Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2025, Vol. 539 Issue (5): 171-187    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
中介机构固定搭配:“合作”抑或“合谋”——基于债券信用评级的经验证据
丁璇, 杨道广, 张新民
天水师范大学商学院,甘肃天水 741001;
对外经济贸易大学国际商学院/北京企业国际化经营研究基地,北京 100029
Fixed Collocation of Intermediaries: “Cooperation” or “Collusion” ——Empirical Evidence from Bond Credit Ratings
DING Xuan, YANG Daoguang, ZHANG Xinmin
Business School, Tianshui Normal University;
Business School, University of International Business and Economics;Beijing Enterprises’Global Management Research Centre, University of International Business and Economics
下载:  PDF (809KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 中介机构在债券市场中发挥着不可替代的重要作用,中介机构行为直接影响债券市场的健康有序发展。基于此,本文着眼于我国债券市场中介机构固定搭配行为,选取2008—2022年间交易所市场和银行间市场发行的所有公司债、企业债、中期票据作为研究对象,实证探究了信用评级机构与会计事务所之间的固定搭配行为对债券信用评级产生的影响。研究发现:基于合作效应理论,信用评级机构与会计师事务所之间的固定搭配经验越多,债券信用评级越低,并且该结论在控制内生性及进行一系列稳健性检验后依然存在。异质性分析发现,信用评级机构具有外资背景时,中介机构固定搭配行为对信用评级的影响效应减弱;会计师事务所为国际“四大”时,中介机构固定搭配行为对债券信用评级的影响效应增强。进一步研究表明,信用评级机构与会计师事务所之间的固定搭配经验越多,债券信用评级的信息含量也越多,债券评级误差越少。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
丁璇
杨道广
张新民
关键词:  中介机构  合作  合谋  信用评级  违约风险    
Summary:  During the bond issuance process, intermediaries play an irreplaceable and significant role in addressing information asymmetry and reducing transaction costs. Meanwhile, their behavior has also affected the healthy and orderly development of the bond market. Since the implementation of the registration system for public issuance of corporate bonds in China on March 1, 2020, regulatory authorities have placed greater emphasis on the behavior of intermediaries, emphasizing the improvement of their professional quality and clarifying the division of responsibilities among intermediaries. Intermediaries are precisely the important link in maintaining the order of the financial market.
This paper focuses on the fixed collocation of intermediaries in China's bond market. It selects all corporate bonds, enterprise bonds and medium-term notes issued in China's exchange market and inter-bank market from 2008 to 2022 as the research objects, and explores in detail how the stable partnerships between credit rating agencies and accounting firms impact bond credit ratings. Empirical research has found that consistent with the more frequently a credit rating agency and an accounting firm collaborate, the lower the bond credit rating tends to be. Moreover, this conclusion still exists after controlling for endogeneity and conducting a series of robustness tests. Heterogeneity analysis reveals that when credit rating agencies have foreign capital backgrounds, the influence of the fixed collocations of intermediaries on bond credit ratings diminishes. Conversely, when accounting firms are among the international "Big 4", the impact of the fixed collocation of intermediaries on bond credit ratings is enhanced. Further research indicates that the greater fixed collocation between credit rating agencies and accounting firms, the higher information content in bond credit ratings, the fewer rating errors in bond credit ratings.
The theoretical and policy contributions of this research are as follows. First, it enriches the literature on the bond rating behavior of credit rating agencies. Different from the existing literature, this paper focuses on how the fixed collocation of bond market intermediaries affects the bond rating behavior of credit rating agencies, and proves that the fixed collocation of credit rating agencies and accounting firms is based on the cooperative effect theory, positively influence the bond rating behavior of credit rating agencies. Second, it has expanded the research on the consequences of the fixed allocation behavior of intermediaries in the capital market. This article, based on the Chinese bond market, elaborately explores the impact and consequences of the fixed collocation of credit rating agencies and accounting firms on bond credit ratings, which is conducive to revealing the crucial roles those intermediaries play in the bond market. Third, the research conclusions of this paper have significant implications for bond market intermediaries and regulatory authorities. For bond market intermediaries such as credit rating agencies and accounting firms, they should fully utilize the information advantages brought by intermediary cooperative relationships, optimize information communication channels, reduce transaction costs, improve service quality, and provide more genuine and effective decision-making references for bond market participants. For regulatory authorities, it is appropriate to encourage long-term cooperation between credit rating agencies and accounting firms,while also strengthen the supervision of intermediaries' behavior,in orderto enhance the quality of bond credit ratings and alleviate the long-standing phenomenon of credit rating inflation in China's bond market.
Keywords:  Intermediaries    Cooperation    Collusion    Credit Rating    Default Risk
JEL分类号:  D53   G12   G24  
基金资助: *本文感谢国家自然科学基金面上项目(7242024)、教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金(21YJC790141)的资助。感谢匿名审稿人的宝贵意见,文责自负。
通讯作者:  杨道广,管理学博士,教授,对外经济贸易大学国际商学院,E-mail: dgyang@uibe.edu.cn.   
作者简介:  丁 璇,管理学博士,讲师,天水师范大学商学院,E-mail:dingxuanjessica@163.com.
张新民,管理学博士,教授,对外经济贸易大学国际商学院/北京企业国际化经营研究基地,E-mail: 00153@uibe.edu.cn.
引用本文:    
丁璇, 杨道广, 张新民. 中介机构固定搭配:“合作”抑或“合谋”——基于债券信用评级的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 539(5): 171-187.
DING Xuan, YANG Daoguang, ZHANG Xinmin. Fixed Collocation of Intermediaries: “Cooperation” or “Collusion” ——Empirical Evidence from Bond Credit Ratings. Journal of Financial Research, 2025, 539(5): 171-187.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2025/V539/I5/171
[1] 常莹莹和曾泉,2019,《环境信息透明度与企业信用评级——基于债券评级市场的经验证据》,《金融研究》第5期,第132~151页。
[2] 陈关亭和朱松,2021,《评级行业竞争与信用评级水平——基于中国信用债市场的证据》,《金融学季刊》第4期,第1~25页。
[3] 龚启辉、李辰和吴联生,2021,《投资银行-审计师业务关联与IPO盈余管理》,《会计研究》第9期,第106~119页。
[4] 黄小琳、朱松和陈关亭,2017,《债券违约对涉事信用评级机构的影响——基于中国信用债市场违约事件的分析》,《金融研究》第3期,第130~144页。
[5] 寇宗来、千茜倩和陈关亭,2020,《跟随还是对冲:发行人付费评级机构如何应对中债资信的低评级?》,《管理世界》第9期,第26~39页。
[6] 寇宗来和千茜倩,2021,《私有信息、评级偏差和中国评级机构的市场声誉》,《金融研究》第6期,第114~132页。
[7] 郎香香、田亚男和迟国泰,2022,《债券评级机构变更——基于评级选购与评级迎合视角》,《金融研究》第1期,第135~152页。
[8] 连立帅和朱松,2023,《取消强制评级政策、评级机构声誉与信用评级质量——基于中国债券市场的实证研究》,《金融研究》第10期,第125~144页。
[9] 林晚发、何剑波、周畅和张忠诚,2017,《“投资者付费”模式对“发行人付费”模式评级的影响:基于中债资信评级的实验证据》, 《会计研究》第9期,第62~68页。
[10] 林晚发、钟辉勇、赵仲匡和宋敏,2022,《金融中介机构竞争的市场反应——来自信用评级机构的证据》,《金融研究》第4期,第77~96页。
[11] 吕怀立和杨聪慧,2019,《承销商与审计师合谋对债券发行定价的影响——基于个人层面的经验数据》,《审计研究》第3期,第111~119页。
[12] 潘怡麟、张舒怡和朱凯,2021,《文过饰非还是秉笔直书:中国债券评级报告文本信息的价值相关性》,《南开管理评论》第4期,第101~112页。
[13] 孙亮、刘春和柳建华,2016,《御用会计师:合作抑或合谋》,《管理科学学报》第2期,第109~126页。
[14] 王芳、刘琪和杨国超,2021,《审计的信息价值与保险价值——基于主体评级和债项评级异质性视角》,《审计研究》第2期,第35~45页。
[15] 吴育辉、翟玲玲、张润楠和魏志华,2020,《“投资人付费”vs“发行人付费”:谁的信用评级质量更高?》,《金融研究》第1期,第130~149页。
[16] 杨国超和芮萌,2020,《高新技术企业税收减免政策的激励效应与迎合效应》,《经济研究》第9期,第174~191页。
[17] 杨国超和刘琪,2022,《中国债券市场信用评级制度有效性研究》, 《经济研究》第10期,第191~208页。
[18] 余明桂、安剑锋、郑馨和李金洋,2024,《全国统一大市场建设与金融高质量发展——基于打破债券市场分割的研究》,《管理世界》第3期,第1~15页。
[19] 张舒怡、潘怡麟和朱凯,2021,《发行人产权性质、付费模式与债券评级质量——基于中债资信的经验证据》,《财经研究》第5期,第19~33页。
[20] 朱彩婕,2021,《内部控制有效性在董事会治理对债券信用评级影响中的中介效应研究》,《审计研究》第3期,第118~128页。
[21] Akins, B. ,2018, “Financial Reporting Quality and Uncertainty About Credit Risk Among Rates Agencies”, The Accounting Review, 4(93), pp.1~22.
[22] Baghai, R.P. and B.Becker, 2020, “Reputations and Credit Ratings: Evidence from Commercial Mortgage-backed Securities”, Journal of Financial Economics, 135(2), pp.425~444.
[23] Bonsall, S.B, K. Koharki and M. Neamtiu,2021, The Disciplining Effect of Credit Default Swap Trading On the Quality of Credit Rating Agencies”, Contemporary Accounting Research, 39(2), pp.1297~1333.
[24] Bonsall, S B, J. R.Gillette, G. Pundrich and E.So, 2024, “Conflicts of Interest In Subscriber-paid Credit Ratings”, Journal of Accountingl & Economics, 77(2), pp.1297~1333.
[25] Cheng, M. and M. Neamtiu, 2009, “An Empirical Analysis of Changes in Credit Rating Properties: Timeliness, Accuracy and Volatility”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 47 (1-2), pp.108~130.
[26] Dehaan, E.,2017, “The Financial Crisis and Corporate Credit Ratings”, The Accounting Review, 92(4), pp.161~189.
[27] Du, X., X. Li,S. Liu and S.Lai, 2018, “Under Writer Auditor Relationship and Pre IPO Earning Management: Evidence from China”, Journal of Business Ethics, 152(2), pp.365~392.
[28] He, X., J.Pittman, S. Sun and D. Wu, 2019, “A Tale of Two Intermediaries: Investment Banker-Auditor Social Ties and IPO Quality”. Working Paper.
[29] KhuranaI, K., N.J. Lundstrom and K.K. Ramam, 2021, “PCAOB Inspections and the Differential Audit Quality Effect for Big 4 and Non-Big 4 US Auditors”, Contemporary Accounting Research,38(1), pp.376~411.
[30] Levin, J., 2003, “Relational Incentive Contracts”, The American Economic Review, 93 (3), pp. 835~857.
[31] Ma, Z., L. Ruan, D. Wang and H. Zhang, 2021, “Generalist CEOs and Credit Ratings”, Contemporary Accounting Research, 38 (2),pp.1009~1036 .
[32] Vanhaverbeke, S., B. Balsmeier and T. Doherr,2024, “Mandatory Financial Information Disclosure and Credit Ratings”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 78(1), pp. 101676.
[33] William, H.B., S. Cathtine and T. S.Mark, 2006, “Differential Properties in the Rates of Certified Versus Non-certified Bond-rate Agencies”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42(3), pp.303~334.
[34] Xia, H., 2014, “Can Investor-paid Credit Rating Agencies Improve the Information Quality of Issuer-paid Rating Agencies?”, Journal of Financial Economics, 111(2), pp.450~468.
[35] Ziebart, D.A. and S.A. Reiter, 1992, “Bond Rates, Bond Yields and Financial Information”, Contemporary Accounting Research, 9(1), pp. 252~282.
[1] 孙洁, 李能飞, 赵梦茹. 互动式信息披露与企业信用评级——来自证券交易所互动平台的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 537(3): 150-168.
[2] 杨子晖, 李雅茜, 王姝黛. 违约风险国际传染研究——基于前沿非对称断点技术的新应用[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 535(1): 20-38.
[3] 衣昭颖, 柳建华, 马新啸. 客户高质量会计信息与供应商债务违约风险[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 531(9): 77-94.
[4] 王剑锋, 倪丹丹, 王骜然, 马太超. 加入合作社与农户信贷可得性——基于合作社发展质量的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 530(8): 169-187.
[5] 魏晓云, 韩立岩. 环境规制、绿色技术创新与违约风险[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 528(6): 169-187.
[6] 梁上坤, 王思超, 董青, 谢志华. 地方政府财政压力与企业违约风险[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 528(6): 78-96.
[7] 牛晓健, 强皓凡, 吕斌, 王聪. 企业跨界竞争与债务违约风险——基于机器学习与复杂网络方法[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 525(3): 150-168.
[8] 袁劲, 余丽丽, 冯桂媚. 统一大市场建设与企业采购的区位选择[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 523(1): 187-206.
[9] 连立帅, 朱松. 取消强制评级政策、评级机构声誉与信用评级质量 ——基于中国债券市场的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 520(10): 125-144.
[10] 姜富伟, 林奕皓, 马甜. “去刚兑”背景下的企业债券违约风险:机器学习预警和经济机制探究[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 520(10): 85-103.
[11] 吕之安, 郭雪寒, 刘冲, 刘莉亚. 第三方合作存款与商业银行风险承担[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 507(9): 39-56.
[12] 林晚发, 钟辉勇, 赵仲匡, 宋敏. 金融中介机构竞争的市场反应 ——来自信用评级机构的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 502(4): 77-96.
[13] 魏晓云, 韩立岩. 绿色PPP项目组合的最优契约:经济与环境效应的福利视角[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 501(3): 60-78.
[14] 刘星, 杨羚璇. 信用评级变动能反映企业真实财务信息吗?——基于财务重述的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 500(2): 98-116.
[15] 谢德仁, 刘劲松. 自由现金流量创造力与违约风险——来自A股公司的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 510(12): 168-186.
[1] 贾君怡, 潘慧峰, 宋敏杰. 资管产品估值规范如何影响债券市场效率?——来自资管新规的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 538(4): 39 -56 .
[2] 张龙耀, 李渊, 郜栋玺. 提低扩中:普惠金融能否实现益贫式增长?[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 539(5): 21 -38 .
[3] 张少辉, 余泳泽, 陶云清. 新型“政银担”模式与小微企业投资——基于风险共担的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 539(5): 57 -75 .
[4] 宗计川, 吴庆帮. 流动性冲击与系统重要性银行的稳定作用[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 538(4): 21 -38 .
[5] 江轩宇, 张明媚, 林雯. 银企数字化协同与企业信贷获取——基于银行贷款的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 539(5): 39 -56 .
[6] 郭豫媚, 王航, 郭田勇, 郭俊杰. 中央银行通货膨胀预期管理有效性评估——基于文本通货膨胀预期指数的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 538(4): 1 -20 .
[7] 兰天琪, 陈运森, 赵瑞瑞, 贾宁. 股东诉讼溢出与策略性信息披露[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 539(5): 188 -206 .
[8] 王雄元, 王慧娴, 王子平. 竞争对手主持或参与标准制定与企业创新质量[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 539(5): 95 -113 .
[9] 孙传旺, 何一若. 低碳转型中差异化绿色金融政策的驱动机制与协同影响——基于引入多元绿色金融工具的DSGE模型[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 539(5): 114 -132 .
[10] 邓国营, 李欣媛, 颜镜洲, 邓启运. 媒体ESG报道情绪与公司债券风险溢价——基于信息传导视角的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 539(5): 133 -151 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《金融研究》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn
京ICP备11029882号-1