I doveri e le responsabilità contabili nella corporate governance delle società di capitali

La costruzione di un modello efficiente di corporate governance deve offrire una disciplina adeguata dei doveri contabili. Ciò nonostante, gli ordinamenti giuridici configurano i doveri di contabilità in modo incompleto, giacché l’inadempimento di questi non comporta una sanzione diretta per il soggetto inadempiente. Come informazione sulla situazione economica e finanziaria della società, esiste un interesse pubblico nella contabilità, e questa può servire come base di giudizio a soggetti interni ed esterni all’impresa, nell’adozione delle sue scelte. Disporre di un’informazione falsa o inesatta al riguardo può comportare un danno ingiustificato alla società stessa, ai soci o ai terzi, che potranno esercitare le azioni precise per il risarcimento del danno cagionato. Per evitare la produzione di questi danni, da una prospettiva preventiva, la corporate governance delle società di capitali può prevedere dei meccanismi di controllo che riducano il rischio di offrire un’informazione sbagliata. Questi controlli potranno essere esercitati da soggetti interni o esterni (revisori legali) alla struttura della società, ed avranno una configurazione diversa a seconda che le società adottino una struttura monistica o dualistica di governance. Questo ci colloca di fronte ad una eventuale situazione di concorrenza delle colpe, giacché i diversi soggetti che intervengono nel processo d’elaborazione dell’informazione contabile versano la sua attuazione sullo stesso documento: il bilancio. Risulta dunque cruciale determinare il contributo effettivo di ciascuno per analizzare il suo grado di responsabilità nella produzione del danno.

Corporate Governance and Dividend Policy in European Banking

This dissertation investigates corporate governance and dividend policy in banking. This topic has recently attracted the attention of numerous scholars all over the world and currently remains one of the most discussed topics in Banking. The core of the dissertation is constituted by three papers. The first paper generalizes the main achievements in the field of relevant study using the approach of meta-analysis. The second paper provides an empirical analysis of the effect of banking corporate governance on dividend payout. Finally, the third paper investigates empirically the effect of government bailout during 2007-2010 on corporate governance and dividend policy of banks. The dissertation uses a new hand-collected data set with information on corporate governance, ownership structure and compensation structure for a sample of listed banks from 15 European countries for the period 2005-2010. The empirical papers employ such econometric approaches as Within-Group model, difference-in-difference technique, and propensity score matching method based on the Nearest Neighbor Matching estimator. The main empirical results may be summarized as follows. First, we provide evidence that CEO power and connection to government are associated with lower dividend payout ratios. This result supports the view that banking regulators are prevalently concerned about the safety of the bank, and powerful bank CEOs can afford to distribute low payout ratios, at the expense of minority shareholders. Next, we find that government bailout during 2007-2010 changes the banks’ ownership structure and helps to keep lending by bailed bank at the pre-crisis level. Finally, we provide robust evidence for increased control over the banks that receive government money. These findings show the important role of government when overcoming the consequences of the banking crisis, and high quality of governance of public bailouts in European countries.

Regulating State Aid: Inter-jurisdictional competition, public choice, and corporate governance

Depending on the regulatory regime they are subject to, governments may or may not be allowed to hand out state aid to private firms. The economic justification for state aid can address several issues present in the competition for capital and the competition for transfers from the state. First, there are principal-agent problems involved at several stages. Self-interested politicians might enter state aid deals that are the result of extensive rent-seeking activities of organized interest groups. Thus the institutional design of political systems will have an effect on the propensity of a jurisdiction to award state aid. Secondly, fierce competition for firm locations can lead to over-spending. This effect is stronger if the politicians do not take into account the entirety of the costs created by their participation in the firm location race. Thirdly, state aid deals can be incomplete and not in the interest of the citizens. This applies if there are no sanctions if firms do not meet their obligations from receiving aid, such as creating a certain number of jobs or not relocating again for a certain amount of time. The separation of ownership and control in modern corporations leads to principal-agent problems on the side of the aid recipient as well. Managers might receive personal benefits from subsidies, the use of which is sometimes less monitored than private finance. This can eventually be to the detriment of the shareholders. Overall, it can be concluded that state aid control should also serve the purpose of regulating the contracting between governments and firms. An extended mandate for supervision by the European Commission could include requirements to disincentive the misuse of state aid. The Commission should also focus on the corporate governance regime in place in the jurisdiction that awards the aid as well as in the recipient firm.

The Influence of Direct Democracy on Agency Costs: Lessons from Corporate Governance

This dissertation seeks to improve the usage of direct democracy in order to minimize agency cost. It first explains why insights from corporate governance can help to improve constitutional law and then identifies relevant insights from corporate governance that can make direct democracy more efficient. To accomplish this, the dissertation examines a number of questions. What are the key similarities in corporate and constitutional law? Do these similarities create agency problems that are similar enough for a comparative analysis to yield valuable insights? Once the utility of corporate governance insights is established, the dissertation answers two questions. Are initiatives necessary to minimize agency cost if referendums are already provided for? And, must the results of direct democracy be binding in order for agency cost to be minimized?