Wealth Effects of Dividend Announcements on Bondholders: The Case of Taiwan Bond Market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although bonds play an important role in U.S. capital markets, this financial instrument is less common in the emerging markets. Taiwan is a typical case. In fact, both bond issuances and bond transactions in Taiwan have been declining in the past years. Consistent with the previous studies, this research documents that wealth transfer effects exist between bondholders and stockholders. We hypothesize that this wealth transfer discourages investors from investing in bond markets because companies in Taiwan seem to care less about the interest of bondholders. Using the event study methodology, we examine the price change of bonds and stocks in Taiwan capital market around cash dividend announcements. We find that there are significant abnormal returns before cash dividend announcements from 30 days to 60 days and that there is insignificant price change of bonds during the three-day period around the announcement. Possible explanations of the results include low bond trading volumes, insider trading before announcements, and mixing signaling and wealth transfer effects. Although this study cannot prove that the results are directly related to management holdings, we tend to believe that insider trading somehow matters.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".