Niswah Baroroh

This study examines the role of the risk management committee as a moderating variable. The risk management committee will moderate the relationship between firm size, profitability, ownership concentration, and the size of the Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) disclosure board. The study is based on agency theory, which discusses the relationship between management and company owners and shareholders. The research sample consisted of 56 manufacturing companies in Indonesia with 224 units of analysis obtained using the purposive sampling technique. It has been proven that the risk management committee can moderate the relationship between firm size and ERM disclosure and ownership concentration and ERM disclosure. Company size is known to affect the disclosure of risk management in a company. But ownership concentration shows different things, that is, it does not affect corporate risk management disclosures. The results also show that the risk management committee cannot moderate the relationship between profitability and the size of the board of commissioners on the company’s risk management disclosures. It has also not been proven that profitability and the size of the board of commissioners directly affect corporate risk management disclosures. Thus, it can be stated that the risk management committee plays a role in controlling the extent of the company’s risk management disclosures; this is necessary to maintain stakeholder trust in the company.

Earnings response coefficient (ERC) is one of the important things for companies and investors, as it reflects a company’s good value. The COVID-19 pandemic, which is happening globally, has greatly affected capital market conditions and companies in general. It is necessary to examine what factors affect ERC significantly to provide an overview to the company while maintaining the good name of the company. This study aims to analyze the effect of firm growth, leverage, information asymmetry, and systematic risk on ERC with dividend payout ratios as moderating on the Indonesia Stock Exchange and Singapore Stock Exchange. The study uses a quantitative approach with secondary data in the form of companies’ annual reports. Population was made up of food and beverage and tobacco manufacturing companies in 2018–2020. It consists of 38 JASICA index companies on IDX, and 33 SGX index companies on SGX. The results showed that, firstly, leverage and systematic risk had a significant negative effect on ERC. Second, firm growth and information asymmetry have no effect on ERC. Third, dividend payout ratio can weaken a positive influence of information asymmetry on ERC. Fourth, dividend payout ratio failed to moderate a positive effect of firm growth and a negative effect of leverage and systematic risk on ERC. All variables have no significant statistical difference between the two stock exchanges. These results indicate that a company must improve the performance and quality of information; pay attention to obligations, mitigate and manage risk to obtain optimal ERC.

This study highlights the complexity of the relationship between sustainability performance, environment, social and governance (ESG) reporting, and tax aggressiveness, which is a critical concern amidst the increasing demands for corporate social accountability. Companies in Indonesia and Malaysia, especially those in the non-financial sector, face increasing regulatory pressure to meet ESG standards. This study uses 263 Indonesian and 311 Malaysian companies as samples because both countries are prominent emerging markets in Southeast Asia with fast-growing economies, diverse industries, and abundant natural resources. However, aggressive tax avoidance remains a common strategy to maintain financial flexibility. This study aims to examine whether companies with high ESG performance tend to reduce tax avoidance practices or use it as a strategy to cover ESG costs. Through 2SLS regression analysis on 2012–2021 data, the results show that ESG performance has a significant positive effect on tax aggressiveness, where companies with high ESG performance also tend to engage in tax avoidance to cover ESG costs. Conversely, tax aggressiveness positively affects ESG performance because companies increase ESG engagement to reduce reputational risks from aggressive tax practices. The simultaneous test found a reciprocal relationship between the two variables with an R² value of 29.4% for tax aggressiveness and 63.1% for ESG performance. This study suggests stricter regulations to reduce tax avoidance in companies with high ESG performance and provides insights for policymakers in Southeast Asia.