Abstract:the past two decades, increasing the influence of common shareholders has become a touchstone of good governance and shareholder democracy across the globe. Institutional activism combined with major regulatory overhauls has led shareholders to play a more active role in corporate decision-making. Yet, there are only a handful of studies that examine the role of corporate governance on a CEO’s opportunity costs to sell her holdings. In this paper, we provide evidence that quality of governance helps to explain a significant amount of variation in CEO ownership and the compensation structure. We argue that exogenous improvements in governance standards reduce the CEO’s costs to sell her shares because the market puts a higher weight on liquidity-related sales relative to private information-related sales. We find that CEO ownership level is strongly negatively related to the quality of corporate governance. Further, we argue that higher liquidation of shareholdings lowers the CEO’s wealth-performance sensitivity; hence, the compensation committee needs to give more incentive compensation to keep the wealth-performance sensitivity at the optimal level. We find that CEO incentive intensity is positively associated with the quality of corporate governance. Thus, we find that CEOs get more stakes in the firm, but CEOs choose to hold a lower stake in their portfolio. We use the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (henceforth, SOX) as a quasi-natural experiment to mitigate the causality concern between corporate governance, CEO’s stick ownership, and compensation structure. As a robustness test, we check that CEOs, under good governance, have higher yearly share sales. This effect is positively related to CEOs' tenure and negatively related to the size of the firm. However, we show that even if they earn higher incentive compensation, CEOs with lower stock ownership have lower wealth-performance sensitivity compared to CEOs with higher stock ownership. Our results have important implications for contracting mechanisms related to mitigating agency problems.

When shareholder power kicks in: corporate financialization as ratchet behaviour and sticky payouts

(Un)intended Consequences of a Mandatory Dividend Payout Regulation for Earnings Management: Evidence From a Natural Experiment:

Agency Dynamics in Corporate Finance

Insider Stock Pledges and Shareholder Wealth

Short‐selling Constraints and Corporate Payout Policy

How Does Dividend Payout Affect Corporate Social Responsibility? A Channel Analysis

Payout Policy under Enhanced Labor Power: Evidence from a New Approach

Why Are Corporate Investment Horizons Shrinking? Uncovering the Spillover Effects of Shareholder Litigation

Corporate growth and strategic payout policy

Quality of Governance, Opportunity Costs, and CEO Compensation Structure

Equity-Incentive Compensation and Payout Policy in Europe

Tax Motivated Payout Financing

Pay for Corporate Performance or Pay as Social Division? Rethinking the Problem of Top Management Pay in Giant Corporations

Shareholder Voting: A Complementary Mechanism to Mandatory Disclosure Regulation

CEO Pay Duration and Corporate Debt Maturity Structure

Corporate executives' incentives and ESG performance

Information in Unexpected Bonus Cuts: Firm Performance and CEO Firings

Shareholder Activism and Dividend Policy of the Firms: The Moderating Role of Financial Distress

ESG reputation risks, cash holdings, and payout policies

A study of the impact of staggered boards on corporate financialization: from the perspective of board governance

Incentive Effects of Extreme CEO Pay Cuts *