Anecdotal evidence suggests that uncontrolled managers let wages rise above
competitive levels, To test this belief we examine the wage impact of anti
takeover legislation passed throughout the 1980s in many states. Since many
view hostile takeovers as an important disciplining device, these laws, by
reducing takeover threats, potentially raised managerial discretion, If un
controlled managers pay higher wages, we expect wages to rise following the
se laws. Using firm-level data, we find that these laws raised annual wages
by 1% to 2%, or about $500 per year, The findings are robust to a battery
of specification checks and do not appear to be contaminated by the politic
al economy of the laws or other sources of bias, These results challenge st
andard theories of wage determination that ignore the role of managerial pr
eferences.