美国证券交易委员会的监管溢出效应和监管摩擦

Lorien Stice-Lawrence
{"title":"美国证券交易委员会的监管溢出效应和监管摩擦","authors":"Lorien Stice-Lawrence","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3485468","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I investigate how the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) monitors firms by analyzing internet downloads of regulatory filings by SEC employees. I find that SEC employees respond to negative financial reporting events, such as restatements and spikes in negative media coverage, by monitoring the peers of focal firms (“Regulatory Spillover”). This is consistent with the SEC using peer information to identify potential violators. However, there is less spillover when peer firms are assigned to different regional or industry offices, even when those offices are located within the same building, suggesting that SEC employees are poor at sharing information across organizational boundaries. Further, firms with names later in the alphabet are less likely to be monitored, indicating that SEC employees use simple heuristics when prioritizing targets. These findings contribute to the literature by exploring the monitoring activities through which the SEC identifies noncompliance and by identifying frictions that impair efficient monitoring.","PeriodicalId":120099,"journal":{"name":"Economic Anthropology eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulatory Spillover and Monitoring Frictions at the SEC\",\"authors\":\"Lorien Stice-Lawrence\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3485468\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I investigate how the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) monitors firms by analyzing internet downloads of regulatory filings by SEC employees. I find that SEC employees respond to negative financial reporting events, such as restatements and spikes in negative media coverage, by monitoring the peers of focal firms (“Regulatory Spillover”). This is consistent with the SEC using peer information to identify potential violators. However, there is less spillover when peer firms are assigned to different regional or industry offices, even when those offices are located within the same building, suggesting that SEC employees are poor at sharing information across organizational boundaries. Further, firms with names later in the alphabet are less likely to be monitored, indicating that SEC employees use simple heuristics when prioritizing targets. These findings contribute to the literature by exploring the monitoring activities through which the SEC identifies noncompliance and by identifying frictions that impair efficient monitoring.\",\"PeriodicalId\":120099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economic Anthropology eJournal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economic Anthropology eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3485468\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic Anthropology eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3485468","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

我调查了美国证券交易委员会(SEC)如何通过分析SEC员工在互联网上下载的监管文件来监控公司。我发现,SEC员工对负面财务报告事件(如重述和负面媒体报道的激增)的反应,是通过监控焦点公司的同行(“监管溢出”)。这与美国证券交易委员会使用同行信息来识别潜在的违规者是一致的。然而,当同行公司被分配到不同的地区或行业办公室时,即使这些办公室位于同一栋大楼内,溢出效应也较小,这表明SEC员工在跨组织边界共享信息方面表现不佳。此外,名字在字母表后面的公司不太可能受到监控,这表明SEC员工在确定目标优先级时使用简单的启发式方法。这些发现通过探索SEC识别违规行为的监测活动以及识别损害有效监测的摩擦,为文献做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulatory Spillover and Monitoring Frictions at the SEC
I investigate how the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) monitors firms by analyzing internet downloads of regulatory filings by SEC employees. I find that SEC employees respond to negative financial reporting events, such as restatements and spikes in negative media coverage, by monitoring the peers of focal firms (“Regulatory Spillover”). This is consistent with the SEC using peer information to identify potential violators. However, there is less spillover when peer firms are assigned to different regional or industry offices, even when those offices are located within the same building, suggesting that SEC employees are poor at sharing information across organizational boundaries. Further, firms with names later in the alphabet are less likely to be monitored, indicating that SEC employees use simple heuristics when prioritizing targets. These findings contribute to the literature by exploring the monitoring activities through which the SEC identifies noncompliance and by identifying frictions that impair efficient monitoring.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信