As Foreign Registrants Abandon the U.S. Capital Markets, What Happens to the Cross-Listing Audit Fee Premium?

Author(s):  
Kathleen M. Bakarich ◽  
Joseph Weintrop
2009 ◽  
Vol 84 (5) ◽  
pp. 1429-1463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong-Hag Choi ◽  
Jeong-Bon Kim ◽  
Xiaohong Liu ◽  
Dan A. Simunic

ABSTRACT: We study the effects of cross-listings on audit fees. We first develop a model in which legal environments play a crucial role in determining the auditor's legal liability. Our model and analysis predict that auditors charge higher fees for firms that are cross-listed in countries with stronger legal regimes than they do for non-cross-listed firms and that the cross-listing audit fee premium increases with the difference in the strength of legal regimes between the cross-listed foreign country and the home country. We then empirically test these predictions. The results of our cross-country regressions strongly support our predictions. In addition, we find no significant cross-listing fee premium for firms that are cross-listed in countries whose legal regimes are. no stronger than those of their home countries. This suggests that cross-listing audit fee premiums are associated with increased legal liability and not with increased audit complexity per se. Our findings help explain why cross-listing premiums occur and what determines their magnitude.


2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 58-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Bessler ◽  
Fred R. Kaen ◽  
Colin Schneck

Author(s):  
Lee-Hsien Pan ◽  
Shuo Chen ◽  
Chieh-Chung Wu ◽  
K. C. Chen

This paper examines the effects of cross listing and Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) on corporate governance and firm performance of the cross-listed firms from four Tiger Cub Economics: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, and Thailand. We find that these non-U.S. firms that list their shares as American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) experience an improvement in corporate governance and a decrease in firm performance after issuing ADRs in the U.S. However, SOX appears to be effective in enhancing firm performance for these ADRs, though it has little impact on improving corporate governance.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 509-527
Author(s):  
Kim Hin David Ho ◽  
Kwame Addae-Dapaah ◽  
Fang Rui Lina Peck

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the common stock price reaction and the changes to the risk exposure of the cross-listing for real estate investment trusts (REITs). Design/methodology/approach The paper adopts the event study methodology to assess the abnormal returns (ARs). Pre- and post-cross-listing changes in the risk exposure for the domestic and foreign markets are examined, via a modified two-factor international asset pricing model. A comparison is made for two broad cross-listings, namely, the depositary receipts and the dual ordinary listings, to examine the impacts from institutional differences. Findings Cross-listed REITs generally experience positive and significant ARs throughout the event window, implying significant superior returns associated with the cross-listing for REITs. On systematic risks, REITs exhibit significant decline in their domestic market β coefficients after the cross-listing. However, the foreign market β coefficients do not yield conclusive evidence when compared across the sample. Research limitations/implications Results are consistent with prudential asset allocation for potential diversification gains from the cross-listing, as the reduction from the domestic market beta is more significant than changes in the foreign market beta. Practical implications The results and findings should incentivise REIT managers to explore viable cross-listing. Social implications Such cross-listing for REITs should enhance risk diversification. Originality/value This is a pioneer study on cross-listing of REITs. It provides a basis for investment decision making, and could provoke further research and discussion.


Author(s):  
Schweigelová Dana

This chapter provides an overview of the legal framework of set-off in the Czech Republic both outside and within the context of insolvency. In the Czech Republic, set-off rights are regulated exclusively by statutory law. General regulations on set-off arrangements are laid down in Sections 1982–1991 of the Czech Civil Code. Other laws relevant to set-off are the Business Corporations Act, the Capital Markets Act, the Financial Collateral Act, and the Act on Insolvency. The chapter first examines set-off between solvent parties, taking into account general regulations, specific regulations under the Business Corporations Act, contractual set-off involving multiple parties, and special regulatory regimes governing set-off in the Czech Republic. It then considers set-off between insolvent parties before concluding with an analysis of set-off issues arising in the cross-border context.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 82
Author(s):  
Stephen Paul Ferris ◽  
Min Yu Liao

Using a comprehensive set of cross-listings, we extend the bonding hypothesis by developing what we term as the  relative bonding hypothesis. We hypothesize that firms seek the advantages of stronger investor protections by listing in countries whose governance is relatively better than its own. This means that firms can achieve bonding without listing in the U.S and that the governance advantages of bonding are not only for ADRs. We find that firms are more likely to choose a cross-listing destination if the host country has better governance than the home country, except those firms from countries whose managers enjoy greater private benefits of control. We also find that there is valuation premium even when cross-listing occurs  outside of the U.S. The premia are even stronger if the host country has better governance than that of the home country. We conclude that although bonding might explain the existence of ADRs, relative bonding helps to explain the extensive cross-listing which occurs outside of the U.S. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document