The joint determination of leverage and maturity

By Michael J. Barclay, Leslie M. Marx, Clifford W. Smith. 2003

412 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4bf9473677bd652921701a1dc1361c1b1a53403c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Finance

Citations in the corpus

Accounting Quality and Debt Contracting (2008, background): “In case of the maturity specification, we also include asset maturity since firms match their debt maturity to asset maturity (Barclay et al. 2003).”
On the Value of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: An Empirical Investigation of Corporate Bond Issues in China (2018, methodology): “Following Barclay et al. (2003), we estimate a firm’s asset maturity as CA CAþ PPE CA COGS þ PPE CAþPPE PPED&A , where CA is the current assets, PPE is the net fixed asset, COGS is the cost of goods sold, and D&A denotes depreciation and amortization.”
Corporate Boards and the Leverage and Debt Maturity Choices (2007, positive): “To test our hypotheses that there is a positive relation between our board constructs and the level of leverage, and a negative relation between our board constructs and debt maturity in a multivariate framework, we use two-stage least squares regression analysis as in Barclay et al. (2003) and Datt”
Evidence of jointness in the terms of relationship lending (2007, background): “The case for endogenizing maturity and size is particularly strong (see, for example, Barclay et al., 2003; Berger et al., 2003; Brick and Ravid 1985, 1991; and Dennis et al., 2000).”
Firm Cash Holdings and CEO Inside Debt (2013, background): “…evidence that cash holdings are related to firm cash flow (Cash flow/net assets) which 24 For example, see Barclay and Smith (1995), Stohs and Mauer (1996), Barclay, Marx, and Smith (2003), and Billett, King, and Mauer (2007) for discussions of this limitation of the firm fixed effects estimator.”
CEO Overconfidence and Corporate Debt Maturity (2016, neutral): “, Barclay et al. (2003), Datta et al.”
Determinants of Corporate Debt Maturity in South America: Do Institutional Quality and Financial Development Matter? (2012, positive): “According to Barclay et al. (2003), leverage and maturity are endogenous facets of the firm capital structure decision.”
Lending Relationships and Loan Contract Terms (2011, positive): “Recent research has begun examining syndicate moral hazard.(2) Our paper adds to this literature by examining a large set of bank loans to publicly listed corporations.”
Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Debt Maturity (2015, positive): “Their inclusion is motivated by previous empirical literature (e.g., Barclay and Smith 1995; Barclay et al. 2003; Johnson 2003; Custódio et al. 2013), and they serve to control for the different existing theories on debt maturity, namely agency cost theory, signaling theory, and liquidity risk theor”
Influence of bank concentration and institutions on capital structure: New international evidence (2008, background): “(2001), Fama and French (2002), Barclay et al. (2003), Leary and Roberts (2005), and Flannery and Rangan (2006).”
Managerial Stock Ownership and the Maturity Structure of Corporate Debt (2005, methodology): “The significantly positive correlations between leverage and debt maturity measures corroborate the results reported by Barclay et al. (2003) and Johnson (2003).”
Growth Opportunities and the Choice of Leverage, Debt Maturity, and Covenants (2007, methodology): “Borrowing from the covenant equation specifications in Begley (1994), Nash, Netter and Poulsen (2003), and Reisel (2004), in the covenant index equation we include as controls firm size, volatility, and dummy variables for Altman’s Z-score < 1.”
Ownership structure, control contestability, and corporate debt maturity (2015, methodology): “Second, previous studies argue that firms likely choose the level of their leverage and the maturity of their debt simultaneously, which implies that the use of OLS regressions could be problematic (e.g., Barclay et al., 2003; Johnson, 2003).”