arbiter
JournalsAccount

Political Risk, Bargaining Power, and the Target Selection of Cross-Border Acquisitions

Shao-Chi Chang & Tien-Ho Cheng

Management International Review2026https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-025-00608-1article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

This study employs the firm-level political risk index by Hassan et al. (Q J Econ 134:2135–2202, 2019) to analyze political risk and the target selection decisions in cross-border acquisitions. We draw on bargaining power theory to illustrate the incentives for acquirers to undertake cross-border acquisitions amid political risk. A sample of 1106 international acquisitions by US-listed firms is collected to test the bargaining power hypothesis in international acquisitions. We find that acquirers with higher political risk tend to acquire targets with higher political risk and pay lower premiums. Moreover, the evidence suggests that the positive relationship between the political risk of acquirers and targets is stronger when acquirers and targets operate in related industries and culturally similar countries. The findings are robust to endogenous biases, subsample tests, and an alternative measure of political risk.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-025-00608-1

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{shao-chi2026,
  title        = {{Political Risk, Bargaining Power, and the Target Selection of Cross-Border Acquisitions}},
  author       = {Shao-Chi Chang & Tien-Ho Cheng},
  journal      = {Management International Review},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-025-00608-1},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Political Risk, Bargaining Power, and the Target Selection of Cross-Border Acquisitions

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.