부채특성이 경영권방어수단과 타인자본비용 간의 관계에 미치는 영향
The Effect of Debt Characteristics on the Relationship between Anti-Takeover Provision and the Cost of Debt
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose - This study examines the effect of corporate debt characteristics on the relationship between anti-takeover provision and the cost of debt. Design/methodology/approach - The study analyzes a sample of non-financial firms listed on the stock market with December fiscal year-end from 2011 to 2018. Debt default risk (debt size, liquidity ratio, interest coverage ratio, loss occurrence) and the issuance of bonds are utilized as measures of corporate debt characteristics. Findings - First, it is observed that creditors of firms with anti-takeover provision demand higher returns as the debt default risk of these firms increases. Second, for firms issuing bonds, it is found that bondholders in companies with anti-takeover provision also seek higher returns. Research implications or Originality - This study contributes by demonstrating that the effect of anti-takeover provision on creditors can vary depending on corporate debt characteristics. Particularly, the study highlights the importance of a firm's debt default risk and creditor distinction (bondholders vs. regular creditors) as significant factors that may influence perceptions of anti-takeover provision.
Abstract
Purpose - This study examines the effect of corporate debt characteristics on the relationship between anti-takeover provision and the cost of debt. Design/methodology/approach - The study analyzes a sample of non-financial firms listed on the stock market with December fiscal year-end from 2011 to 2018. Debt default risk (debt size, liquidity ratio, interest coverage ratio, loss occurrence) and the issuance of bonds are utilized as measures of corporate debt characteristics. Findings - First, it is observed that creditors of firms with anti-takeover provision demand higher returns as the debt default risk of these firms increases. Second, for firms issuing bonds, it is found that bondholders in companies with anti-takeover provision also seek higher returns. Research implications or Originality - This study contributes by demonstrating that the effect of anti-takeover provision on creditors can vary depending on corporate debt characteristics. Particularly, the study highlights the importance of a firm's debt default risk and creditor distinction (bondholders vs. regular creditors) as significant factors that may influence perceptions of anti-takeover provision.
참고문헌 (28)
- Bebchuk L., "The Costs of Entrenched Boards", Journal of Financial Economics, 78, pp.409~433 (2005)[DOI]
- Bebchuk L., "What Matters in Corporate Governance", Review of Financial Studies, 22, pp.783~827 (2009)[DOI]
- Bertrand, M., "Enjoying the Quiet Life? Managerial Behavior Following Anti-takeover Legislation", Journal of Political Economy, 111(5), pp.1042~1075 (2003)
- Bharath, S. T., "Accounting quality and debt contracting", The Accounting Review, 83, pp.1~28 (2008)[DOI]
- Billett, M. T., "Bondholder Wealth Effects in Mergers and Acquisitions : New Evidence from the 1980s and 1990s", The Journal of Finance, 59, pp.107~135 (2004)[DOI]
- Botosan, C. A., "A re-examination of disclosure level and the expected cost of equity capital", Journal of accounting research, 40, pp.21~40 (2002)[DOI]
- Chava, S., "Do Shareholder Rights Affect the Cost of Bank Loans?", The Review of Financial Studies, 22, pp.2973~3004 (2009)[DOI]
- Collins D., "Management entrenchment and the cost of equity capital", Journal of Business Research, 64, pp.356~362 (2011)
- Francis, J. R., "Disclosure incentives and effects on cost of capital around the world", The accounting review, 80, pp.1125~1162 (2005)[DOI]
- Gompers, P., "Corporate Governance and Equity Prices", Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, pp.107~155 (2003)
- Henry F. Johnson, "Those Golden Parachute’ Agreements : The Tanman cuts the Ripcord", The Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, 10 (1985)
- Jiang, J., "Beating earnings benchmarks and the cost of debt", The Accounting Review, 83, pp.377~416 (2008)[DOI]
- Klock, M. S., "Does Corporate Governance Matter to Bondholders?", Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 40, pp.693~719 (2003)[DOI]
- Qiu, J., "The Market for Corporate Control and the Cost of Debt", Journal of Financial Economics, 93, pp.505~524 (2009)[DOI]
- Sadra, A. M., "The Impact of Stronder Shareholder Control on Bondholders?", Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 56, pp.1259~1295 (2021)[DOI]
- Zhao, Y., "The Influence of Takeover Protection on Earnings Management", Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 35(3), pp.347~375 (2008)[DOI]
- 적대적 M&A와 경영권방어제도, "고동수", 산업연구원, ~ (2008)
- 권재열, "정관규정을 이용한 적대적 M&A에 대한 방어 - 2008년도 상장회사의 실태에 대한 분석 및 평가를 중심으로 -", 경영법률, 19(1), pp.147~171 (2008), 한국경영법률학회
- 김성혜, "부채의 특성이 기업의 회계투명성에 미치는 영향", 회계정보연구, 38(1), pp.1~26 (2020), 한국회계정보학회[DOI]
- 김성혜, "경영권방어수단과 타인자본비용", 회계정보연구, 41(2), pp.85~115 (2023), 한국회계정보학회
- 박종일, "재량적 발생액과 부채조달비용 간의 관계에 대한 실증적 증거", 회계학연구, 39(3), pp.359~410 (2014), 한국회계학회
- 박종일, "세무위험 및 조세회피가 기업신용등급과 타인자본비용에 미치는 영향", 세무와회계저널, 20(2), pp.163~204 (2019), 한국세무학회[DOI]
- 윤석헌, "기업의 부채선택과 자본시장의 균형 : 은행의 모니터링활동을 중심으로", 재무연구, 12(2), pp.125~163 (1999)
- 윤종미, "경영진의 경영권 방어행위와 법적책임", 법학연구, 17(4), pp.1~27 (2017), 한국법학회
- 이아영, "경영권방어수단의 존재가 자기자본비용에 미치는 영향", 관리회계연구, 21(3), pp.121~145 (2021), 한국관리회계학회[DOI]
- 이아영, "경영진단의견서(MD&A)의 공시품질과 타인자본비용", 경영교육연구, 29(1), pp.407~430 (2014), 한국경영교육학회
- 이아영, "불성실공시가 타인자본비용에 미치는 영향", 회계학연구, 33(1), pp.127~158 (2008), 한국회계학회
- 이철수, "경영권 방어수단 도입이 기업가치에 미치는 영향", 경영교육연구, 27(1), pp.53~81 (2012), 한국경영교육학회