面值退市制度对企业高送转行为的治理效应研究

The Governance Effects of the Par-value Delisting Rule on Corporate High Stock Dividend Practices

黄欣怡,付广燕,蔡祥

2026 第 52 卷 第 09 期 页码 64-78

DOI: 10.16538/j.cnki.jfe.20260731.401

PDF全文下载 HTML全文

摘要

文章基于面值退市的视角考察监管制度改革对企业股票送转行为的治理作用。文章研究发现,在面值退市制度颁布实施后,该制度出台前股票送转比例较高的企业送转比例明显减小,实施高送转的概率显著下降。导致上述结果的内在机制在于:第一,企业通过减少高送转行为以避免股票价格的大幅度除权调整,从而降低面值退市风险;第二,在低股价的情形下,风险较高的企业因股价过度波动触发面值退市的可能性更高,因此上市公司有更强烈的意愿抑制送转行为;第三,面值退市制度促使投资者更为理性地看待高送转行为,从而降低了高送转公告的正向超额收益,弱化了企业实施高送转的动机。基于股权特征的进一步研究显示,面值退市制度对高送转行为的抑制作用在大股东与机构投资者持股比例较高的企业、非国有企业与进行定向增发的企业中更为显著。文章的结论为检验面值退市制度的实施效果及其对高送转行为的治理成效提供了经验证据。

High stock dividend plans are widely adopted by listed firms in China and are often met with favorable market reactions. When undertaken to cater to investors’ irrational preferences, high stock dividend plans may not only mislead investors but also adversely affect firms’ long-term performance.

Focusing on the disciplining role of regulation, this paper employs a DID design to examine how the par-value delisting rule affects corporate stock dividend decisions. It thereby provides evidence on both the effectiveness of the par-value delisting policy and its governance effect on the “high stock dividend” phenomenon. The results show that firms with higher pre-policy stock dividend ratios become significantly less likely to undertake high stock dividend plans following the introduction of the par-value delisting rule. The study further investigates the mechanisms through which the rule affects corporate stock dividend decisions. First, high stock dividends result in substantial downward ex-rights adjustments in share prices, thereby increasing exposure to par-value delisting risks and directly inducing listed firms to modify their stock dividend strategies. Second, when high stock dividend plans result in low share prices, firms with greater risks may experience more pronounced stock price volatility and are therefore more likely to breach the par-value delisting threshold. These firms consequently have stronger incentives to reduce high stock dividend practices. Finally, the par-value delisting rule weakens investors’ favorable expectations regarding high stock dividends and significantly reduces the positive abnormal returns associated with their announcements, which diminishes firms’ incentives to implement such plans.

This paper makes the following contributions: First, it extends the literature on the determinants of high stock dividend practices from the perspective of delisting system reform. Second, whereas prior studies have primarily focused on how financial delisting criteria affect corporate behavior, this paper investigates the par-value delisting rule and thus offers a new perspective on the economic consequences of delisting regulation. Third, it provides useful implications for securities regulators, listed firms, and investors seeking a deeper understanding of the governance effects of the par-value delisting rule.

参考文献

1 机构投资者如何发挥积极股东作用——以降低退市风险为例. 证券市场导报,2026,(1):42-55. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-1589.2026.01.004.
2 定向增发与股利分配动机异化: 基于“高送转”现象的证据. 会计研究,2017,(7):62-68.
3 “放手一搏”还是“稳中求进”: 退市监管与企业风险承担. 金融监管研究,2021,(6):84-99. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.2095-3291.2021.06.006.
4 上市公司退市制度实施效果的实证分析. 财经研究,2009,(1):133-143. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1001-9952.2009.01.012.
5 上市公司股票送转行为动机研究——基于股权质押融资视角的证据. 会计研究,2018,(3):57-63. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2886.2018.03.008.
6 中国上市公司送股、转增行为动机初探. 金融研究,2003,(9):44-56.
7 送转与定向增发: 基于市值管理的视角. 财经研究,2016,(12):84-95. DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.jfe.2016.12.008.
8 中国上市公司送转动机研究: 操纵迎合还是估值提升?. 会计研究,2019,(4):50-57. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2886.2019.04.007.
9 控股股东股权质押影响上市公司“高送转”吗?. 管理科学学报,2018,(12):18-36. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-9807.2018.12.002.
10 “一劳永逸”还是“饮鸩止渴”——基于上市公司高送转的研究. 管理科学,2018,(4):17-29.
11 中国股票市场“高送转”现象研究. 管理世界,2014,(11):133-145.
12 控股股东股权质押与上市公司股利政策选择. 金融研究,2018,(4):172-189.
13 退市监管与股价崩盘风险. 中国工业经济,2016,(12):58-74.
14 股利情绪、股利迎合与股价崩盘风险——基于百度指数平台搜索量的经验证据. 管理科学学报,2023,(2):87-103.
15 限售股解禁、政府监管与公司股份送转行为——基于投资者非理性的调节效应. 会计研究,2020,(8):91-103.
16 创业板退市制度新规的市场反应研究. 证券市场导报,2014,(5):20-25.
17 退市制度与盈余管理——创新包容视角. 南开管理评论,2025,(9):66-75.
18 上市公司“高送转”与内部人股票减持: “谋定后动”还是“顺水推舟”?. 金融研究,2016,(11):158-173.
19 退市制度对创业板上市公司盈余管理行为的影响——基于应计与真实盈余管理的分析. 审计研究,2013,(1):95-102.
20 退市风险与企业战略选择——基于中国渐进式退市制度的实证研究. 中国工业经济,2026,(1):170-193.
21 退市制度变革对上市公司盈余管理行为影响. 会计研究,2018,(6):32-38.
22 会计师事务所职业风险基金、职业责任保险与首次业务承接. 会计研究,2020,(11):152-169.
23 投资者名义价格幻觉与管理者迎合——基于基金拆分现象的研究. 经济研究,2014,(5):133-146.
24 上市公司“退市难”的利益动机. 金融评论,2020,(3):53-64.
25 “吐故方能纳新”——基于退市新规的事件研究. 中央财经大学学报,2024,(2):81-91.
26 上市公司为什么要退市——基于盛大互动和阿里巴巴的案例研究. 中国工业经济,2014,(1):127-139.
27 Law, finance, and economic growth in China. Journal of Financial Economics,2005,77(1):57-116. DOI:10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.06.010.
28 Further evidence on managerial motives for stock splits. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics,1993,32(3):20-31.
29 Why do European firms go public?. European Financial Management,2009,15(4):844-884. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-036X.2009.00501.x.
30 Effective stock splits. Harvard Business Review,1956,34(1):101-106.
31 Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy,1968,76(2):169-217. DOI:10.1086/259394.
32 Earnings management and post-split drift. Journal of Banking & Finance,2019,101:136-146.
33 Changes in trading activity following stock splits and their effect on volatility and the adverse-information component of the bid-ask spread. Journal of Financial Research,1998,21(2):159-183. DOI:10.1111/j.1475-6803.1998.tb00678.x.
34 CEO opportunism?: Option grants and stock trades around stock splits. Journal of Accounting and Economics,2015,60(1):18-35. DOI:10.1016/j.jacceco.2015.02.004.
35 The impact of regulation FD on the information environment: Evidence from the stock market response to stock split announcements. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting,2014,43(4):829-853. DOI:10.1007/s11156-013-0394-4.
36 What are the benefits of attracting gambling investors? Evidence from stock splits in China. Journal of Corporate Finance,2022,74:102199. DOI:10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2022.102199.
37 Should earnings thresholds be used as delisting criteria in stock market?. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy,2008,27(5):409-419. DOI:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2008.07.002.
38 Stock splits and price change. The Journal of Finance,1966,21(4):675-686. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1966.tb00273.x.
39 The effect of market segmentation and illiquidity on asset prices: Evidence from exchange listings. The Journal of Finance,1994,49(2):611-636. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1994.tb05154.x.
40 Motivations for public equity offers: An international perspective. Journal of Financial Economics,2008,87(2):281-307. DOI:10.1016/j.jfineco.2006.09.010.
41 Econometric policy evaluation: A critique. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy,1976,1:19-46. DOI:10.1016/S0167-2231(76)80003-6.
42 The effects of splitting on the ex: A microstructure reconciliation. Financial Management,1992,21(4):44-59. DOI:10.2307/3665840.
43 Why do firms go dark?. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis,2007,42(2):421-442. DOI:10.1017/S0022109000003331.
44 Stock dividends, stock splits, and signaling. The Journal of Finance,1990,45(3):857-879. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1990.tb05109.x.
45 Dividend policy, growth, and the valuation of shares. The Journal of Business,1961,34(4):411-433. DOI:10.1086/294442.
46 Consequences of earnings management triggered by delisting regulation: Evidence in China. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy,2023,42(3):107046. DOI:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2022.107046.
47 Anything wrong with breaking a buck? An empirical evaluation of NASDAQ's $1 minimum bid price maintenance criterion. Journal of Financial Markets,2012,15(2):258-285. DOI:10.1016/j.finmar.2011.09.002.
48 Stock exchange listings, firm value, and security market efficiency: The impact of NASDAQ. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis,1986,21(1):1-25. DOI:10.2307/2330987.
49 Corporate actions and the manipulation of retail investors in China: An analysis of stock splits. Journal of Financial Economics,2022,145(3):762-787. DOI:10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.09.018.

数据公开

标题文件大小下载
2006-2023年沪深A股上市公司机制检验(企业的面值退市风险、低价的持续性、ROA高低、是否亏损、经营风险高低、财务风险高低、有无股权质押、超额收益率) 2.0 MB
2006-2023年沪深A股上市公司控制变量(净资产收益、资产负债率、企业规模、企业成长性、净利润增长率、每股收益、每股未分配利润、股权集中度、产权性质、每股派现金额、股票增发、股票回报率、平均股价、上市年限) 5.1 MB
2006-2023年沪深A股上市公司面值退市制度 1.0 MB
2006-2023年沪深A股上市公司送转比例和高送转行为 1.5 MB
2006-2023年沪深A股上市公司稳健性检验(变更处理组与控制组的分组设定、排除其他政策的影响) 1.4 MB
2006-2023年沪深A股上市公司异质性检验(大股东持股、机构投资者、产权性质、定向增发) 1.8 MB
附录 268.0 KB
数据及程序代码 1.7 MB