provide a response to the feddback received below

Great analysis! In this paper, the authors explored how corporate governance quality influences capital structure decisions, and whether the national governance environment amplifies or moderates this effect. Using a dataset of firms across multiple countries, the study showed that companies with stronger internal governance tend to rely less on debt financing, favoring equity-based structures. Importantly, the impact of firm-level governance is more pronounced in countries with high national governance quality, suggesting a complementary relationship between internal and external governance systems. The paper highlights the need for policymakers to strengthen national institutions to support sound corporate financial strategies. The paper and your analysis were very interesting to read.

From the paper, the key strengths include:

Cross-National Scope- The study analyzes firms across multiple countries, allowing for a broader understanding of how both firm-level and national governance quality interact to influence capital structure decisions. Dual-Level Governance Analysis- By examining both internal corporate governance and external national governance, the paper provides a nuanced view of how governance environments shape financial strategies. Empirical Rigor- The authors employ robust econometric methods and a well-structured dataset, lending credibility to their findings and ensuring statistical validity. Policy Relevance- The paper offers actionable insights for policymakers, suggesting that strengthening national governance institutions can amplify the positive effects of firm-level governance. Contribution to Literature- It fills a gap in corporate finance research by linking governance quality to capital structure in a comparative international context, which is often underexplored. Clear Theoretical Framework- The study is grounded in agency theory and institutional theory, providing a solid conceptual foundation for interpreting results. From your point of view, you correctly identified these strengths, including inherent opportunities for future research, and you identified its limitations with respect to its limited time frame, narrow institutional focus, geographical/cultural bias.

Being an auditor, my point of view is heavily reliant on an auditing perspective. But I will add that a company's internal governance refers to the systems, structures, and processes it uses to manage itself responsibly and effectively from within. It encompasses the rules, roles, and mechanisms that guide decision-making, accountability, and ethical conduct across all levels of the organization. Key components of internal governance include:

Board of Directors: Oversees strategic direction and monitors executive performance. Management Controls: Policies and procedures that regulate operations, budgeting, and risk. Internal Audit: Independent function that evaluates compliance, financial integrity, and operational efficiency. Ethical Standards: Codes of conduct and corporate values that shape behavior. Transparency Mechanisms: Reporting systems that ensure stakeholders are informed and decisions are traceable. From these key components, the board and management take higher priory and responsibility. This view is in line with the five components of internal control as defined by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). They form the foundation for effective risk management and organizational governance. Specifically:

Control Environment- Sets the tone of the organization. Includes integrity, ethical values, leadership philosophy, and governance structure. Influences the control consciousness of employees. Risk Assessment- Identifies and analyzes risks that could prevent the organization from achieving its objectives. Consider internal and external factors. Help determine how risks should be managed. Control Activities- Policies and procedures that help ensure management directives are carried out. Includes approvals, authorizations, verifications, reconciliations, and segregation of duties. Information and Communication- Ensures relevant information is captured and communicated in a timely manner. Supports internal control by enabling informed decision-making. Includes both internal and external communication channels. Monitoring Activities- Ongoing or periodic evaluations of internal control performance. Help identify deficiencies and ensure controls are functioning as intended. Includes internal audits and management reviews. Clearly, these components work together to create a robust internal control system that supports accountability, transparency, and operational efficiency.

References

Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (2013). Internal controlIntegrated framework: Executive summary. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.

Nguyen, An, Nguyen, Tuan, & Hoang, Phuong. (2022). The impact of corporate governance quality on capital structure choices: Does national governance quality matter? Cogent Economics & Finance, 10(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2022.2073003