本研究針對1993年到2007年在美國三大證券交易所，紐約證券交易所、那斯達克證券交易所與美國證券交易所之中具有更名事件的上市公司進行盈餘管理之研究，並從LexisNexis資料庫中，取得公司變更名稱的原因，將更名原因作為研究之標的，以瞭解企業盈餘管理是否會因更名原因不同而有所不同。當面對公司分別以「組織重整」、「變更營運項目」與「大幅度更名」等三種原因而更名時，是否出現不同的盈餘管理之變化幅度，藉此觀察出不同更名原因與盈餘管理之關聯性。 本研究是以Kothari, Leone and Wasley（2005）估計出的裁決性應計數，取其絕對值作為衡量盈餘管理程度的代理變數，實證結果發現，當公司宣告改變其公司名稱，相較於同產業其他公司的財務報表，當年度對於盈餘管理的影響效果並不顯著。以更名原因將樣本公司進行分類後，發現由於變更營運項目而更名的公司或是大幅度更名的公司，相較於其他同產業的對照公司，亦未發現其當年度盈餘管理之幅度有顯著差異，僅有因為組織重整而進行更名的公司，其當年度盈餘管理之幅度會高於其他同產業的對照公司。這樣的結論究其原因，可能是企業更名或許對於其他方面將產生影響，但與盈餘管理並無顯著關聯。

This paper investigates the impact of corporate name changes on both of stock performance and analysts’ reaction with the employment of event study. We first examine a sample of 387 listed Australian companies that renamed themselves during the time frame from January 2001 to December 2007. Separate analyses are conducted under three criterion dividing the overall sample into (1)”major” versus “minor” name changes; (2)name changes in “mining-related” versus “non-mining-related” sectors; and (3)name changes “with” versus “without” reasons mentioned. Generally, we find some evidence of significant negative association between corporate name changes and cumulative abnormal return. The result shows, unlike all other subgroups, name changes “with” reasons mentioned generate insignificant positive valuation effects. Separate analyses give two important implications. First, negative cumulative abnormal return in all subgroups is discovered except in the subgroup of name changes “with” reasons mentioned. The difference of abnormal returns within subgroups, in addition, appears to be significant only between name change with reasons mentioned or not. Our findings suggest that analysts react reluctantly to corporate name changes by showing tiny downward forecast revisions, which are far from significant. Instead, it seems analysts make forecast revisions based more on accounting data, which shows insignificant variations between pre- and post-event, than on signals of corporate name changes.

企業名稱是企業重要的無形資產，但是在1925年至2000年間名列美國證券市場資料庫的企業中，卻有超過三成的比率在公開上市後曾經更改過企業的名稱，因此本研究基於管理者及投資者的門檻心理，使用實證模型，探討企業更名後，管理者為了吸引投資者的注意，是否較可能去迎合各個盈餘門檻。 本研究以1994~2006年在美國三大證券交易所交易之具更名事件的企業為觀察樣本（實驗組），並依企業規模大小、產業及年度配對出非更名企業（對照組），比較更名企業與非更名企業在門檻心理之下的盈餘管理程度差異，探討企業更名後擊敗或達到盈餘門檻的機率是否大於更名前，研究方法兼採獨立樣本t檢定、綜和橫斷面分配法、分群樣本之羅吉斯多變量迴歸及差異中之差異法。實證結果發現獨立樣本t檢定下，企業更名後會迎合前期盈餘門檻；在綜和橫斷面分配法下則沒有發現迎合盈餘門檻的跡象；多變量迴歸及差異中之差異法則發現企業更名後會迎合前期盈餘門檻及分析師預測盈餘門檻。 / The name is an important intangible asset of the corporate. But over the 1924~2000 period, on the CRSP tapes, over 30% corporates had changed corporate names. Based on the earning thresholds behavior, I examine whether executives would try to meet or beat different earning thresholds in order to attract investors’ attention. In order to investigate the effects of name change, I use the corporates which had changed names over the 1994~2006 period to be the target groups, and then pair comparison groups by the same firm size, industry, and name-changed year. The results indicate that corporates would try to sustain recent performance when using t test. On the other hand, there is no evidence for executives to exceed thresholds under pooled cross-sectional distribution approach. Finally, corporates would sustain recent performance and meet analyst’s expectations when using multivavariate logit regression and difference - in - difference methods.

公司名稱不僅僅是識別的代號，還具有深切的意義存在，且更名還需花費很大的成本、面對原有客戶流失的風險，故企業更名背後的真正涵義是值得深入探討的。 本研究旨在探討在CRSP有更名紀錄之美國上市公司，是否會透過實質交易或裁決性應計之方式進行盈餘管理。除了比較更名前後盈餘管理程度之差異，同時也以更名公司為實驗組，並選取未更名公司作為對照組，檢測在更名後，更名公司與未更名公司之盈餘管理程度是否有顯著差異。另外，為額外分析不同類型的更名原因，是否會採取不同的盈餘管理方式，依不同標準選取以下二類之更名公司：第一類為因業務範圍改變而更名；第二類為無原因之更名。 實證結果發現，更名公司在更名後，比起更名前及未更名公司，可能有以操縱銷貨來壓低現金流量、透過過量生產以降低銷貨成本的實質交易行為，進行裁決性應計項目之盈餘管理也較為嚴重。額外分析不同原因的更名公司之實證結果則發現，無原因之更名公司在更名後，進行實質交易之情形較業務範圍改變之更名公司嚴重。 / This study investigates the impact of corporate name changes on earnings management. We examine earnings management behavior in the period leading to the passage of name change effective year and in the period following the passage of name change effective year, focusing on both real earnings management and accrual-based earnings management. To make further investigations, we conduct analysis of firms that change name because of broader or narrower focus the firm’s scope of business versus firms that change name with no reason. The empirical results show that name change firms use more accruals and real earnings management after name changes when compared to similar firms. Furthermore, we also find that firms change name with no reason tend to adopt real earnings management when compared to the firms that change name because of broader or narrow focus.