Corporate Governance Requirements in Canada and the United States: A Legal and Empirical Comparison of the Principles-Based and Rules-Based Approaches
21 Pages Posted: 29 Mar 2006
Date Written: February 2006
Abstract
We present a first-time comparison of the principles-based corporate governance regime in Canada and the rules-based corporate governance regime in the United States from a theoretical, legal and empirical perspective. This comparison is of value to both firms considering a listing in Canada and/or the United States and institutional investors who hold equity stakes in either of these two countries. Under the Canadian principles-based approach, with the exception of mandatory rules relating to audit committees, companies are required to publicly disclose the extent of their compliance with the suggested best practices and, where a firm's practices depart from such guidelines, to describe the procedures implemented to meet the same corporate governance objective. Hence, the Canadian approach is in the form of comply or disclose. In contrast, the U.S. rules-based approach is oriented toward mandatory compliance with legislation and stock exchange requirements, with a much greater emphasis on regulatory enforcement rather than voluntary compliance. Our empirical evidence illustrates that the different regulatory regimes in Canada and the United States has to a certain extent resulted in considerably different corporate governance practices. Our research shows that Canadian firms, in comparison to U.S. firms: have smaller boards with fewer independent directors; have boards that hold more meetings; have directors that sit on a greater number of boards than directors of Nasdaq-listed firms, and sit on a fewer number of boards than directors of NYSE firms; are less likely to have CEOs also serving as the chairman of the board; and are less likely to have compensation, nominating and corporate governance committees, and the fraction of independent directors sitting on these committees is significantly lower. We conclude that there are pros and cons associated with both the principles-based and rules-based regimes. The extent to which the made-in-Canada approach to governance is found to be effective largely depends upon whether investors remain confident in regulation of the Canadian capital markets.
Keywords: Corporate governance, rules-based approach, principles-based approach, boards, board independence
JEL Classification: G30, G38
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Recommended Papers
-
The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems
-
The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems
-
The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems
-
Boards of Directors as an Endogenously Determined Institution: A Survey of the Economic Literature
-
Boards of Directors as an Endogenously Determined Institution: A Survey of the Economic Literature
-
Boards of Directors as an Endogenously Determined Institution: A Survey of the Economic Literature
-
CEO Involvement in the Selection of New Board Members: An Empirical Analysis
By David Yermack and Anil Shivdasani
-
The Uncertain Relationship between Board Composition and Firm Performance
By Sanjai Bhagat and Bernard S. Black
-
The Non-Correlation between Board Independence and Long-Term Firm Performance
By Sanjai Bhagat and Bernard S. Black
-
The Non-Correlation between Board Independence And Long-Term Firm Performance
By Sanjai Bhagat and Bernard S. Black
