HEC Research Papers Series,
HEC Paris

Abstract: Using ASU 2017-12, which substantially simplified reporting of hedging activities, I compare debt contracting outcomes from public bond issuers’ and private loan borrowers’ implementations of less complex hedge accounting. Bond issuers lower credit spreads by 13 – 22 basis points through effective hedging and reporting under the ASU. In contrast, private loan borrowers face 11 basis points higher loan pricing, and 50% greater balance-sheet covenants post-ASU adoption. I argue that when the ASU removes risk-relevant reporting requirements, information frictions and thus the agency cost of private debt increase for banks, and hedging outcomes from private borrowers’ ASU adoptions are insufficient towards offsetting the increased agency cost of debt. Bondholders and private lenders price the informational content of simplified hedge accounting rules differently even when borrowers’ real hedging outcomes remain unchanged. I extend the literature by showing that complex accounting rules have opposite effects on institutionally different public and private debt markets.

Keywords: Reporting Complexity; Hedge accounting; Financial risk management; Debt contracting; Public debt; Private debt; ASU 2017-12

JEL-codes: D82; G21; G32; M41

52 pages, November 1, 2023

Full text files

papers.cfm?abstract_id=4594229 HTML file Full text

Download statistics

• HEC Paris
• Ordering Working Papers
• Home page for this series

Questions (including download problems) about the papers in this series should be directed to Antoine Haldemann ()
Report other problems with accessing this service to Sune Karlsson ().

RePEc:ebg:heccah:1494This page generated on 2024-09-13 22:19:53.