Defense Procurement: Fraud, Penalties, and Contractor Influence
34 Pages Posted: 8 Dec 1998 Last revised: 21 Jun 2017
Date Written: 1999
Abstract
Press reports of military procurement fraud investigations, indictments, and suspensions are associated with significantly negative average abnormal returns in the stocks of affected firms. Abnormal stock returns are significantly less negative, however, for firms ranking among the Top 100 defense contractors than for unranked contractors, even after controlling for firm size, the fraud's characteristics, and the firm's recidivism. Unranked contractors are penalized heavily for procurement frauds, experiencing both a decline in market value and a subsequent loss in government-derived revenues. Furthermore, these losses are related to the percentage of the firm's revenues that derive from government contracts. Influential contractors, in contrast, are penalized lightly, experiencing negligible changes in share value and government contract revenue.
JEL Classification: D21, G38, H57, K23, K42, L14
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
The Cost to Firms of Cooking the Books
By Jonathan M. Karpoff, D. Scott Lee, ...
-
The Consequences to Managers for Financial Misrepresentation
By Jonathan M. Karpoff, D. Scott Lee, ...
-
On the Nature of the Reputational Penalty for Corporate Crime: Evidence
-
Shareholder Initiated Class Action Lawsuits: Shareholder Wealth Effects and Industry Spillovers
By Amar Gande and Craig M. Lewis
-
Why Do Corporations Become Criminals? Ownership, Hidden Actions, and Crime as an Agency Cost
By Cindy R. Alexander and Mark A. Cohen
-
The Legal Penalties for Financial Misrepresentation
By Jonathan M. Karpoff, D. Scott Lee, ...
-
By Anup Agrawal and Tommy Cooper
-
Securities Class Actions, Corporate Governance and Managerial Agency Problems