舞弊真的能帶來好處嗎？ 舞弊被發現前後對ESG評價之影響

Abstract

本研究以2007年至2019年間有因為發生不實表達而重新公告財務報表的美國公司為樣本，比較當ESG評價機構得知公司財務重編時，因舞弊造成的財務重編是否相較因錯誤造成的財報重編有更大的ESG評價調整。再計算公司於財務報表重編期間之累計異常報酬，並衡量其對公司ESG評價之影響。最後，將舞弊與累計異常報酬二者對ESG評價的影響合併探討。研究結果發現，ESG評價機構得知公司需作財務重編的原因後，舞弊相較於錯誤並不會對ESG評價有更顯著的負面影響。而累計異常報酬對ESG評價有正向的顯著影響。惟當該異常報酬的增加係由舞弊所導致時，會對ESG評價有負向的顯著影響。代表若公司只要是因舞弊而獲得不法之利益，且該舞弊被監管機關發現後，都將對公司產生負面影響，無論原先公司價值多少，此結論符合本研究原先對舞弊影響的預期。

This paper examines the effect of fraud on ESG ratings of US companies that restated their financial statements between 2007 and 2019. I investigate three research questions. First, does fraud lead to a greater ESG rating decline than error does upon the disclosure of financial misstatements? Second, is corporate performance during the misstatement period positively associated with the change in ESG ratings from the beginning to the end of the restatement period? Third, does the disclosure of fraud offset the effect of corporate performance during the misstatement period on ESG ratings? My findings suggest that first, fraud does not have a greater effect than error on ESG ratings upon the announcement of financial restatements. Second, cumulative abnormal returns (CAR) during the restatement period is positively associated with the change in ESG ratings. Finally, while fraud does not incrementally affect ESG ratings, CAR during the restatement period is negatively associated with the overall change in ESG ratings when the restatements were due to fraud. My results imply that the revelation of fraud more than offsets the ESG rating increase during the misstatement period if the misstatements were due to fraud. These findings align with my initial expectations regarding the impact of fraud.