Skip to main content
Log in

Dividends Behavior in State- Versus Family-Controlled Firms: Evidence from Hong Kong

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study comparatively examines the dividends behavior in state-controlled firms versus family-controlled firms. With the sample of large industrial firms listed on the Main Board of Hong Kong Stock Exchange, we investigate the dividends payment rates, stability of dividends payment, the effects of firm size, profitability and growth opportunity on likelihood to pay dividends, as well as the concentration of dividend in state-controlled versus family-controlled firms. Based on the findings, we derive some ethical implications of dividends policy regarding the differences in business ethical behavior, corporate social responsibility, corporate governance, business sustainability, and shareholder activism in state-controlled versus family-controlled firms, as well as the improvement in these respects through cross-listing in Hong Kong.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The State Administration of Taxation announced in 2008 that it would levy a 10% withholding tax on dividends paid to non-resident enterprises by Chinese firms starting from the fiscal year of 2008, and Chinese firms cross-listed in HK started collecting the dividend tax accordingly.

  2. For example, a survey by the Ministry of Finance China finds that 98.7% of Chinese companies falsified their earnings in the annual reports in 2000 (Xu and Ho 2002).

  3. http://www.hkex.com.hk/eng/rulesreg/listrules/mbrules/vol1_2.htm.

  4. For example, as described by World Bank policy note (Kuijs et al. 2005), before 1993, revenue from China’s state-owned enterprises was a component of government budget revenue in China.

  5. In view of the absence of a SOE dividend policy since 1994, the State Council launched a reform in 2007 that aims to collect dividend from central SOEs and channel it to a State Capital Management Budget (SCMB) on a pilot basis.

  6. For example, in China most SOEs did not pay dividends until the State Council issued “Opinions of the State Council on the Pilot Implementation of the State Capital Operating Budget” which requires the SOEs to pay dividends from 2008 onwards.

  7. We omit the case in which several firms are controlled by one family for simplicity.

  8. The ultimate ownership data collected by Claessens et al. (2000) are posted on the website of Journal of Financial Economics in the “Data and programs used in JFE papers”.

  9. We have also conducted the analysis of likelihood to pay dividends in state and family controlled firms for the years of 2003−2006, respectively, and the results (not tabulated here) are qualitatively similar as the result for the year of 2007.

  10. http://www.cnstock.com/paper_new/html/2008-05/21/content_61806292.htm.

  11. The quotations are from the website of Cheung Kong (Holdings) Limited.

References

  • Adegbite, E., Amaeshi, K., & Amao, O. (2011, forthcoming). The politics of shareholder activism in Nigeria. Journal of Business Ethics.

  • Alchian, A., & Demsetz, H. (1972). Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62, 777–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1301–1328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M., & Wurgler, J. (2004). A catering theory of dividends. Journal of Finance, 59, 1125–1165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berle, A., & Means, G. (1932). The modern corporation and private property. New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boycko, M., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1993). Privatizing Russia. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2, 139–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brickley, J., & Dark, F. (1987). The choice of organizational form: The case of franchising. Journal of Financial Economics, 18, 401–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, M. (2005). Corporate governance and competitive advantage in family-controlled firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, 249–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, M., & Gedajlovic, E. (2002). The coupling of ownership and control and the allocation of financial resources: Evidence from Hong Kong. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 123–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, Y. L., Connelly, J. T., Limpaphayom, P., & Zhou, L. (2007). Do investors really value corporate governance? Evidence from the Hong Kong market. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 18, 86–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, W., & Zhang, H. (2010). Are stronger executive incentives associated with cross-listing? Evidence from China. China Economic Review, 21, 150–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Sharma, P. (2005). Trends and directions in the development of a strategic management theory of the family firm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, 555–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. (1999). Defining family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23, 19–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chun, R. (2009). Ethical values and environmentalism in China: Comparing employees from state owned and private firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 341–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J., & Lang, L. H. P. (2002). Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholdings. Journal of Finance, 57, 2741–2771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. H. P. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58, 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronqvist, H., & Fahlenbrach, R. (2009). Large shareholders and corporate policies. Review of Financial Studies, 22, 3941–3976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Carvalho, A. G., & Pennacchi, G. G. (2011, forthcoming). Can a stock exchange improve corporate behavior? Evidence from firms’ migration to premium listings in Brazil. Journal of Corporate Finance.

  • DeAngelo, H., DeAngelo, L., & Skinner, D. J. (2004). Are dividends disappearing? Dividend concentration and the consolidation of earnings. Journal of Financial Economics, 72, 425–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denis, D. J., & Osobov, I. (2008). Why do firms pay dividends? International evidence on the determinants of dividend policy. Journal of Financial Economics, 89, 62–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doidge, C., Karolyi, A., & Stulz, R. (2009). Has New York become less competitive than London in global markets? Evaluating foreign listing choices over time. Journal of Financial Economics, 91, 253–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duh, M., Belak, J., & Milfelner, B. (2010). Core values, culture and ethical climate as constitutional elements of ethical behaviour: Exploring differences between family and non-family enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 473–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, W. G., & Whetten, D. A. (2006). Family firms and social responsibility: Preliminary evidence from the S&P 500. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 785–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook, F. (1984). Two agency cost explanations of dividends. American Economic Review, 74, 650–659.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enderle, G. (2010). Wealth creation in China and some lessons for development ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faccio, M., Lang, L. H. P., & Young, L. (2001). Dividends and expropriation. American Economic Review, 91, 54–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2001). Disappearing dividends: Changing firm characteristics or lower propensity to pay? Journal of Financial Economics, 60, 3–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fudenberg, D., & Tirole, J. (1995). A theory of income and dividend smoothing based on incumbency rents. Journal of Political Economy, 103, 75–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallo, M. A. (2004). The family business and its social responsibilities. Family Business Review, 17(2), 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greif, A., & Tabellini, G. (2010). Cultural and institutional bifurcation: China and Europe compared. American Economic Review, 100, 135–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). The proper scope of government: Theory and an application to prisons. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 1127–1161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, L. J., & Snell, R. S. (2003). Turnaround, corruption and mediocrity: Leadership and governance in three state owned enterprises in Mainland China. Journal of Business Ethics, 43, 111–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ip, P. K. (2009). The challenge of developing a business ethics in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 211–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency cost of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. American Economic Review, 76, 323–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karolyi, A. (2006). The world of cross-listings and cross-listings of the world: Challenging conventional wisdom. Review of Finance, 10, 73–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuijs, L., Mako, W., & Zhang, C. (2005). SOE dividends: How much and to whom? World Bank policy note. Washington, DC: World Bank.

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 44, 471–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1998). Law and finance. Journal of Political Economy, 106, 1113–1155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lintner, J. (1956). Distribution of incomes of corporations among dividends, retained earnings and taxes. American Economic Review, 46, 97–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Y. (1997). Partner selection and venturing success: The case of joint ventures with firms in the people’s republic of China. Organization Science, 8, 648–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandl, I. (2008). Overview of family business relevant issues. Final report. Vienna: Austrian Institute for SME Research.

  • Miller, M. H., & Rock, K. (1985). Dividend policy under asymmetric information. Journal of Finance, 40, 1031–1051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morck, R., Wolfenson, D., & Yeung, B. (2005). Corporate governance, economic entrenchment and growth. Journal of Economics Literature, 43, 655–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quazi, A. M., & O’Brien, D. (2000). An empirical test of a cross-national model of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 33–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, L. (1992). Changing mind-sets: Taking the long view of investment planning. Management Review, 81, 31–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. G. (1989). Signalling. In J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, & P. Newman (Eds.), Allocation, information and market. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozeff, M. S. (1982). Growth, beta and agency costs as determinants of dividend payout ratios. Journal of Financial Research, 5, 249–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salva, C. (2003). Foreign listings, corporate governance, and equity valuations. Journal of Economics and Business, 55, 463–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, W. G., & Carpenter, M. A. (2003). Strategic satisficing? A behavioral-agency theory perspective on stock repurchase program. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 160–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schacht, K. N. (1995). Institutional investors and shareholder activism: Dealing with demanding shareholders. Directorship, 21(5), 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2001). Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12, 99–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Setia-Atmaja, L., Tanewski, G. A., & Skully, M. (2009). The role of dividends, debt and board structure in the governance of family controlled firms. Journal of Business, Finance and Accounting, 36, 863–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A. (1998). State versus private ownership. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12, 133–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52, 737–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., & Hitt, M. A. (2003). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management, and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27, 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soppe, A. (2004). Sustainable corporate finance. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 213–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavrou, E., Kassinis, G., & Filotheou, A. (2007). Downsizing and stakeholder orientation among the Fortune 500: Does family ownership matter? Journal of Business Ethics, 72, 149–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian, L., & Estrin, S. (2007). Retained state shareholding in Chinese PLCs: Does government ownership reduce corporate value? Journal of Comparative Economics, 36, 74–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Eije, H., & Megginson, W. L. (2008). Dividends and share repurchases in the European Union. Journal of Financial Economics, 89, 347–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C.-F. (2006). The study of the relations among ethical considerations, family management and organizational performance in corporate governance. Journal of Business Ethics, 68, 165–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, S., & Ho, M. (2002). PetroChina: International corporate governance with Chinese characteristics. Centre for Asian Business Cases 2/15/02, 1020. University of Hong Kong.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to Thomas Clarke (Section Editor) and four anonymous reviewers for their insightful guidance, helpful suggestions and useful comments. All remaining errors are our own.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wilson X. B. Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

He, T.T., Li, W.X.B. & Tang, G.Y.N. Dividends Behavior in State- Versus Family-Controlled Firms: Evidence from Hong Kong. J Bus Ethics 110, 97–112 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1150-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1150-0

Keywords

Navigation