Personal possession is gaining floor once more throughout Europe as corporations search extra management and aid from the pressures of public markets. Earlier than delisting, nonetheless, managers usually alter reported earnings, generally to make the corporate seem cheaper or to clean the trail for a buyout. But as soon as these plans develop into public, markets usually reply favorably, viewing the transfer as a sign of future worth.
This shift towards going non-public started after the tech bubble burst within the early 2000s and accelerated following the 2008 monetary disaster, as companies sought higher management and adaptability exterior public markets. The growth of personal fairness companies has strengthened the development, providing new avenues to restructure and lift capital away from the glare of public disclosure. In Europe, the place possession is commonly concentrated, voluntary delistings by leveraged buyouts (LBOs), administration buyouts (MBOs), or minority freeze-outs have develop into widespread.
On this submit, I share insights from my evaluation of 526 European companies from 2005 to 2023. My purpose was to know how managers handle earnings within the 12 months earlier than these delistings and the way markets react as soon as these plans develop into public. This analysis, supervised by Wouter Creemers, PhD, CFA, gained third prize within the 2024 CFA Society Belgium’s Grasp Thesis Awards.
Earnings Administration Earlier than the Exit
As voluntary delistings develop into extra widespread in Europe, consideration has turned to how managers deal with earnings earlier than these transactions. Accounting requirements resembling IFRS and US GAAP permit a level of discretion, giving managers flexibility to affect reported outcomes by accounting decisions or actual enterprise choices.
This flexibility could make a agency’s efficiency seem higher or worse than it truly is, influencing choices and contracts that depend upon monetary reviews. When these actions adjust to accounting requirements and mirror real enterprise exercise, they aren’t fraudulent and may function a instrument in company restructuring.
Managers usually interact in downward earnings administration earlier than voluntary delistings. In LBOs, reducing reported earnings may also help scale back the takeover worth, whereas in MBOs, it could possibly safe a extra favorable buyout worth for managers themselves. In each circumstances, earnings administration acts as a strategic instrument, serving to make delistings cheaper and smoother.
The important thing questions, then, are whether or not managers in Europe handle earnings downward earlier than voluntary delistings and whether or not markets acknowledge it earlier than or across the announcement.
Findings and Market Reactions
My examine examines 526 European companies — half that voluntarily delisted and half that remained public — utilizing accounting and market knowledge from 2005 to 2023. Irregular present accruals had been estimated following the DeFond and Park (2001) mannequin to measure earnings administration. An occasion examine utilizing inventory costs measured cumulative irregular returns (CARs) earlier than and round every announcement date. T-tests and strange least squares regressions had been then run to check the hypotheses.
The outcomes reveal clear patterns in companies’ conduct earlier than delisting bulletins:
- Corporations handle earnings downward utilizing adverse irregular present accruals within the 12 months previous to the voluntary delistings by way of LBOs and MBOs. This sample suggests managers could deliberately report decrease earnings to assist a decrease deal worth.
- These companies expertise optimistic cumulative irregular returns across the delisting announcement date, suggesting favorable market reactions to the voluntary delisting resolution. For voluntarily delisting European companies by way of LBOs and MBOs, downward earnings administration within the 12 months previous to the delistings is influenced by the voluntary delisting choices in addition to companies’ ROA ratio, D/E ratio, age up till delisting, progress in income, MTB ratio, and the delisting years. In apply, stakeholders ought to issue within the affect these components have on monetary reporting practices to make higher knowledgeable strategic choices.
Though in keeping with prior analysis general, this examine didn’t discover vital downward actions in inventory costs earlier than the bulletins.
Implications for Traders and Policymakers
The outcomes recommend a number of sensible implications. Stakeholders ought to think about how voluntary delisting choices have an effect on monetary reporting practices earlier than bulletins, to make extra knowledgeable strategic choices and higher assess the reliability of monetary statements.
Whereas the earnings administration noticed right here, whether or not by accounting decisions allowed underneath IFRS or actual exercise changes, shouldn’t be unlawful, it nonetheless displays opportunistic managerial conduct in companies getting ready to delist.
Regulators could want to strengthen disclosure requirements to make sure monetary reviews extra precisely mirror companies’ efficiency earlier than delisting. Monetary analysts and advisors can incorporate the influence of the delisting choices on earnings administration into their evaluations and consumer suggestions.
Most earlier research on earnings administration previous to voluntary delistings give attention to america and the UK. By analyzing European companies, this analysis broadens the geographical scope of the literature and enhances the relevance of findings on earnings administration. The evaluation integrates views from accounting, company finance, company governance, and regulation to offer a extra complete view of earnings administration.
Taken collectively, the findings spotlight how managerial choices form monetary reporting and market reactions in European voluntary delistings, providing each a broader understanding of earnings administration and sensible insights for buyers and regulators.
References
Achleitner, A., Betzer, A., Goergen, M., & Hinterramskogler, B. (2013). Personal fairness acquisitions of continental European companies: The influence of possession and management on the probability of being taken non-public. European Monetary Administration, 19(1), 72-107. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-036X.2010.00569.x
Christensen, T. E., Huffman, A., Lewis-Western, M. F., & Scott, R. (2022). Accruals earnings administration proxies: Prudent enterprise choices or earnings manipulation? Journal of Enterprise Finance & Accounting, 49(3-4), 536-587. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbfa.12585
DeFond, M. L., & Park, C. W. (2001). The reversal of irregular accruals and the market valuation of earnings surprises. The Accounting Assessment, 76(3), 375-404. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2001.76.3.375
Fontana, S., Coluccia, D., & Solimene, S. (2019). VAIC as a instrument for measuring intangibles worth in voluntary multi-stakeholder disclosure. Journal of the Data Financial system,10(4), 1679-1699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-018-0526-0
Graham, J. R., Harvey, C. R., & Rajgopal, S. (2005). The financial implications of company monetary reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 40(1-3), 3-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2005.01.002
Healy, P. M., & Wahlen, J. M. (1999). A assessment of the earnings administration literature and its implications for normal setting. Accounting Horizons, 13(4), 365-383. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.1999.13.4.365
Lerner, J. (2011). The way forward for non-public fairness. European Monetary Administration, 17(3), 423-435. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-036X.2010.00589.x
Leuz, C., Triantis, A. J., & Wang, T. Y. (2008). Why do companies go darkish? Causes and financial penalties of voluntary SEC deregistrations. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 45(2-3), 181-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2008.01.001
Magni, D., Morresi, O., Pezzi, A., & Graziano, D. (2022). Defining the connection between agency’s efficiency and delisting: Empirical proof of going non-public in Europe. Journal of the Data Financial system, 13(3), 2584-2605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00806-w
Martinez, I., & Serve, S. (2011). The delisting resolution: The case of buyout provide with squeeze-out (BOSO). Worldwide Assessment of Legislation and Economics, 31(4), 228-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2011.07.001
Matsuura, S. (2008). On the relation between actual earnings administration and accounting earnings administration: Earnings smoothing perspective. Journal of Worldwide Enterprise Analysis, 7(3), 63-77.
Perry, S. E., & Williams, T. H. (1994). Earnings administration previous administration buyout gives. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 18(2), 157-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(94)00362-9
Thomsen, S., & Vinten, F. (2014). Delistings and the prices of governance: A examine of European inventory exchanges 1996-2004. Journal of Administration and Governance, 18(3), 793-833. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-013-9256-7
