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.

Say-on-Pay Laws and Financial Reporting Quality Around the World: Evidence from a Natural Experiment

Short Selling and Financial Reporting Quality: Evidence from Chinese AH Shares

Perceived Audit Quality, State Ownership, and Stock Price Delay: Evidence from China

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

Worldwide Board Reforms and Financial Reporting Quality

The Effect of the Internal Control Regulation on Reporting Quality in China

Corporate Governance and Financial Reporting Quality : Evidence from the Split Share Structure Reform in China

Do Politically Connected Directors Affect Accounting Quality? Evidence from China's Anti-Corruption Campaign (rule 18)

From greed to good: how government regulations of executive compensation impact corporate ESG performance?

Textual Analysis and International Financial Reporting: Large Sample Evidence

The Real Effects of SOX Section 404 : Evidence from Corporate Innovation

Executive Compensation, Supervisory Board, and China'S Governance Reform: A Legal Approach Perspective

Firm Responses to Nonprescriptive Pollution Regulation: Evidence from China’s Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting Mandate

Shareholder Voting: A Complementary Mechanism to Mandatory Disclosure Regulation

Environmental risk exposure and executive pay-for-performance sensitivity

China’s Anti-Corruption Campaign and Financial Reporting Quality

Does Corporate Governance Affect Restatement of Financial Reporting? Evidence from China

Quality of Governance, Opportunity Costs, and CEO Compensation Structure

The Substantial Convergence of Chinese Accounting Standards with IFRS and the Managerial Pay-for-accounting Performance Sensitivity of Publicly Listed Chinese Firms

The Wealth Change and Redistribution Effects of Sarbanes-Oxley Internal Control Disclosures

The Real Effect of Financial Disclosure: International Evidence