended firm. We find that the SEC’s shell company suspensions are associated with a significant reduction in fraud among peer firms, particularly over short horizons. We find that “reactive” trading suspensions—those that are an explicit response to alleged cases of wrongdoing—also have significant fraud deterrence effects. Overall, our results suggest that regulatory spillover effects previously documented in highly regulated markets also exist in a market characterized by relatively low regulation and disclosure.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard A. Cazier & Jianning Huang & Fuzhao Zhou, 2024. "Regulatory spillover effects in OTC markets," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 3600-3632, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:reaccs:v:29:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11142-023-09802-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11142-023-09802-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11142-023-09802-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11142-023-09802-8?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kedia, Simi & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2011. "Do the SEC's enforcement preferences affect corporate misconduct?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 259-278, April.
    2. Files, Rebecca, 2012. "SEC enforcement: Does forthright disclosure and cooperation really matter?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 353-374.
    3. John (Xuefeng) Jiang & Kathy R. Petroni & Isabel Yanyan Wang, 2016. "Private Intermediary Innovation and Market Liquidity: Evidence from the Pink Sheets® Market," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(3), pages 920-948, September.
    4. Chen, Joseph & Hong, Harrison & Stein, Jeremy C., 2001. "Forecasting crashes: trading volume, past returns, and conditional skewness in stock prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 345-381, September.
    5. Hirshleifer, David & Teoh, Siew Hong, 2003. "Limited attention, information disclosure, and financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 337-386, December.
    6. Mariassunta Giannetti & Tracy Yue Wang, 2016. "Corporate Scandals and Household Stock Market Participation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 71(6), pages 2591-2636, December.
    7. Ulf Brüggemann & Aditya Kaul & Christian Leuz & Ingrid M. Werner, 2018. "The Twilight Zone: OTC Regulatory Regimes and Market Quality," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(3), pages 898-942.
    8. Paul Povel & Rajdeep Singh & Andrew Winton, 2007. "Booms, Busts, and Fraud," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 20(4), pages 1219-1254.
    9. Miguel Duro & Jonas Heese & Gaizka Ormazabal, 2019. "The effect of enforcement transparency: Evidence from SEC comment-letter reviews," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 780-823, September.
    10. Elizabeth Blankespoor & Ed Dehaan & John Wertz & Christina Zhu, 2019. "Why Do Individual Investors Disregard Accounting Information? The Roles of Information Awareness and Acquisition Costs," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 57(1), pages 53-84, March.
    11. Patricia M. Dechow & Weili Ge & Chad R. Larson & Richard G. Sloan, 2011. "Predicting Material Accounting Misstatements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 17-82, March.
    12. Bushee, Brian & Cedergren, Matthew & Michels, Jeremy, 2020. "Does the media help or hurt retail investors during the IPO quiet period?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1).
    13. Karen K. Nelson & Richard A. Price & Brian R. Rountree, 2013. "Are Individual Investors Influenced by the Optimism and Credibility of Stock Spam Recommendations?," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(9-10), pages 1155-1183, November.
    14. Hanke, Michael & Hauser, Florian, 2008. "On the effects of stock spam e-mails," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 57-83, February.
    15. Allee, Kristian D. & Bhattacharya, Nilabhra & Black, Ervin L. & Christensen, Theodore E., 2007. "Pro forma disclosure and investor sophistication: External validation of experimental evidence using archival data," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 201-222, April.
    16. Andrew Ang & Assaf A. Shtauber & Paul C. Tetlock, 2013. "Asset Pricing in the Dark: The Cross-Section of OTC Stocks," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 26(12), pages 2985-3028.
    17. Terrence Blackburne & John D. Kepler & Phillip J. Quinn & Daniel Taylor, 2021. "Undisclosed SEC Investigations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3403-3418, June.
    18. Katherine A. Gunny & Judith M. Hermis, 2020. "How Busyness Influences SEC Compliance Activities: Evidence from the Filing Review Process and Comment Letters," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 7-32, March.
    19. Stephen V. Brown & Xiaoli (Shaolee) Tian & Jennifer Wu Tucker, 2018. "The Spillover Effect of SEC Comment Letters on Qualitative Corporate Disclosure: Evidence from the Risk Factor Disclosure," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 622-656, June.
    20. deHaan, Ed & Kedia, Simi & Koh, Kevin & Rajgopal, Shivaram, 2015. "The revolving door and the SEC’s enforcement outcomes: Initial evidence from civil litigation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 65-96.
    21. Agrawal, Ashwini K., 2013. "The impact of investor protection law on corporate policy and performance: Evidence from the blue sky laws," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 417-435.
    22. Masako Darrough & Rong Huang & Sha Zhao, 2020. "Spillover Effects of Fraud Allegations and Investor Sentiment," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 982-1014, June.
    23. Baginski, Stephen P. & Demers, Elizabeth & Kausar, Asad & Yu, Yingri Julia, 2018. "Linguistic tone and the small trader," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 68, pages 21-37.
    24. Mehta, Mihir N. & Zhao, Wanli, 2020. "Politician Careers and SEC enforcement against financial misconduct," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2).
    25. Rajesh K. Aggarwal & Guojun Wu, 2006. "Stock Market Manipulations," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(4), pages 1915-1954, July.
    26. Hailiang Chen & Prabuddha De & Yu (Jeffrey) Hu & Byoung-Hyoun Hwang, 2014. "Wisdom of Crowds: The Value of Stock Opinions Transmitted Through Social Media," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(5), pages 1367-1403.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hills, Robert & Kubic, Matthew & Mayew, William J., 2021. "State sponsors of terrorism disclosure and SEC financial reporting oversight," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1).
    2. Shimon Kogan & Tobias J Moskowitz & Marina Niessner, 2023. "Social Media and Financial News Manipulation," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 27(4), pages 1229-1268.
    3. Donelson, Dain C. & Kubic, Matthew & Toynbee, Sara, 2024. "The SEC's September spike: Regulatory inconsistency within the fiscal year," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2).
    4. Holzman, Eric R. & Marshall, Nathan T. & Schmidt, Brent A., 2024. "When are firms on the hot seat? An analysis of SEC investigation preferences," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1).
    5. Michael Iselin & Bret Johnson & Jacob Ott & Jacob Raleigh, 2024. "Protecting wall street or main street: SEC monitoring and enforcement of retail-owned firms," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 1235-1275, June.
    6. Dan Amiram & Zahn Bozanic & James D. Cox & Quentin Dupont & Jonathan M. Karpoff & Richard Sloan, 2018. "Financial reporting fraud and other forms of misconduct: a multidisciplinary review of the literature," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 732-783, June.
    7. Iselin, Michael & Johnson, Bret & Ott, Jacob & Raleigh, Jacob, 2022. "Protecting wall street or main street: SEC monitoring and enforcement of retail-owned firms," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117743, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Dasgupta, Sudipto & Banerjee, Shantanu & SHI, RUI & Yan, Jiali, 2021. "Information Complementarities and the Dynamics of Transparency Shock Spillovers," CEPR Discussion Papers 15658, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Jonas Heese, 2022. "Does Industry Employment of Active Regulators Weaken Oversight?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 9198-9218, December.
    10. James P. Ryans, 2021. "Textual classification of SEC comment letters," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 37-80, March.
    11. Blankespoor, Elizabeth & deHaan, Ed & Marinovic, Iván, 2020. "Disclosure processing costs, investors’ information choice, and equity market outcomes: A review," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2).
    12. Leone, Andrew J. & Li, Edward Xuejun & Liu, Michelle, 2021. "On the SEC's 2010 enforcement cooperation program," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1).
    13. Mehta, Mihir N. & Zhao, Wanli, 2020. "Politician Careers and SEC enforcement against financial misconduct," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2).
    14. Li, Xiaoxi & Zhong, Qinger & Liu, Shasha, 2025. "Random inspections and corporate information disclosure," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    15. Abdul Ghafoor & Rozaimah Zainudin & Nurul Shahnaz Mahdzan, 2019. "Factors Eliciting Corporate Fraud in Emerging Markets: Case of Firms Subject to Enforcement Actions in Malaysia," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 587-608, December.
    16. Nilabhra Bhattacharya & Hye Sun Chang & Raluca Chiorean, 2023. "Regulatory interventions in response to noncompliance with mandatory derivatives disclosure rules," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 2196-2232, December.
    17. Li, Qianqian & Watts, Edward M. & Zhu, Christina, 2024. "Retail investors and ESG news," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2).
    18. Elizabeth Blankespoor, 2019. "The Impact of Information Processing Costs on Firm Disclosure Choice: Evidence from the XBRL Mandate," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 57(4), pages 919-967, September.
    19. Heese, Jonas & Krishnan, Ranjani & Ramasubramanian, Hari, 2021. "The Department of Justice as a gatekeeper in whistleblower-initiated corporate fraud enforcement: Drivers and consequences," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1).
    20. Files, Rebecca, 2012. "SEC enforcement: Does forthright disclosure and cooperation really matter?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 353-374.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • K2 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business 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:spr:reaccs:v:29:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11142-023-09802-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.