can tax loss selling explain the january seasonal in stock returns this paper analyzes the tax loss selling hypothesis as an explanation of the january seasonal in stock returns and argues that rational tax loss selling implies little relation between the january seasonal and the long term loss empirical results show that the january seasonal is as strongly related to the long term loss as it is to the short term loss the evidence is inconsistent with a model that explains the january seasonal by optimal tax trading

portfolio rebalancing and the turn of the year effect this paper finds that for the 1935 1986 period the market s risk return relation does not have a january seasonal the findings differ from those of other studies due to the use of value weighted rather than equally weighted portfolios inferences are sensitive to the weighting procedure because of the small firm return patterns in january in particular even in those januaries for which the market return is negative small firm returns are positive and they are more positive the higher is beta this is consistent with the portfolio rebalancing explanation of the turn of the year effect since at least 1926 the average return on small firms in january has been unusually high a phenomenon known as the turn of the year effect in this paper we present new evidence regarding the risk return characteristics of small firms in january we find that for small firms there is a positively sloped riskreturn relation in both up and down markets this pattern is difficult to reconcile with the belief that the high return on small firms in january is equilibrium compensation for risk bearing we show how these patterns in small firms returns have led others to conclude that the market s risk return relation has a january seasonal in particular rozeff and kinney 21 and tinic and west 22 23 among others using equally weighted portfolios formed on the basis of historical betas have found a steeper slope for the capm s risk return relation in january than in other months we demonstrate that this pattern exists only for small firms consequently statistical inferences about the risk return relation are heavily dependent upon whether equally weighted or value weighted portfolio returns are used in the estimation we show that for 1935 86 when monthly cross sectional regressions are estimated using value weighted portfolio returns there is no more of a statistically significant difference in the estimated return to risk bearing in january than in the other eleven months of the year the notion that there is a january seasonal in the capm s risk return relation for the us has rapidly become accepted knowledge for example corhay hawawini and michel 6 accept this conclusion and investigate whether other

year end tax induced sales and stock market seasonality the paper relates two phenomena in the stock market the high return during the month of january and the apparent existence of widespread sales of stocks for tax purposes towards the end of the fiscal year the findings suggest that due to the taxinduced sales the price of many stocks over the last 35 years was temporarily depressed in december but recovered in the following january this price recovery is a major contributor to the high returns observed in january the tax effect is present in firms of all sizes but much more pronounced for small firms the analysis also indicates that a more precise identification of the tax switch candidates may prove that the taxinduced sales are in fact the sole contributor to the high january s returns the issue of seasonality in the stock market has attracted the attention of researchers for some time rozeff and kinney 13 present evidence of seasonality in the market index with the months of january and july having a peak return the seasonal movements in the average return in the market could not be fully accounted for by a corresponding seasonal pattern in the market risk they offer three explanations to this phenomenon tax induced sales release of accounting information and seasonal demand for cash the first explanation has received some support from recent research dyl 4 studied the effects of capital gain taxes on trading volumes of common stocks and concluded that capital gain taxes affect investors year end portfolio decisions and that this effect is in turn reflected in the trading volumes of common stocks in december p 174 mcenally 10 and branch 2 studied the effects of the tax induced trading on securities return and found that depressed stocks at the end of the year are likely to bounce back immediately after year end the existence of a pronounced seasonal behavior in the market might suggest some form of market inefficiency a strategy under which stocks are bought towards the end of the year and sold at the beginning of the following year might yield an abnormal return despite the seasonal behavior of stock returns it would be indeed surprising if this regularity which has not gone unnoticed by the financial community could be exploited to bring a risk adjusted excess return the objective of this paper is to examine jointly the two phenomena tax

recent developments in modelling nonstationary vector autoregressions in this paper we review some recent developments in the modelling of nonstationary vector autoregressions vars which we feel have great potential for furthering applied researchers understanding of the relationships linking the variables making up a var the developments surveyed are the use of model determination criteria in selecting lag length trend order and cointegrating rank causality testing in vector error correction models fm var estimation of levels vars common trends and cycles analysis permanent and transitory decompositions impulse response asymptotics and the links between cointegrated vars and structural models the techniques are illustrated by applications to the modelling of u k equities dividends and interest rates

errors in recorded security prices and the turn of the year effect errors in recorded security prices are a source of misspecification in the market model if recorded price errors are sufficiently nonrandom they result in biased returns and in biased and inconsistent estimates of market model regression coefficients this paper argues that tax induced flow supply pressures cause end of the year recorded price errors to be nonrandom enough to create the appearance of anomalous turn of the year stock return behavior empirical tests of returns and market model regression coefficients during the turn of the year period cannot reject this errors in variables explanation of the turn ofthe year effect the turn of the year toy effect or january effect refers to the anomal ous behavior of stock returns during the last five trading days in december and the first five trading days in january this anomaly is of particular interest to financial researchers because it appears to be a small firm effect and the source of the majority of size related anomalies see keim 1985 reinganum 1981 and roll 1983a 1983b the interest in the toy effect is justified because of its implications concerning the validity of the capital asset pricing model capm and market efficiency in this paper we show that there is a price related effect operating during the toy period first we show that the magnitude of the toy return is inversely related to price when we control for price most of the size related toy effect found by reinganum 1983 and roll 1983a disappears second the data indicate that all firms have unusually high returns during the toy period compared with their returns during the rest of the year third we find seasonal shifts in the market model betas associated with the toy period furthermore we test the hypothesis that the toy effect is an errors in variables problem due to the use of the one eighth pricing convention in recording security prices and the accommodation of tax induced flow pressures by liquidity traders such as market

does institutional ownership matter for international stock return comovement funding portuguese foundation for science and technology fct uid ges 00407 2013 ptdc iim fin 2977 2014 and european research council

window dressing by pension fund managers this paper takes a first look at investment strategies of managers of 769 pension funds with total assets of 129 billion at the end of 1989 the data show that managers of these funds tend to oversell stocks that have performed poorly relative sales of losers accelerate in the fourth quarter when funds portfolios are closely examined by the sponsors this result supports the view that fund managers window dress their portfolios to impress sponsors and suggests that managers are evaluated on their individual stock selections and not just aggregate portfolio performance this abstract was borrowed from another version of this item

the turn of the year effect and tax loss selling by institutional investors prior studies attribute the turn of the year effect whereby small capitalization stocks earn unusually high returns in early january to tax loss selling by individual investors and window dressing by institutional investors my results suggest that a significant portion of the effect on turn of the year returns that prior studies attribute to window dressing is actually attributable to tax loss selling by institutional investors among small capitalization stocks i find that institutional investors with strong tax incentives and weak window dressing incentives realize significantly more losses in the fourth quarter than in the first three quarters of the calendar year and that their fourth quarter realized losses have a significant impact on turn of the year returns a one percentage point change in these institutional investors fourth quarter realized losses scaled by a firm s market capitalization results in an increase of 47 basis points in the firm s average daily return over the first three trading days of january which represents a 46 percent change for the mean firm

the information content of short interest a natural experiment an increase in the cost of selling short should increase the bearish information content of short interest announcements by driving relatively uninformed short sellers out of the market we extend the diamond and verrecchia 1987 model to include short selling against the box and test the extended model using a natural experiment based around the taxpayer relief act of 1997 tra97 tra97 made short selling more costly for those shorting against the box consistent with the implications of our extended model this increase in short selling costs strengthens the negative relationship between short interest and subsequent stock price performance post tra97

seasonality in canadian stock prices a test of the tax loss selling hypothesis a popular hypothesis to explain the anomalous january returns of common stocks is based on the argument that there is considerable tax loss selling by investors toward the end of the year the purpose of this study is to test the tax loss selling hypothesis with data on canadian stocks although the introduction of capital gains tax in canada seems to have affected the behavior of stock returns the findings do not support the proposition that taxinduced trading is the sole cause ofthe seasonality in stock returns in canada i introduction over the past several years a number of studies have shown that the returns on common stocks in general and the stocks of small companies in particular tend to be abnormally high during the month of january keim 10 demonstrated quite clearly that a very high percentage of the abnormal positive returns gener ated on stocks with low market capitalizations occurs during january with the returns during the first five trading days of the year accounting for most of the anomalous behavior his results were recently confirmed by roll 14 who re ported that around 37 percent of the annual differences in the returns on the equally weighted and value weighted indices of nyse and amex stocks is ac counted for by what happens in the five trading days from the last trading day in december through the fourth trading day in january a popular hypothesis to explain the so called january effect in stock re turns is based on the argument that there is considerable end of the year tax lossselling by investors originally proposed by wachtel 19 it asserts that inves tors try to realize losses towards the end of the year to reduce their taxes thereby putting downward pressure on stock prices according to the hypothesis once

tax induced trading and the turn of the year anomaly an intraday study this study tests the tax induced trading hypothesis as an explanation of the turn of the year anomaly using canadian and u s intraday data since the canadian tax year end precedes the calendar year end by five business days tax effects may be isolated we find the anomaly is related to the degree of seller and buyer initiated trading and depends upon the incidence of the taxation year end seller initiated transactions at bid prices dominate until the tax year end after which buyer initiated trades at ask prices dominate the anomaly is a function of bid ask prices

a direct test of methods for inferring trade direction from intra day data this study directly tests the ability of several competing methods to identify market buy and sell orders using intra day quote and trade prices and identifies factors that affect the accuracy of the methods lee and ready s 1991 algorithm performs about the same as the tick test but the performance of both methods is worse than expected the results show that the use of either algorithm to classify trades can lead to significantly biased estimates of effective spreads and signed volume but the tick test provides better estimates of effective spreads and signed volume than lee and ready s method i introduction the use of intra day prices in empirical studies of securities markets is increasingly common and studies frequently require trades be identified as buyer or seller initiated unfortunately most data sets do not identify trade direction methods have however been proposed that allow trade direction to be inferred from adjacent prices and quotes the accuracy of these methods and the implica tions for microstructure research are still unresolved issues in large part because trade direction is unobservable in most financial data sets this study directly tests the ability of several competing methods to iden tify market buy and sell orders using intra day quote and trade prices the tests are conducted using the torq database a unique data set the new york stock exchange makes available to researchers that contains information on trades quotes and orders using the tick tests and lee and ready s lr hereafter 1991 method to classify trades as buys or sells and comparing the results to the direction of the actual orders i directly test the accuracy of the classification algorithms the tests also identify the factors that affect the accuracy of the clas sification methods additional tests demonstrate that using these algorithms can lead to biased inferences in two of their most common applications estimating effective spreads and signed volume trading test results also show that the tick

optimal stock trading with personal taxes implications for prices and the abnormal january returns abstract the tax law confers upon the investor a timing option to realize capital losses and defer capital gains with the tax rate on long term gains and losses being about half the short term rate the law provides a second timing option to realize losses short term and gains long term if at all our theory and simulation over the 1962 1977 period establish that taxable investors should realize long term gains in high variance stocks and repurchase stock in order to realize potential future losses short term tax trading does not explain the small firm anomaly but predicts a seasonal pattern in trading volume which maps into a seasonal pattern in stock prices the january anomaly only if investors are irrational or ignorant of the price seasonality

evidence on tax motivated securities trading behavior tax loss selling by investors in common stocks near the end of calendar years has been proposed as an explanation for the turn of the year effect in stock returns past analyses of this hypothesis have relied on inferential data we provide here some direct data from a compilation of over 80 000 actual common stock investment round trips by a sample of 3000 individual investors we find strong evidence of a concentration of loss taking trades late in the year and milder evidence of a concentration just prior to the dates when investments become eligible for long term tax treatment the question as to whether and in what manner the impostion of a tax on realized capital gains affects the securities trading behavior of investors who are subject to the tax has been a longstanding topic of research in the financial ecomonics literature the original attention devoted to the matter was motivated primarily by a concern about resource allocation and federal tax revenue consequences and was directed toward the phenomenon of what has been termed the lock in effect of a gains tax that issue has remained an important public policy one and continues today as part of the ongoing debate about appropriate strategies for reducing the federal budget deficit particular additional interest in the topic has emerged in recent years however because securities transactions undertaken systematically for tax reasons have also been proposed as part of the explanation for certain observed anomalies in historical common stock returns most prominently the well documented turn of the year effect our purpose here is to provide some new evidence that decisions by investors as to the timing of the realization of capital gains and losses from their common stock investments are significantly affected by tax considerations this evidence indicates that a difference in the tax rates applicable to realizations classified as short and long term influences the timing of individual investors trades and further that there is a clear tendency for trades by individuals which give rise to losses to be concentrated near the end of calendar which for them are also tax years while we cannot conclude that

portfolio disclosures and year end price shifts commercial paper sells at an extra discount if it matures in the next calendar year but treasury bills do not the discount is apparent in downward price shifts before the year end and upward price shifts at the turn of the year that are significantly correlated with the simultaneous returns to small stocks and that cannot reflect tax loss selling cross sectional and time series tests on prices as well as flow of funds evidence on trades by institutional investors indicate that both the debt and equity patterns reflect agency problems related to portfolio disclosures financial research has brought considerable analysis to bear on the turn of the year in the equity market but not the money market extant literature starting with keim and stambaugh 1986 reports similarities between equity market and money market price shifts in january but has not examined time series and cross sections of money market prices at the high resolution common in studies of the equity market repeating tests from the equity literature on money market prices this article finds a more precise and robust characterization of the price shifts this characterization combined with observations of year end shifts in money market holdings supports the view that intermediaries move prices with strategic responses to portfolio disclosures the main empirical result is that commercial paper pays a higher yield if it matures across the end of the year that is it imputes a forward premium for the holding period from the last trading day of one year to the first trading day of the next this premium is even higher for issues with more default risk and longer maturity as measured at the end of the year and has a substantial impact on yield spreads i argue that the forward premium reflects an abnormally high market price for bearing risk across the year end and that this high price reflects the disutility to intermediaries of showing risky portfolios to claimholders or regulators the connection between portfolio disclosures and price shifts was proposed by haugen and lakonishok hl 1988 as an explanation of the equity market january effect as originally documented by keim 1983 with monthly data

risk and return abstract this paper examines the seasonality in the basic relationship between expected return and risk during 1935 82 the results reveal that the positive relationship between return and risk is unique to january the risk premiums during the remaining eleven months are not significantly different from zero

seasonalities in nyse bid ask spreads and stock returns in january using end of month bid ask spreads for 540 nyse stocks over the period 1982 1987 we document a seasonal pattern in which both relative and absolute spreads decline from the end of december to the end of the following january cross sectional regressions do not however provide evidence of a significant correlation between changes in spreads at the turn of the year and january stock returns either there is no cause and effect relation between the coincidental seasonals in bid ask spreads and january returns for nyse stocks or the data are too noisy to reveal any relation bid ask spreads hatve played and continue to play an important role in explanations of the january effect in stock returns for example roll 1983 argues persuasively that high january returns are the result of tax loss selling pressure that occurs throughout the year which is released right after the beginning of the new tax year once the selling pressure is released stocks rise in price which results in high january returns however these predictable excess january returns cannot be exploited fully by arbitrageurs because of round trip transactions costs in the form of the bid ask spread this inhibitor to arbitrage is especially great for small or low priced stocks where historically high january returns have been most pronounced stoll and whaley 1983 take a different tack they do not focus on january returns per se but argue that the excess returns on small stocks are a result of higher proportional bid ask spreads in low priced stocks in their view the bid ask spread itself is the cause of the higher returns on small stocks that is because of the higher proportional cost of transacting in small stocks investors demand a higher rate of return in response keim 1983 and schultz 1983 point out that small stock excess returns are concentrated in january and a seasonal in stock returns cannot be explained by the bid ask spread unless there is a seasonal in the bid ask spread as well schultz 1983 compares bid ask spreads in december with those in june plus round trip commissions for a sample of 40 small capitalization new york stock exchange nyse stocks and finds no signifi

modelling the treatment effect of renewable energy policies on economic growth evaluation from mena countries abstract this paper investigates the effects of renewable energy re policies on economic growth in mena countries using the propensity score matching methodology our empirical analysis conducted on a sample of 24 economies 17 re and 7 non re countries from 1980 to 2012 shows that the treatment effect of re policies has a significant and positive impact on stimulating and promoting economic growth in mena economies that have implemented these energy policies re policies alone however are not sufficient this change requires the collective long term commitment of all stakeholders including governments citizens financiers private companies and international agencies this would help impede policy overlaps and incoherence as well as consequently improve the overall policy effectiveness

are seasonal anomalies real a ninety year perspective in recent years there has been a proliferation of empirical studies documenting unexpected or anomalous regularities in security rates of return in addition to the widely studied relation between firm size and rate of return 1 these include seasonal regularities related to the time of the day harris 1986 the day of the week see ball and bowers 1986 cross 1973 french 1980 gibbons and hess 1981 jaffe and westerfield 1985 keim and stambaugh 1984 and lakonishok and levi 1982 the time of the month ariel 1987 and the turn of the year see haugen and lakonishok 1988 jones pearce and wilson 1987 lakonishok

starting on the wrong foot seasonality in mutual fund performance abstract we document a systematic seasonal component in the aggregate underperformance of active mutual funds at the aggregate level active funds underperform the market and other passive benchmarks only in the first month of a quarter this intra quarter performance seasonality holds across fund sizes and investment styles the pattern is consistent with short term stock return reversal effects along with aggregate window dressing and to a lesser extent nav inflation practices around quarter ends we find marginal or no evidence of microstructure biases fund investor flows or cash distributions as sources of this seasonality our findings highlight new features of the active management underperformance puzzle

institutions and individuals at the turn of the year this article evaluates the tax loss selling hypothesis against the window dressing hypothesis as explanations for turn of the year anomalies we examine differences between securities dominated by individual investors versus those dominated by institutional investors and find that the effect is more pervasive in the former controlling for capitalization we find that in early january late december stocks with greater individual investor interest outperform underperform stocks with greater institutional investor interest these results hold for both stocks that previously appreciated in value and stocks that previously depreciated in value the results are most consistent with the tax loss selling hypothesis as an explanation for the turn of the year effect