The paper examines the real effects of financial constraints during the 2008 financial crisis by surveying 1,050 CFOs in the U.S., Europe, and Asia. It finds that firms facing financial constraints significantly reduced spending on technology, employment, and capital investment, and burned through more cash. They also drew more heavily on lines of credit, fearing future restrictions, and sold more assets to fund operations. Over 86% of constrained U.S. firms reported that their investment in attractive projects was restricted during the crisis. More than half of respondents said they would cancel or delay planned investments. These findings hold in Europe and Asia, where the effects are often stronger. The study uses a survey-based measure of financial constraint, directly asking managers if their firms are constrained. It finds that constrained firms are smaller, less profitable, and have lower growth prospects. The analysis shows significant cross-sectional variation in corporate policies during the crisis, with constrained firms planning more severe cuts in spending and investment. The study also finds that constrained firms are more likely to draw on credit lines in anticipation of future restrictions, consistent with previous research. The paper addresses limitations of survey-based analyses, such as potential biases and misinterpretations of economic conditions. It also notes that uncontrolled firm heterogeneity could confound inferences. The study uses matching estimators to compare constrained and unconstrained firms, finding that financial constraints significantly affect corporate policies, especially during the crisis. The paper also examines liquidity management, finding that constrained firms burned through more cash and had lower liquid assets. They also drew more heavily on lines of credit, fearing future restrictions. The study finds that constrained firms are more likely to draw on credit lines in anticipation of future restrictions, consistent with previous research. The paper also examines investment decisions, finding that constrained firms are more likely to bypass attractive investment opportunities. Over 86% of constrained U.S. firms said they bypassed attractive investments due to difficulties in raising external finance. The study finds that constrained firms are more likely to cancel investment projects when they cannot obtain external funds. The paper concludes that financial constraints have significant real effects on corporate behavior during the crisis, with constrained firms cutting investment and spending more severely than unconstrained firms. The study adds to the literature on financial constraints by providing a direct measure of constraints and showing its impact on corporate policies.The paper examines the real effects of financial constraints during the 2008 financial crisis by surveying 1,050 CFOs in the U.S., Europe, and Asia. It finds that firms facing financial constraints significantly reduced spending on technology, employment, and capital investment, and burned through more cash. They also drew more heavily on lines of credit, fearing future restrictions, and sold more assets to fund operations. Over 86% of constrained U.S. firms reported that their investment in attractive projects was restricted during the crisis. More than half of respondents said they would cancel or delay planned investments. These findings hold in Europe and Asia, where the effects are often stronger. The study uses a survey-based measure of financial constraint, directly asking managers if their firms are constrained. It finds that constrained firms are smaller, less profitable, and have lower growth prospects. The analysis shows significant cross-sectional variation in corporate policies during the crisis, with constrained firms planning more severe cuts in spending and investment. The study also finds that constrained firms are more likely to draw on credit lines in anticipation of future restrictions, consistent with previous research. The paper addresses limitations of survey-based analyses, such as potential biases and misinterpretations of economic conditions. It also notes that uncontrolled firm heterogeneity could confound inferences. The study uses matching estimators to compare constrained and unconstrained firms, finding that financial constraints significantly affect corporate policies, especially during the crisis. The paper also examines liquidity management, finding that constrained firms burned through more cash and had lower liquid assets. They also drew more heavily on lines of credit, fearing future restrictions. The study finds that constrained firms are more likely to draw on credit lines in anticipation of future restrictions, consistent with previous research. The paper also examines investment decisions, finding that constrained firms are more likely to bypass attractive investment opportunities. Over 86% of constrained U.S. firms said they bypassed attractive investments due to difficulties in raising external finance. The study finds that constrained firms are more likely to cancel investment projects when they cannot obtain external funds. The paper concludes that financial constraints have significant real effects on corporate behavior during the crisis, with constrained firms cutting investment and spending more severely than unconstrained firms. The study adds to the literature on financial constraints by providing a direct measure of constraints and showing its impact on corporate policies.