Government Equity Investments in Coronavirus Bailouts: Why, How, When?

被引:4
作者
Megginson, William [1 ,2 ]
Fotak, Veljko [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019 USA
[2] Univ Int Business & Econ, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Univ Buffalo, Sch Management, Buffalo, NY USA
[4] Bocconi Univ, BAFFI Carefin, Sovereign Investment Lab, Milan, Italy
来源
JOURNAL OF LAW FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING | 2021年 / 6卷 / 01期
关键词
Bailouts; equity capital injections; preferred stock and warrants; central bank policies; fiscal and stabilization policies; TARP; transportation and hospitality industries; corporate governance; PRIVATE EQUITY; BANK BAILOUTS; CORPORATE; REPRESENTATION; PERFORMANCE; OWNERSHIP; FIRMS; STATE;
D O I
10.1561/108.00000050
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Governments around the world are attempting to support individuals' incomes, rescue distressed businesses, and preserve jobs affected by the coronavirus pandemic by adopting fiscal stimulus programs of unprecedented scale. Although the bulk of this spending will involve direct payments to individuals or some type of direct lending or loan guarantees to businesses, large sums likely will (and should) take the form of government purchases of equity in distressed firms either by direct purchase or by exercising warrants attached to rescue loans. We discuss why we think these equity injections will be necessary, but only in a limited number of cases; how they should be structured; when investments should be made and, almost as important, exited. We summarize (and tabulate) both the modest recent history of governments rescuing non-financial firms with equity injections and the voluminous research examining the efficacy of governments rescuing failing banks using equity investments. We highlight the dangers that would likely arise if governments permanently retain and vote the equity stakes purchased during the current crisis. Where equity investments must be made, we argue that these should: (1) be effective, in being large enough to be decisive; (2) be passive after the initial injection, when some financial restrictions should be imposed; (3) be temporary and preferably self-liquidating through open-market sales or redemptions; (4) provide taxpayers an upside claim if and when the rescued firm recovers; (5) be restricted to exchange-listed companies in all but extreme cases; and (6) be timely, as speed is crucial. In most cases, the default instrument to employ should be either non-voting preferred stock or warrants that convert into immediately marketable common shares.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 49
页数:49
相关论文
共 73 条
[1]   A Pyrrhic Victory? Bank Bailouts and Sovereign Credit Risk [J].
Acharya, Viral ;
Drechsler, Itamar ;
Schnabl, Philipp .
JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 2014, 69 (06) :2689-2739
[2]  
AMADEO K, 2019, THE BALANCE
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2009, 360 EUR COMM
[4]  
Arnold K., 2020, DALLAS MORNING NEWS
[5]  
Asquith J., 2020, FORBES
[6]   Are Small Businesses Worthy of Financial Aid? Evidence from a French Targeted Credit Program [J].
Bach, Laurent .
REVIEW OF FINANCE, 2014, 18 (03) :877-919
[7]   Assessing TARP [J].
Bayazitova, Dinara ;
Shivdasani, Anil .
REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STUDIES, 2012, 25 (02) :377-407
[8]   A more complete conceptual framework for SME finance [J].
Berger, Allen N. ;
Udell, Gregory F. .
JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE, 2006, 30 (11) :2945-2966
[9]   Efficient Bailouts? [J].
Bianchi, Javier .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2016, 106 (12) :3607-3659
[10]  
Bolton John., 2020, ROOM IT HAPPENED WHI