Abstract

This paper investigates the potential role of enforcement action in shaping firms’ decisions to opt out of highly regulated stock market regimes. Our analyses are set in the German environment, where firms may choose to “downlist” from an EU-regulated to an exchange-regulated stock market, thereby circumvent mandatory preparation of IFRS financial statements and enforcement oversight. We find that downlisting firms are more likely to have been censured by enforcement bodies for erroneous accounting, compared to a sample of control firms, and that this association is more pronounced for severe or controversial errors. This finding is consistent with enforcement actions creating costs for firms and managers. Event study analyses show that market price reactions to firms’ downlisting announcements are negative in about one out of two cases. This suggests that in quite a few cases, managers, by downlisting, may be protecting private benefits rather than the interests of equity holders. Additional analyses reveals that about half of our sample firms continued to prepare IFRS financial statements on a voluntary basis after the downlisting. Taken together, our results contribute to the literature on the economic consequences of the EU’s IAS and enforcement regulation by suggesting that some firms adopt avoidance strategies to opt out of enforcement supervision.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call