This paper uses a principal-agent model to study the interaction between
hedging and earnings management. Hedging makes earnings management
more difficult and they appear to be strategic substitutes in this model,
which is both consistent with existing empirical evidence and provides a new
explanation for that evidence.
If hedging decision is contractible, hedging is efficient since it reduces
both the risk premium and the equilibrium amount of earnings management.
If hedging decision is not contractible, however, hedging does not always alleviate
the agency problem. Surprisingly, sometimes a scenario of no hedging
but allowing earnings management is efficient. The reason is that motivating
hedging may require a more costly compensation scheme to mitigate the
appeal of earnings management.
In addition, this paper shows that tolerating some earnings management
is always efficient when there is no hedge option, since it is costly to eliminate
earnings management. Sometimes it is inefficient to take any action against
earnings management. However, with the encouraged hedge option, the cost
to eliminate earnings management can be reduced significantly and zero tolerance
of earnings management may be efficient.