教育资源为主的文档平台

当前位置: 查字典文档网> 所有文档分类> 工程科技> 电子/电路> Insider trading restrictions and top executive compensation

Insider trading restrictions and top executive compensation

上传者:尚振宏
|
上传时间:2015-04-22
|
次下载

Insider trading restrictions and top executive compensation

内容需要下载文档才能查看 内容需要下载文档才能查看

JournalofAccountingandEconomics56(2013)91–112

ContentslistsavailableatSciVerseScienceDirect

JournalofAccountingandEconomics

journalhomepage:http://wendang.chazidian.com/locate/jae

Insidertradingrestrictionsandtopexecutivecompensation$

DavidJ.Denisa,n,JinXub

ab

KatzGraduateSchoolofBusiness,UniversityofPittsburgh,Pittsburgh,PA15260,USA

KrannertSchoolofManagement,PurdueUniversity,403WestStateStreet,WestLafayette,IN47907-2056,USA

articleinfo

Articlehistory:

Received7July2011

Receivedinrevisedform8April2013

Accepted19April2013

Availableonline29April2013JELclassification:G18G32G34

Keywords:

InsidertradingrestrictionsExecutivecompensationInsiderownership

abstract

Theuseofequityincentivesissignificantlygreaterincountrieswithstrongerinsidertradingrestrictions,andthesehigherincentivesareassociatedwithhighertotalpay.Thesefindingsarerobusttoalternativedefinitionsofinsidertradingrestrictionsandenforcement,andtopanelregressionswithcountryfixedeffects.Wealsofindsignificantincreasesintopexecutivepayandtheuseofequity-basedincentivesintheperiodimmediatelyfollowingtheinitialenforcementofinsidertradinglaws.Weconcludethatinsidertradinglawsareonechannelthroughwhichcross-countrydifferencesinpaypracticescanbeexplained.

&2013ElsevierB.V.Allrightsreserved.

1.Introduction

Recentstudiesdocumentsubstantialcross-countryvariationinboththelevelofexecutivecompensationandtheuseofequity-basedincentivesfortopexecutives(see,e.g.,Murphy,1999,forthcoming).However,theunderlyingfactorscontributingtotheseobserveddifferencesremainthetopicofactiveinvestigation.Forexample,althoughConyonetal.(2011)findthathigherlevelsofpayforU.S.CEOsrelativetotheirU.K.andE.U.counterpartscanbeexplained(atleastinpart)bytheirhigherstockandoptionincentives,theirfindingsleaveopenthequestionofwhyincentivesaresomuchhigherforU.S.CEOs.Indeed,Conyonetal.suggestthat“researchersshouldshifttheireffortstowardbetterunderstandingthereasonfordifferencesinincentivesbetweenCEOsintheU.S.andCEOsintheU.K.andotherpartsoftheworld”.

Weanalyzewhethercountry-levelrestrictionsinsidertradingcontributetocross-countrydifferencesintopexecutivecompensation.Specifically,weanalyzeseveral(notmutuallyexclusive)channelsthroughwhichcompensationandinsidertradingrestrictionsmightberelated.Onepossibilityisthatinsidertradingrepresentsaformofcompensationfortop

Wethankananonymousreferee,LeonceBargeron,JohnCore(theeditor),MelanieCao,MartijnCremers,DianeDenis,MaraFaccio,SteveKaplan,SeoyoungKim,KenLehn,DavidLesmond,TimLoughran,HenryManne,JohnMcConnell,DarrenRoulstone,ShawnThomas,andMarkWalkerforhelpfuldiscussionsandcomments.Inaddition,thepaperhasbenefitedfromcommentsfromworkshopparticipantsatCarnegieMellonUniversity,HongKongUniversityofScienceandTechnology,MichiganStateUniversity,NanyangTechnologicalUniversity,NationalUniversityofSingapore,PennStateUniversity,SingaporeManagementUniversity,TempleUniversity,TulaneUniversity,UniversityofToronto,the2009NorthernFinanceAssociationmeetings,the2009StateofIndianaFinanceConferenceandthe2010AmericanFinanceAssociationmeetingsfortheirhelpfulcomments.XuacknowledgesthefinancialsupportfromthePurdueUniversityCenterforInternationalBusinessEducationandResearch.SpecialthanksareduetoLuisMarquesforpartofthedatausedinthepaper.ClarkeBjarnasonprovidedableresearch

内容需要下载文档才能查看

assistance.n

Correspondingauthor.Tel.:+14126481708.

E-mailaddresses:djdenis@katz.pitt.edu(D.J.Denis),xu68@purdue.edu(J.Xu).0165-4101/$-seefrontmatter&2013ElsevierB.V.Allrightsreserved.http://wendang.chazidian.com/10.1016/j.jacceco.2013.04.003

92D.J.Denis,J.Xu/JournalofAccountingandEconomics56(2013)91–112

executives.Thus,wheninsidertradinglawsarerestrictive,equilibriuminthemarketforcesfirmstoincreasetheleveloftopexecutivecompensation.Asecondpossibilityisthatthestrengthofinsiderlawsaffectstheoptimaluseequityincentives.insidertradingrepresentsaformofequityincentives(e.g.,Manne,1966),restrictingsuchtradingmightleadfirmstosubstituteothertypesofequityincentivesintheexecutivecompensationcontract.Similarly,wheninsidertradinglawsareweaker,firmsmightchoosetouserelativelyfewerincentivesinpaypackagessoastoavoidtrading-relatedagencyconflicts(see,forexample,BaimanandVerrecchia,1995).Becausegreaterequityincentivesexposetopexecutivestogreaterrisk,theincreaseduseofequityincentiveswheninsidertradingisrestrictedalsoleadstohigherlevelsofcompensation.Athirdpossibilityisthatinsidertradinglawsarethemselvesaresponsetocross-countrydifferencesinpaypractices.Specifically,incountriesinwhichfirmsusegreaterequityincentives,strongerinsidertradinglawsarerequiredtomitigatetrading-relatedagencyconflictswithexecutives.

Toprovideevidenceonthesehypotheses,analyzebothlevelsoftopexecutivecompensationandtheuseofequity-basedincentivesforabroadsetofexecutivesin41differentcountries.Ourprimarysampleconsistsof468non-U.S.firmswithAmericanDepositoryReceipts(ADRs)and1852U.S.firmsin2006.TheprimaryvirtueofanalyzingcompensationinforeignfirmswithADRsisthatsuchfirmsarerequiredtofileForm20-FwiththeSEC.Thus,weareabletoobtaincomplete,standardizedcompensationdataatthefirmlevelforallofoursamplefirms.Bycontrast,mostpriorcross-countrycompensationstudieshavebeenforcedtorelyuponsurvey-basedandcountry-aggregatecompensationdata.1WerecognizethatapossiblelimitationofourdataisthatfirmswithADRsarenotrepresentativeofthepopulationoffirmsinthatcountryandlateraddressthispotentiallimitation.

Wemeasureinsidertradingrestrictionsinways.First,followingDuandWei(2004),weuseaninsidertrading(ITR)indexthatisbasedonglobalexecutiveopinionsurveysabouttheextentofinsidertradingrestrictionsinindividualcountries.Second,weuseaninsidertradinglaw(ITL)indexfromBeny(2006)thatcapturesdifferencesinthestrengthofinsidertradinglaws.Importantly,forourpurposes,bothITRandITLexhibitsubstantialcross-countryvariation.

Ourbaselineanalysisindicatesthatequityincentivesarepositivelyrelatedtoinsidertradingrestrictions.Thesefindingsarerobusttotheinclusionofavarietyoffirm-levelandcountry-levelcontrolvariables,suchasfirmsize,leverage,R&D,growthopportunities,boardstructure,shareholderprotection,andcountryGDP.Moreover,theimpliedimpactofinsidertradingrestrictionsonequityincentivesisalsoeconomicallyimportant.Aone-unitincreaseintheITRindex(approximatelyonestandarddeviation)isassociatedwithanincreaseinoverallequityincentivesofover200%,andanincreaseinthepercentageofequity-basedpay(i.e.,theincrementalflowofincentives)ofabout22percentagepoints.Wealsofindthattheleveloftopexecutivetotalpayispositivelyassociatedwithinsidertradingrestrictions.However,wecannotrejectthatthisfindingisdrivenbythegreateruseofequityincentives(and,therefore,higherriskpremium)incountrieswithstrongerinsidertradingrestrictions.

Thesebaselinefindingsareconsistentwithallthreehypothesizedchannelsfortheassociationbetweeninsidertradingrestrictionsandcompensation.Inaddition,afourthpossibilityisthatthereisnocausalconnectionbetweeninsidertradingrestrictionsandtopexecutivepay/incentives.Underthisexplanation,theassociationbetweenthetwoisaspuriousbyproductofthefactthatourregressionsomitpotentiallyimportantfactorsthatarecorrelatedwithbothinsidertradingrestrictionsandexecutivepay.

Tofurtherdiscriminateamongthesealternativeexplanations,therefore,weconductseveraladditionaltests.First,weexploittime-seriesvariationininsidertradingrestrictionstoestimatepanelregressionswithcountryandyearfixedeffects.Theresultsfromthesetestsindicatethatgreaterrestrictionsoninsidertradingareassociatedwithsignificantincreasesintheuseofincentivecompensation.

Second,weanalyzechangesincompensationaroundthedatesofinitialenforcementofinsidertradinglaws.Aftercontrollingfortimetrendsandfixedcountryeffects,wefindthatboththeleveloftotalexecutivecompensationandtheuseofequity-basedincentivesincreasesignificantlyfollowingtheinitialenforcementofinsidertradinglaws.

Third,weanalyzewhethertheobservedlinkbetweenexecutivecompensationandinsidertradingrestrictionsisassociatedwiththelevelofinsiderownership.Becausehigherinsiderownershipdiminishestheneedforadditionalincentivesatthemargin,thisshouldweakenthelinkbetweeninsidertradingrestrictionsandtheuseofequityincentivesifthedirectionofcausationrunsfromtradingrestrictionstoexecutivepay.Consistentwiththisargument,theresultsfromthesetestsindicatethathigherinsideownershipweakensthelinkbetweeninsidertradingrestrictionsandbothoverallequityincentivesandthelevelofpay.

Basedontheresultsoftheseadditionaltests,weconcludethattheevidenceappearsmostconsistentwithacausallinkthatrunsfrominsidertradingrestrictionstocompensationincentives.Suchalinkisconsistentwithboth(i)insidertradingservingasanimplicitformofcompensation,and(ii)firmsoptimallychoosingtousegreater(fewer)equityincentiveswheninsidertradingrestrictionsarestrong(weak).Because(i)dependsoninsidertradingrestrictionsleadingtoreducedtradingprofitsforexecutiveswhereas(ii)doesnot,distinguishingbetweenthesetwoexplanationsrequiresobservationofwhetherstrongerinsidertradingrestrictionsactuallydoreduceexecutivetradingprofits.

Unfortunately,weareunawareofsystematicdataontheprofitabilityofinsidertradingoutsideoftheU.S.Therefore,weconductanindirecttestbyanalyzingtherun-upinstockpricespriortoacquisitionannouncementsineachofoursample

ExamplesincludeAbowdandBognanno(1995),AbowdandKaplan(1999),andMurphy(1999)whorelyonTowersPerrin'sWorldwideTotalRemunerationreports.

1

D.J.Denis,J.Xu/JournalofAccountingandEconomics56(2013)91–11293

countries.Priorstudiesdocumentboththeexistenceofabnormalinsidertradingbyexecutivespriortotakeoverannouncements(AgrawalandNasser,2012)andanassociationbetweenpre-announcementrun-upsandinformedtrading(ArshadiandEyssell,1991).Wethustestwhethercross-countrydifferencesinstockpricerun-upsareassociatedwiththestrengthofinsidertradinglaws.Consistentwithreducedinformedtradingincountrieswithtighterrestrictionsoninsidertrading,wefindasignificantnegativeassociationbetweenpre-acquisitionstockpricerun-upsandthestrengthofinsidertradingrestrictions.However,wenoteanimportantcaveatwithinterpretingthisfindingasevidenceofreducedinsiderprofitsforexecutivesincountrieswithstrongerinsidertradingrestrictions.AlthoughthestudybyArshadiandEyssell(1991)findsthatthereisareductioninnetinsiderpurchasespriortotenderofferannouncementsafterthepassageofanewinsidertradinglawintheU.S.,theyreportthatthelargesteffectisontradingbybeneficialownersofthetarget'sshares.Thus,ourfindingoflowerrun-upsincountrieswithstrongerinsidertradingrestrictionscanbeviewedasevidenceofreducedtradingprofitsforexecutivesonlyifthetradesofthoseexecutivesarecorrelatedwiththoseofotherbeneficialowners.Unfortunately,welackdirectevidenceonthatissue.

Byidentifyinginsidertradingrestrictionsasanimportantchannelthroughwhichdifferencesincross-countrycompensationandincentivescanbeexplained,ourfindingscontributetothegrowinginternationalexecutivecompensationliterature.2OurfindingsalsocomplementandextendthoseofRoulstone(2003),whofindsthatself-imposedinsidertradingrestrictionsinU.S.firmsarerelatedtohigherexecutivecompensationandagreaterlevelofincentivecompensation.

Theremainderofthepaperisorganizedasfollows.InSection2,weprovidebackgroundontheliteraturethathypothesizesalinkbetweeninsidertradingandcompensation.Section3describesoursampleselectionprocessanddescribesourprimarydata.Section4reportstheresultsofourcross-sectionalregressions.InSection5,wereporttheresultsfromaseriesofadditionalteststhatexplorealternativeexplanationsforourfindings.Section6reportstheresultsfromouranalysisofstockpricerun-upspriortoacquisitionannouncementsandSection7concludes.

2.Insidertrading,equityincentivesandtopexecutivecompensation

Inthissection,wediscussseveralchannelsthroughwhichinsidertradingrestrictionsmightbeassociatedwithcompensationlevelsandequityincentives.Thesechannelsdifferintheextenttowhichtheyrelyonasubstitutionbetweeninsidertradingprofitsandcompensation,andthedirectionofcausationinthehypothesizedassociationbetweeninsidertradingrestrictionsandcompensation.

http://wendang.chazidian.compensationandinsidertradingprofitsassubstitutes

Alargebodyofacademicliteraturereportsthatinsidertradingallowsinsiderstoprofitablyexploittheirprivateinformationandrealizesignificanttradingprofits.3Severalstudiespointtosuchtradingprofitsasprovidingapotentiallinkbetweeninsidertradingrestrictionsandcompensationpolicies.InBaimanandVerrecchia(1995,1996),managerscantradeprofitablybasedontheirprivateinformation,butshareholderscomputetheexpectedamountofthisredistributionfromtradersanddeductitfromexplicitmanagerialpay.Ifequilibriumwagesaredeterminedcompetitivelyandthelevelofcompensationismeasuredasthesumofexplicitcompensationandinsidertradingprofits,thesemodelspredictapositiveassociationbetweeninsidertradingrestrictionsandequilibriumcompensationlevels.4

Otherstudiespointtowardsinsidertradingprofitsasasubstitutesourceofequityincentives.Forexample,bothCarltonandFischel(1983)andManne(1966)hypothesizethatbecauseinsidertradingallowsinsiderstoprofitfromtheirinnovationandeffort,itrepresentsameansforprovidingincentivestotopexecutives.Moreover,CarltonandFischel(1983)arguethatallowinginsidertradingismoreefficientthanexpostsalaryrenegotiationsofthetypeinFama(1980)becauseitavoidsfrequentandcostlyrenegotiations.Thus,ifinsidertradingisrestricted,firmsneedtomakegreateruseofotherformsofincentivecompensationinordertomaintainoptimalincentivelevels.Thegreateruseofincentivesinturnleadstohigherlevelsofcompensationasexecutivesarecompensatedforbearinggreaterrisk.

Althoughtheaboveargumentssuggestthatrestrictionsoninsidertradingwillleadfirmstosubstituteintootherformsofequityincentives,criticsarguethatinsidertradingcancreateperverseincentivesaswell.Forexample,severalstudiespointoutthatbecauseinsidertradingallowsexecutivestoprofitfrombadnewsaswellasgoodnews,managersmaybelesswillingtoexertefforttoincreasefirmvalue,andmayeventakeactionsthatcreateunfavorablenews.5Thisargumentsuggeststhatwheninsidertradingisallowed,firmsshouldmakegreateruseofincentivecompensationinordertocounteracttheperverseincentiveeffectsofinsidertrading.

SeealsoAbowdandBognanno(1995),ConyonandSchwalbach(1997),andFernandesetal.(2013).

See,forexample,DamodaranandLiu(1993),Fidrmucetal.(2006),Meulbroek(1992),andSeyhun(1986).4

AsimilarargumentisalsomadebyKhannaetal.(1994).5

See,forexample,BagnoliandKhanna(1992),Levmore(1982),andSchotland(1967).CarltonandFischel(1983)contendthattheseadverseincentiveeffectsofinsidertradingareofsecond-orderimportancebecauseoflimitsonshort-sellingaswellasreputationandlitigationconcerns.

32

94D.J.Denis,J.Xu/JournalofAccountingandEconomics56(2013)91–112

2.2.Insidertradingrestrictionsandtheoptimaluseofincentives

Thepredictionsoutlinedaboverelyonasubstitutionbetweenexecutivetradingprofitsandtopexecutivecompensation.Similarpredictionscanbeobtained,however,evenifthereisnosuchsubstitution.Forexample,BaimanandVerrecchia(1995)modeltwotypesofagencyproblemsrelatedtoinformedtradingbymanagersintheirownshares.Inthefirst,theabilityofmanagerstotradeintheirownsharesweakensthelinkbetweencompensationpaidbyshareholdersandtheconsumptionofmanagers.Thisreducesshareholdercontroloverthemanager'seffortdecisiontherebydiminishingtheusefulnessofequityincentives.Inthesecond,managerstradingintheirownsharescanaffectthemarketpriceofthosesharesand,consequently,theirlevelofcompensation.Shareholderswilloptimallyaccountforthispotentialformanipulationbyloweringtheweightonstockpriceinthemanager'scompensationcontract.6

Thus,evenifthereisnosubstitutionbetweeninsidertradingprofitsandexplicitcompensation,theseargumentspredictapositiveassociationbetweencountry-levelinsidertradingrestrictionsandequityincentives.Again,executivesoffirmsusinggreaterequityincentiveswillrequirehigherlevelsoftotalpayascompensationforbearinggreaterincentiverisk.Theseargumentsthereforealsopredictapositiveassociationbetweencountry-levelinsidertradingrestrictionsandthelevelofcompensation.

2.3.Insidertradinglawsasanendogenousresponsetocountrypaypractices

Althoughtheabovehypothesespredictacausalassociationthatrunsfrominsidertradingrestrictionstoequilibriumcompensationincentives,itispossiblethatthedirectionofcausationisreversed.Thatis,country-levelinsidertradinglawsthemselvesmightbeanendogenousresponsetotypicalpaypracticeswithinthatcountry.Forexample,incountriesthatmakegreateruseofequityincentivesincompensationplans,regulatorsmightsettighterinsidertradingrestrictionstomitigatetrading-relatedagencyconflictsofthetypedescribedinBaimanandVerrecchia(1995,1996).Again,compensationlevelswillnecessarilybehigherinthesecountriestocompensateexecutivesforbearinggreaterincentiverisk.2.4.Relatedevidence

Therearethusseveralplausiblereasonstoexpectapositiveassociationbetweencountry-levelinsidertradingrestrictionsandbothcompensationlevelsandtheuseofincentives.Theexistenceofsuchanassociationanditsunderlyingreasonsareempiricalissuesthatourstudyaddresses.Todate,theliteratureprovidesonlylimited,indirectevidence.Roulstone(2003)studiesthelinkbetweencompensationandself-imposedinsidertradingrestrictions.Hefindsthatfirmswithsuchrestrictionsexhibithigherlevelsofcompensationandmakegreateruseofincentivecompensation.AlthoughRoulstoneinterpretsthesefindingsasconsistentwiththeviewthatinsidertradingplaysaroleinrewardingandmotivatingemployees,itisdifficulttoruleoutthepossibilityofacorrelatedomittedvariable.Moreover,becauseRoulstone(2003)analyzesinsidertradingrestrictionsandcompensationinjustonecountry,theU.S.,hisstudydoesnotaddresswhethercross-countrydifferencesincompensationpracticesareassociatedwithcountry-levelrestrictionsoninsidertrading.Ourstudyaimstofillthisgapbyprovidingdirectevidenceontheassociationbetweeninsidertradingrestrictionsandexecutivecompensationinacross-countrysetting.73.Sampleselectionanddatadescription

Inthissection,wedescribetheexecutivecompensationdatathatweuseinourempiricalanalysisaswellasourprimarymeasuresofinsidertradingrestrictions.Wethenreportsummarystatisticsforthesample.3.1.Executivecompensationdata

ForeigncompaniesissuingADRsintheU.S.marketsarerequiredtofileForm20-FreportswiththeSecuritiesandExchangeCommission(SEC).Thisformcontainsinformationontheboardofdirectors,thecompensationofexecutivesanddirectors,thelocationofthebusiness,thecompany'sindustrysector,andothermiscellaneousitems.8Fromthe20-Freports,http://wendang.chazidian.compensationdataforexecutivesofU.S.firmsisobtainedfromExecuComp.

Notethatalternatively,shareholderscouldimposetheirownrestrictionsonexecutivetradingthroughmorestringentvestingrequirements,aswellasrestrictionsonoptionexercisesandstocksales.Thus,thishypothesisimplicitlyassumesthatthecostsofimposingandenforcingsuchfirm-specificrestrictionsexceedthebenefitsofdoingso.

7

BaimanandVerrecchia(1996)alsosuggestthattheanalysisofinternationaldatacouldbeusefulforaddressingwhetherhigherlevelsofexecutivecompensationintheU.S.isrelatedtodifferencesininsidertrading:“ThegreaterdiffusenessofU.S.capitalmarketsandtheconsequentlessprofitableopportunitiesforinsidertradingbymanagersmayprovideapartialexplanationfortheobservedhigherlevelofdirectcompensationreceivedbyU.S.CEOs.”(p.2–3).

8

SeeBryanetal.(2006)foradetaileddescriptionofthissourceofcompensationdata.

6

D.J.Denis,J.Xu/JournalofAccountingandEconomics56(2013)91–11295

WebeginwithalistofallLevel2andLevel3ADRsasofMay2008fromtheJPMorganADRGroupwebsite.WethensupplementthissetoffirmsbyexaminingthelistofallADRsfrom1961to2007downloadedfromCRSP.WeexcludeLevel1andRule144AADRsbecausetheyareeithertradedoverthecounterorareprivateplacements,makingthemexemptfromSECreportingrequirements.FortheresultingsetofADRs,wesearchSEC'sEDGARdatabasefor20-Ffilingsin2006.Ifasamplefirmdoesnothavea20-Ffilingin2006,weobtaintherelevantdatafromeitherits2005or2007filing,whereavailable.

Thereissomevariationinthelevelofdetailwithwhichexecutivecompensationdataisavailable.Insomefilings,informationoncompensationofindividualexecutives(typicallythemosthighly-paidexecutives)canbeobtainedfromsummaryexecutivecompensationtables.WelaterrefertothesefirmsasU.S.stylereportingfirms.Inothercases,thecompensationtablesreportonlytheaggregatecompensationforallexecutives(anddirectors).Foreachfirm,weconstructfirm-levelcompensationvariablesthatcapturethelevelandstructureofcompensationfortheaverageexecutiveinthatfirm.Wheneveravailable,weusetheindividualexecutive-leveldatatoconstructourfirm-levelmeasures.Otherwise,weusetheaggregatefirm-leveldatatoconstructaveragevaluespertopexecutive.

Thecompensationdatacontainvariouscomponents:salary,bonus,equity-basedcompensationsuchasrestrictedstockawardsandoptiongrants,andothercompensationsuchaspensionsandperquisites.Ouranalysisfocusesprimarilyonthedollaramountoftotalcompensation(TotalPay)andameasureofoverallequityincentives(EquityIncentives).TotalPayisdefinedasthesumofsalary,bonus,equityincentivecompensation(includingrestrictedstockawardsandoptiongrants)andothercompensation.9Whenstatedinlocalcurrencies,TotalPayisconvertedintoU.S.dollarsusingyear-averageexchangeratesincorrespondingdatayearsastheconversionrate.Inaddition,allTotalPayfiguresareconvertedinto2006realdollarsbyadjustingfortheinflationratebetween2006andthegivenyear.EquityIncentivesaremeasuredastheoverallsensitivityofexecutivewealthtoa1%changeinthefirm'sstockprice.Becausethismeasurerequiresdataattheindividualexecutivelevel,testsusingthismeasureareconductedonthesubsetoffirmswithU.S.stylereporting.Nonetheless,becausewedonothavecompletedataonthedetailsofoutstandingoptions(e.g.,maturity,exerciseprice,etc.),thesesensitivitiesareestimatedbasedonfullydilutedsharesoutstanding;i.e.,assumingthatalloutstandingoptionsareexercised.Finally,insometests,weuseameasureoftheincrementalflowofincentives(EquityPayRatio)—definedasthefractionoftotalcompensationthatiscomprisedofequity-basedincentivepay,whereequity-basedincentivepayismeasuredasthetotalgrant-datevalueofrestrictedstockawardsandoptiongrants.ThedefinitionsfortheseandothervariablescanbefoundinAppendixA.

Apossibleconcernwithoursampleisthat,becausetheADRfirmsarelistedintheU.S.,theinsidertradingrestrictionsthatapplytothemaredifferentfromthosethatapplytothegeneralpopulationoffirmsintheirhomecountry.Forexample,perhapsbylistingintheU.S.,ADRfirmsaresubjecttoU.S.insidertradingregulation.However,becauseoftheSEC'slong-standingpolicygoaloffacilitatingaccessofforeignissuerstoU.S.capitalmarkets,ADRfirmsareprovidedwithavarietyofexemptionstoU.S.insidertradingrules.Forexample,theExchangeActRule3a12-3(b)10exemptsforeignprivateissuersfromtheCommission'sproxyrules11,andfromtheinsiderstocktradingreportsandshort-swingprofitrecoveryprovisionsunderSection1612oftheExchangeAct.13RegulationFD,whichlimitsprivatecommunicationsofmaterialinformation,alsoexemptsforeignprivateissuersfromitscoverage.14Foreignprivateissuerswouldbesubjecttothepensionblackouttradingrestriction(RegulationBTR),aclarificationtoSection306(a)oftheSarbanes–OxleyActof2002,butonlyunderacertaincondition.15Thus,ADRfirmsarenotsubjecttothesamelevelofinsidertradingregulationasU.S.firms.Moreover,becausethemajorityofADRfirmsarealsolistedontheirdomesticexchange,theyarerequiredtofollowdomesticinsidertradinglaws.Finally,evenifADRfirmsareaffectedprimarilybyU.S.insiderlawandenforcement,thiswillbiasourtestsagainstfindinganyassociationbetweencompensationandourmeasuresofinsidertradingrestrictions.

ArelatedconcernisthatbecauseADRfirmstendtobelargerandmoreprofitablethanthetypicalfirmintheirhomecountry,ourfindingsaresubjecttoasampleselectionbias.Itisimportanttopointout,however,thatanysuchselectionbiasappliestoallofthecountriesthatmakeupoursample.Thus,itisunlikelytobiasourestimatesofthecross-sectionalassociationbetweencompensationandinsidertradingrestrictions.

Nonetheless,toprovidefurtherevidenceonthisissue,wecompareourdatawiththesummarycompensationdatafromFernandesetal.(2013).Forthe23countriesthatarecommontobothstudies,ourcompensationmeasures,TotalPayandEquityPayRatio,bothhavecorrelationcoefficientsofaround0.55(significantatthe1%level)withsimilarmeasuresinFernandesetal.(2013).Thesehighcorrelationsimplythat,despitepotentialdifferencesbetweenADRfirmsandtheirlocal

Forbothrestrictedstockawardsandoptiongrants,weusethegrant'smarketvalueatthetimeoftheaward.Thegrantdatefairvalueofoptionsgrantedisusedinthecalculation,whichislargelymadeavailableinthe20-F,followingtheInternationalFinancialReportingStandards2(IFRS2).

10

Alsoreferredtoas17CFR240.3a12-3(b).11

17CFR240.14a-1etseq.12

15U.S.C.78p.13

See,forexample,OwnershipReportsandTradingbyOfficers,DirectorsandPrincipalSecurityHolders,RIN3235-AI62,FinalRule,Securities

andExchangeCommission,footnote12.Alternatively,seeForeignIssuerReportingEnhancements,RIN3235-AK03,FinalRule,SecuritiesandExchangeCommission,footnote37.

14

SelectiveDisclosureandInsiderTrading,RIN3235-AH82,FinalRule,SecuritiesandExchangeCommission.15

InsiderTradesDuringPensionFundBlackoutPeriods,RIN3235-AI71,FinalRule,SecuritiesandExchangeCommission.Accordingtotherule,foreign

privateissuersareonlysubjecttoRegBTRiftheblackoutweretoaffectatleast50%ofthepensionplanbeneficiarieslocatedwithintheU.S.andsuchpersonsrepresentedmorethan15%ofallparticipantsandbeneficiariesunderallindividualaccountplansoftheissuer.

9

版权声明:此文档由查字典文档网用户提供,如用于商业用途请与作者联系,查字典文档网保持最终解释权!

下载文档

热门试卷

2016年四川省内江市中考化学试卷
广西钦州市高新区2017届高三11月月考政治试卷
浙江省湖州市2016-2017学年高一上学期期中考试政治试卷
浙江省湖州市2016-2017学年高二上学期期中考试政治试卷
辽宁省铁岭市协作体2017届高三上学期第三次联考政治试卷
广西钦州市钦州港区2016-2017学年高二11月月考政治试卷
广西钦州市钦州港区2017届高三11月月考政治试卷
广西钦州市钦州港区2016-2017学年高一11月月考政治试卷
广西钦州市高新区2016-2017学年高二11月月考政治试卷
广西钦州市高新区2016-2017学年高一11月月考政治试卷
山东省滨州市三校2017届第一学期阶段测试初三英语试题
四川省成都七中2017届高三一诊模拟考试文科综合试卷
2017届普通高等学校招生全国统一考试模拟试题(附答案)
重庆市永川中学高2017级上期12月月考语文试题
江西宜春三中2017届高三第一学期第二次月考文科综合试题
内蒙古赤峰二中2017届高三上学期第三次月考英语试题
2017年六年级(上)数学期末考试卷
2017人教版小学英语三年级上期末笔试题
江苏省常州西藏民族中学2016-2017学年九年级思想品德第一学期第二次阶段测试试卷
重庆市九龙坡区七校2016-2017学年上期八年级素质测查(二)语文学科试题卷
江苏省无锡市钱桥中学2016年12月八年级语文阶段性测试卷
江苏省无锡市钱桥中学2016-2017学年七年级英语12月阶段检测试卷
山东省邹城市第八中学2016-2017学年八年级12月物理第4章试题(无答案)
【人教版】河北省2015-2016学年度九年级上期末语文试题卷(附答案)
四川省简阳市阳安中学2016年12月高二月考英语试卷
四川省成都龙泉中学高三上学期2016年12月月考试题文科综合能力测试
安徽省滁州中学2016—2017学年度第一学期12月月考​高三英语试卷
山东省武城县第二中学2016.12高一年级上学期第二次月考历史试题(必修一第四、五单元)
福建省四地六校联考2016-2017学年上学期第三次月考高三化学试卷
甘肃省武威第二十三中学2016—2017学年度八年级第一学期12月月考生物试卷

网友关注

山东公务员面试热点模拟题:农村成为高价彩礼“重灾区”
2018山东省考面试监狱试题答案解析(7月15日上午)
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:反腐倡廉热度从未减
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:野生动物园破规下车被伤谁之过
山东公务员面试模拟题:机票退票费销售代理高手续费牟利
2018山东省考结构化面试试题答案解析(7月7日上午)
2018山东省考结构化面试试题答案解析(7月8日上午)
历年山东公务员面试考情分析
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:政府部门数据“小农意识”
山东公务员考试申论模拟题:谈谈对“立鸿鹄志,做奋斗者”的理解
2018山东省考结构化面试试题答案解析(7月8日下午)
2018山东公务员考试面试模拟题:营造农村结婚新风尚
山东公务员面试热点类题目预测之乡村振兴
2018山东公务员面试结构化小组试题答案解析(7月7日上午)
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:奢侈品店霓虹灯影响居民休息
2018山东公务员考试面试模拟题:教授收入不及保姆
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:悲情营销被滥用
山东公务员面试模拟题:停车收费新规
2018山东公务员考试面试模拟题:微信公益事业
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:校园网贷
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:图书馆变“聊天室”怎么办
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:教师缘何不再举戒尺
2018山东公务员面试备考注意事项
2018山东省考结构化面试试题答案解析(7月9日上午)
山东公务员面试热点模拟题:如何看待“地域黑”
2018山东省考结构化面试、演讲试题答案解析(7月9日下午)
2018山东省考面试监狱试题答案解析(7月15日下午)
山东公务员面试模拟题:化解人际矛盾 创造良好人文环境
山东公务员考试行测题库:行测判断推理模拟题07.16
山东公务员面试模拟题:医院、社区等公共场所遭共享单车围堵

网友关注视频

8.对剪花样_第一课时(二等奖)(冀美版二年级上册)_T515402
三年级英语单词记忆下册(沪教版)第一二单元复习
六年级英语下册上海牛津版教材讲解 U1单词
沪教版牛津小学英语(深圳用) 四年级下册 Unit 8
外研版英语三起6年级下册(14版)Module3 Unit1
冀教版小学数学二年级下册第二单元《有余数除法的竖式计算》
七年级英语下册 上海牛津版 Unit5
苏科版数学 八年级下册 第八章第二节 可能性的大小
第4章 幂函数、指数函数和对数函数(下)_六 指数方程和对数方程_4.7 简单的指数方程_第一课时(沪教版高一下册)_T1566237
冀教版英语五年级下册第二课课程解读
第五单元 民族艺术的瑰宝_15. 多姿多彩的民族服饰_第二课时(市一等奖)(岭南版六年级上册)_T129830
8.练习八_第一课时(特等奖)(苏教版三年级上册)_T142692
沪教版牛津小学英语(深圳用) 五年级下册 Unit 12
外研版英语七年级下册module3 unit2第二课时
【部编】人教版语文七年级下册《老山界》优质课教学视频+PPT课件+教案,安徽省
沪教版八年级下次数学练习册21.4(2)无理方程P19
青岛版教材五年级下册第四单元(走进军营——方向与位置)用数对确定位置(一等奖)
北师大版八年级物理下册 第六章 常见的光学仪器(二)探究凸透镜成像的规律
第12章 圆锥曲线_12.7 抛物线的标准方程_第一课时(特等奖)(沪教版高二下册)_T274713
冀教版小学英语五年级下册lesson2教学视频(2)
3月2日小学二年级数学下册(数一数)
《小学数学二年级下册》第二单元测试题讲解
北师大版小学数学四年级下册第15课小数乘小数一
沪教版牛津小学英语(深圳用) 四年级下册 Unit 3
北师大版数学 四年级下册 第三单元 第二节 小数点搬家
【部编】人教版语文七年级下册《泊秦淮》优质课教学视频+PPT课件+教案,广东省
冀教版小学数学二年级下册第二单元《有余数除法的整理与复习》
第五单元 民族艺术的瑰宝_16. 形形色色的民族乐器_第一课时(岭南版六年级上册)_T3751175
冀教版英语三年级下册第二课
沪教版八年级下册数学练习册21.4(1)无理方程P18