The results of our study indicate that participants were less willing to lend to firms that were required to capitalize lease renewal options than to firms that were not required to capitalize renewal options. This finding suggests that participants focused inordinately on the total capitalized lease obligation as presented on the face of the financial statements, ignoring or paying little attention to the fact that a portion of this capitalized amount does not represent a present obligation. The results of our study also indicate that, when capitalized lease renewal options were presented separately from non-cancelable lease liabilities, participants were just as likely to lend to the lessee as they were in a situation where the lessee did not have to capitalize lease renewal options. This finding suggests that disaggregation of the lease liability according to the differing nature of lease obligations can help users overcome the informational disadvantage of capitalizing optional lease periods, while still guarding against transaction structuring that might occur if lease renewal periods were ignored completely.