Do Managers Time Securitization Transactions to Obtain Accounting Benefits?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Relative to recording securitizations as collateralized borrowings, the “gain on sale” treatment has several accounting benefits such as reducing leverage, increasing earnings, and improving efficiency. We investigate whether managers engage in real transaction management to take advantages of these benefits. We predict that in order to maximize financial statement window-dressing, managers will engage in securitizations toward the end of the quarter. We find that 41 percent of the quarter's transactions occur in the third month of the quarter and almost half of these occur in the last five days of the quarter. In addition, we show that when firms report securitization gains sufficient to beat earnings thresholds, the securitization transactions are more likely to have occurred in the last five days of the quarter. We also document that the impact of securitizations on leverage is large and material for many firms. Our results suggest that window-dressing the financial statements appears to be a valuable side-benefit of engaging in securitization transactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it