Table 7

Cross-sectional analysis

Panel A: Industry competition
NCSKEWt+1
FluidHHI
(1)(2)(3)(4)
HighLowLowHigh
IDDRt0.096**0.0230.097**0.026
(0.041)(0.031)(0.039)(0.036)
ControlsYYYY
Firm FEYYYY
Region*Year FEYYYY
Difference test3.14*3.32*
(p-value)(0.082)(0.074)
N20,94021,08131,71832,539
Adj_R20.0520.0630.0610.058
Panel B: Reliance on key talents
NCSKEWt+1
R & D intensitySG & A intensity
(1)(2)(3)(4)
HighLowHighLow
IDDRt0.097**0.0410.124***0.016
(0.039)(0.027)(0.034)(0.030)
ControlsYYYY
Firm FEYYYY
Region*Year FEYYYY
Difference test4.22**10.03***
(p-value)(0.045)(0.003)
N32,82031,72532,92131,623
Adj_R20.0630.0520.0590.057

Note(s): SG & A: selling, general and administrative. This table examines the cross-sectional differences of rejection of the Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine (IDD) on stock price crash risk. All variables are as defined in Table A1 in Appendix. The sample period covers 1990 through 2017. All columns control for firm-fixed effects and region-times-year-fixed effects. Robust standard errors are clustered at the state-of-headquarter level. Robust standard errors are reported in parentheses. Coefficients marked with *, **, and *** are significant at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal