上市公司股利政策外文文獻(xiàn)翻譯2017

1、外文文獻(xiàn)翻譯 原文及譯文文獻(xiàn)出處：Carl Mika. The research of dividend policy of listed firms J. Global Finance Journal, 2017, 2(12): 124-135.原文The research of dividend policy of listed firmsCarl MikaAbstractIn this paper we analyze the results from a survey among all publicly listed Nordic firms on their dividend pa

2、yout policy. The results show that 72% of the Nordic companies have a specified dividend policy. Larger and more profitable companies are more likely to have a defined dividend policy in place. The dividend policy is mostly influenced by capital structure considerations and the outlook of future ear

3、nings. We also find that the likelihood for a firm having an explicit dividend policy is positively related to ownership concentration as well as to the presence of large long-term private or industrial owners. Our results support the use of defined dividend policies for agency or monitoring reasons

4、 rather than signaling reasons.Keywords: Corporate finance;Dividend policy;Payout;NASDAQ OMXIntroductionEver since studies such asLintner (1956)andFama and Babiak (1968), a large number of papers have studied corporate dividend policies (payout ratios) and factors that contribute to the payout decis

5、ion. Recently, focus has been on the choice between dividends and share repurchases (see for exampleGuay and Harford, 2000andJagannathan et al., 2000; andSkinner, 2008), the question of disappearing dividends (see for exampleDeAngelo et al., 2004andFama and French, 2001), and the relationship betwee

6、n minority protection and dividends (see for exampleFaccio et al., 2001andLa Porta et al., 2000). Typically, the dividend payout is found to be a function of factors such as profitability of the company, stability of the earnings, rate of growth, free cash flows, and more recently, the governing str

7、ucture of the company. In their survey of dividend policies,DeAngelo, DeAngelo and Skinner (2008)conclude that a simple asymmetric information framework does a good job at explaining observed payout policies. This framework emphasizes the need to distribute free cash flow in the presence of agency c

8、osts and security valuation problems. They also conclude that other motives and factors such as signaling, tax preferences, and clientele demands have at best minor influences, but that behavioral biases at the managerial level (such as overconfidence) and the idiosyncratic preferences of controllin

9、g shareholders plausibly have a first order impact.We contribute to the literature on studies of the relationship between controlling shareholders and dividend decisions by studying the determinants of whether a firm follows a more explicit dividend policy. While implicit dividend policies (most com

10、monly the relationship between dividends and earnings, and the speed of adjustment to an assumed optimal level) have been subject of many studies, only a few papers have studied whether a company has an explicit defined dividend policy in place, and what factors are related to the choice of that pol

11、icy (exceptions includeBaker, Saadi, Dutta, & Gandhi, 2007; andBrav, Graham, Harvey, & Michaely, 2005).There are many reasons for why the question of whether the firm follows a clearly defined dividend policy may be of interest. Firstly, it can be seen as an alternative approach to study whether sig

12、naling can be one of the motives for dividend distributions. Without expectations for future dividends, formulated by some systematic publicly announced dividend policy, deviations from such expectations cannot be identified and reacted upon. Thus, one could view a “dividend policy” as a necessary b

13、ut not sufficient condition for dividends to convey information about future earnings. Secondly, a systematic and defined dividend policy may also be required by dominant corporate owners. The policy may solve agency problems between minority owners and large owners in firms with concentrated owners

14、hip (La Porta et al., 2000), and optimize taxation or satisfy large owners preference for a more predictable dividend stream. Literature review and hypothesis developmentThere exists a vast literature on corporate dividend policy. The main determinants of a corporate dividend policy include tax opti

15、mizing, firm profitability and earnings stability, signaling (of firm investment policy) and managerial or majority owner related agency costs. There are a number of papers that study which factors are considered by companies when setting their dividend policy. Early results indicate that taxes play

16、 a role if taxation on capital gains and dividends differ, but if they do not differ, taxation does not play a major role (Amihud & Murgia, 1997). In addition, the profitability of the company and the stability of its earnings play a major role in the dividend policy (see for exampleBarclay, Smith,

17、& Watts, 1995andGaver & Gaver, 1993). Other significant factors include, among others, companys (expected) growth rate and investment opportunities and signaling about the quality of the firms investment potential (see for exampleFama and French, 2001andMichaely et al., 1996andMyers & Majluf, 1984).

18、 Finally,La Porta, Lpez de Silanes, Shleifer, and Vishny (1998)observe that companies tend to pay higher dividends in countries where minority shareholders have greater protection.A dividend policy can be formulated in several ways. In theLintner (1956)study, the most common specification was based

19、on the long-run target payout ratio. Current earnings are the main determinant of the current dividend while deviations from the target represent the signaling component. Dividend per share is another potential dividend policy target and is only weakly linked to current earnings performance through

20、the corporate history. Dividends may also be related to other currently observable measures such as the companys stock price.DataThe survey dataThis paper is based on the results of a questionnairedirected to all chairpersons of the Board of firms in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland,

21、Norway, and Sweden). this paper lists the questions used in the survey.The survey was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, the questionnaire was sent to the chairmen in the Nordic firms listed on the exchanges operated by the OMX (now NASDAQ OMX) including the national stock markets of Denma

22、rk, Finland, Iceland, and Sweden. This took place in early December 2007. In the second stage, in May 2008, the questionnaire was sent to the chairmen in the firms listed at the Oslo Brs in Norway. The questionnaire was sent as a letter directed to a named respondent. The names and addresses of the

23、chairmen were hand-collected into a database. Ultimately, the questionnaire was sent to 780 firms in total.Background dataThe responses were matched with background information on firm financials and ownership concentration. The financial data are collected from three sources. Our primary source is

24、the Amadeus database. Additional items have been collected from Datastream, when not available in Amadeus. Finally, annual reports downloaded from internet sources have provided an additional data source in cases where information has not been available in other databases. The financials are from th

25、e last reporting year completed prior to the questionnaire was sent out. This period is year-end 2006 for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, and Sweden and year 2007 for Norway. Year-end exchange rates have been used to convert all financials to the same currency, euro, which already was the currency of Fin

26、land. Financial data were collected not only for responding firms, but also for the whole market, to facilitate relating our sample to the whole population of the survey.ResultsWe asked the chairpersons to indicate whether their company had a defined dividend policy. Two alternatives (yes and no) we

27、re given. Panel Ashows the results. Out of the 158 responses we got from the chairpersons, 152 provided an answer to this question. 110 companies (72.4%) had a defined dividend policy, 42 (27.6%) did not.ConclusionsThe results of our extensive survey among Nordic listed firms on their commitment to

28、dividend policy show that 72% of the Nordic companies have a specified dividend policy. Furthermore, the results indicate that the dividend policies are mostly influenced by the considerations of the companys capital structure and future earnings. In estimations studying the determinants for whether

29、 a firm has an explicit dividend policy or not, we find that firms with older chairmen appear to prefer a looser commitment to payout policy as their firms are significantly less likely to have an explicit dividend policy in place. We also documented that larger and more profitable companies are mor

30、e likely to commit to a defined dividend policy.Finally, the likelihood for a firm having an explicit dividend policy is significantly positively related to ownership concentration as well as to large long-term private or industrial owners. This gives indirect support for agency/monitoring motives r

31、ather than the signaling motive which is expected to be more prevalent in firms with dispersed ownership. Overall, our results suggest that the relatively concentrated ownership structures in Nordic firms play a role in shaping dividend policy over traditional tax or signaling based rationales for a

32、 dividend policy.ReferencesAmihud, Y., & Murgia, M. (1997). Dividends, taxes, and signaling: Evidence from Germany. Journal of Finance, 52(1), 397408.Baker, H. K., Mukherjee, T. K., & Paskelian, O. G. (2006). How Norwegian managers view dividend policy. Global Finance Journal, 17, 155176.Baker, H. K

33、., Saadi, S., Dutta, S., & Gandhi, D. (2007). The perception of dividends by Canadian managers: New survey evidence. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 3(1), 7091.Barclay, M., Smith, C., & Watts, R. (1995). The determinants of corporate leverage and dividend policies. Journal of Applied Co

34、rporate Finance, 7(4), 419.Bena, J., & Hanousek, J. (2005). Rent extraction by large shareholders: Evidence using dividend policy in the Czech Republic. Working paper series 291. Charles University, Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education.Brav, A., Graham, J. R., Harvey, C. R., & Michael

35、y, R. (2005). Payout policy in the 21st century. Journal of Financial Economics, 77(3), 483527.Brunzell, T., Liljeblom, E., & Vaihekoski, M. (2013). Determinants of capital budgeting methods and hurdle rates in Nordic firms. Accounting & Finance, 53(1), 85110.DeAngelo, H., DeAngelo, L., & Skinner, D

36、. J. (2004). Are dividends disappearing? Dividend concentration and the consolidation of earnings. Journal of Financial Economics, 72, 425456.DeAngelo, H., DeAngelo, L., & Skinner, D. J. (2008). Corporate payout policy. Foundations and trends in finance. Nos. 2-3. (pp. 95287).Easterbrook, F. H. (198

37、4). Two-agency explanations of dividends. American Economic Review, 74(4), 650659.譯文上市公司的股利分配政策研究Carl Mika摘要本文分析了所有在北歐公開上市的公司的股利分配政策。研究結(jié)果表明，72%的北歐公司都有其獨(dú)特的股利政策。那些規(guī)模更大的以及盈利更多的公司更有可能有一個(gè)特定的股利政策。股利政策主要受到資本結(jié)構(gòu)因素和未來收益前景的影響。我們還發(fā)現(xiàn)，公司有一個(gè)明確的股利政策可能與所有權(quán)集中度以及企業(yè)家之間存在著積極的關(guān)系。我們的研究結(jié)果認(rèn)為，可以使用特定的股利分配政策。關(guān)鍵詞:企業(yè)融資；股利政策；支出;

38、納斯達(dá)克交易所引言自從林特納于1956年，法瑪和巴比克于1968年所做的研究以來，目前有大量的文獻(xiàn)都研究了企業(yè)的股利政策(股息支付率)和影響企業(yè)股利分配的決定因素。最近，人們的研究一直都在關(guān)注股息分配或股票回購方面(例如：蓋伊和哈福德，2000；賈甘納坦等，2000;斯金納，2008)，股利消失的問題(例如：迪安杰羅等，2004；法瑪和弗蘭奇，2001)；以及少數(shù)股權(quán)保護(hù)與股息分配之間的關(guān)系(例如：法喬等，2001和博爾特等，2000)。通常來說，股息分配政策是企業(yè)中一系列因素導(dǎo)致的結(jié)果，如：公司的盈利能力、穩(wěn)定的收入增長速度、自由現(xiàn)金流以及公司的治理結(jié)構(gòu)等。在他們對股利政策的調(diào)查中，迪安杰羅

39、和斯金納(2008)得出結(jié)論，有一個(gè)簡單的信息不對稱框架，可以很好地解釋觀察到的派息政策。這個(gè)框架強(qiáng)調(diào)了需要分散自由現(xiàn)金流的代理成本和安全評估問題。他們還得出結(jié)論，其他動(dòng)機(jī)和因素，比如：稅收優(yōu)惠、客戶的需求等。另外，行為偏差管理水平(如過度自信)和控股股東的特殊偏好似乎對公司的股利政策也會有一定的影響。我們的研究對控股股東和股息分配政策的決定因素之間的關(guān)系，以及一個(gè)公司是否遵循一個(gè)更明確的股利政策等方面的研究都是有所助益的。而隱含的紅利政策(最常見的股利和盈利之間的關(guān)系)已經(jīng)被許多專家學(xué)者們所研究，只有少數(shù)文獻(xiàn)研究了公司是否有一個(gè)明確的分紅政策，以及分紅政策的選擇與哪些因素相關(guān) （貝克，薩阿迪

40、和甘地2007；布拉夫，格雷厄姆，哈維和米夏埃爾，2005)。關(guān)于為什么很多研究都對公司是否遵循一個(gè)特定的股息政策感興趣，這有許多的原因。首先，它可以被看作是用來研究企業(yè)是否有特定的股息分配政策的另一種方法。因?yàn)殡y以預(yù)期到未來的股息，一些企業(yè)制定和公開宣布的分紅政策，都有可能有所偏離。因此，人們可以查看“股息政策”作為股息分配方法的必要條件但不是充分條件，因?yàn)檫@一政策難以傳達(dá)關(guān)于未來收益的信息。其次，那些對企業(yè)持有控股權(quán)的企業(yè)所有者也需要一個(gè)特定的股利分配政策。這一政策可能解決少數(shù)股股東的代理和大老板在公司集中所有權(quán)之間的問題(博爾特等，2000)，優(yōu)化稅收問題，以及滿足企業(yè)主的股利分配偏好問題。文獻(xiàn)綜述和假設(shè)的發(fā)展關(guān)于公司股利政策的研究已有大量的文獻(xiàn)。公司股利政策的主要決定因素包括稅收優(yōu)化,公司盈利能力和盈虧穩(wěn)定性,信令(公司投資政策)和管理或大股東相關(guān)的代理成本。之前就有許多論文研究公司制定股利政策的決