Lower Defeat Thresholds for Minority Shareholders and Corporate Governance: Evidence from the Australian “Two-Strikes” Rule

2Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This study assesses the impact of minority shareholder empowerment via lower defeat thresholds in “say-on-pay” votes on CEO compensation and career prospects for directors. We exploit the adoption of the Australian “two-strikes” rule as a quasi-exogenous shock, which empowers shareholders to vote on board dismissal if a firm’s remuneration report receives 25 percent or more dissent votes for two consecutive years. Using a difference-in-differences methodology, we find that firms respond to a “strike” by curbing excessive CEO pay. Under the two-strikes regime, independent directors are held more accountable for poor oversight and experience significant reputational penalties in terms of turnover and the loss of outside directorships subsequent to receiving a strike. The results are mainly driven by firms receiving a nonmajority strike, indicating that the effectiveness of the two-strikes regime stems largely from the lower defeat threshold.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bugeja, M., da Silva Rosa, R., Shan, Y., Walter, T., & Yermack, D. (2023). Lower Defeat Thresholds for Minority Shareholders and Corporate Governance: Evidence from the Australian “Two-Strikes” Rule. Accounting Review, 98(7), 61–96. https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2020-0434

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free