Abstract
This paper investigates how free cash flow (FCF) is associated with agency costs (AC), and how FCF and AC influence firm performance. The research purpose is therefore threefold. Specifically, the study is to explore the impact of FCF on AC, to re-examine the free cash flow hypothesis, and to test the agency theory based on the empirical data from Taiwan publicly-listed companies. The study uses the variable of standard free cash flow to measure FCF and six proxy variables to measure AC. It is found that FCF has a significant impact on AC with two contrary effects. On one hand, FCF could incur AC due to perquisite consumption and shirking behavior; on the other hand, the generation of FCF, resulting from internal operating efficiency, could lead to better firm performance. Excluding insignificant proxy variables of AC and including only total asset turnover and operating expense ratio as sufficient AC measures, the study finds evidence to support the agency theory, meaning AC has a significantly negative impact on firm performance and stock return. In contrast, the study finds a significantly positive relation between FCF and firm performance measures, indicating lack of evidence supporting the free cash flow hypothesis. The study provides a better understanding of the association among FCF, AC, and firm performance.
Highlights
The main purpose of business administration and financial management is to pursue perpetual growth of a corporation such that the wealth of its stockholders could be maximized
This paper investigates how free cash flow (FCF) is associated with agency costs (AC), and how FCF and AC influence firm performance
The study is to explore the impact of FCF on AC, to re-examine the free cash flow hypothesis, and to test the agency theory based on the empirical data from Taiwan publicly-listed companies
Summary
The main purpose of business administration and financial management is to pursue perpetual growth of a corporation such that the wealth of its stockholders could be maximized. The U.S government initiated financial bailout projects in order to save these corporations from financial distress. Several companies, after receiving government bailout funding, proposed enormous bonus compensation plans to the management as well as the board of directors. AIG decided to issue a bonus compensation plan amounted to $165 million dollars to senior management even though the plan had been severely criticized by the press. This notorious case presented a dilemma to government policy-makers whether the government should assist these troubled companies out of corporate financial distress [1,2]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
