No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
A Note on the Determinants of IFRS Policy Choice When Accounting for Non‐controlling Interest and Goodwill
Abstract
This paper provides evidence on the choices made by European firms when measuring non‐controlling interest (NCI) and goodwill. Since 2009, IFRS 3 allows measurement of NCI either at fair value (full goodwill method) or at the proportionate share of net assets (partial goodwill method). IFRS 3 allows this policy choice on a per transaction basis. Our data comprise 188 hand‐collected firm choices in connection with business combinations with remaining NCI, between 2010 and 2016. We use the theoretical framework developed by Stadler and Nobes (2014) explaining differences in firms’ choices of overt accounting options by country, industry, and firm‐specific topic factors. Based on univariate and multivariate analyses, we find that transaction‐specific and firm‐specific topic factors influence accounting policy choice, whereas country and industry factors do not. The choice has different effects on financial leverage and operating returns, which inform firm‐level preferences. Regarding choices made at the transaction level, we find acquirers with an intention to buy additional shares from non‐controlling shareholders tend to prefer the full goodwill method. Thus, the choice of accounting method conveys information to users about future additional acquisitions and has implications for standard setters, indicating that offering choices at transaction level may increase the forward‐looking content of financial statements.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) contain several policy options. This paper examines the choices made in 2008/9 IFRS financial statements by large listed companies from five countries on all the options that are observable. We compare these choices with those that had been made by the same companies in 2005/6, which (except for the German companies) was the year of transition to IFRS. For Australian and UK companies, we find, as expected, that there were few policy changes. However, despite the constraints on policy change within IFRS, we find that French and Spanish companies not only made more changes than the other companies but that they also made more changes after transition than at transition. Further investigation reveals that these findings are largely driven by a small number of topics. One possible explanation for the pattern of these changes is a „learning‟ process, which is supported by finding that nearly all the post-transition changes made by the French and Spanish companies were away from previous national requirements. However, we consider other possible explanations. We also present the profiles of IFRS practices for 2008/9. Despite the changes in policy from 2005/6, we find clear evidence that national patterns of IFRS practice continue through the period, so that international comparability remains in doubt.
Purpose
This paper aims to investigate how sell-side analysts form expectations on, analyse, and communicate the effects of corporate acquisitions.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper reports on case studies of three listed firms who are frequent acquirers. The case data comprise semi-structured interviews and content analysis of analyst reports and corporate reports.
Findings
The paper reports three sets of findings. First, the analysts viewed acquisitions as heterogeneous events and, therefore, also treated acquisitions differently depending on factors such as size and acquisition strategy and the perceived “authenticity” of the acquisition (i.e. whether parts of the acquisition would be more accurately described as organic growth and regular capital expenditure (CAPEX) investments). Second, the authors find that analysts struggle with analysing the effects of acquisitions at the announcement date because of a mismatch between the analysts’ need of and the analysts’ access to relevant information. Although clients demand evaluations of announced acquisitions, relevant accounting information is not published until much later and the information at hand only allows for cursory analyses. Finally, the authors find that the analysts’ valuation models were too inflexible to fully incorporate the effects of the acquisition. In sum, the analysts, therefore, developed acquisition-driven investment cases without supporting accounting information and without converting expected acquisitions into forecasts.
Originality/value
By adopting a qualitative case study research design, the paper contributes to the ongoing efforts to open the “black-box” of sell-side analyst behaviour. In particular, the unique research design focusses on effects related to specific corporate events (acquisitions) rather than analysts’ everyday work.
We examine banks’ accounting policy choices during the financial crisis where they are strongly motivated to manage earnings or regulatory capital. We address the issue via the initial elections of the fair value option (FVO) under SFAS No. 159, which provides considerable latitude and in particular its transition guidance is amenable to exploitation. We investigate banks’ reasons to elect the FVO and provide evidence regarding whether and how these reasons differed for banks adopting the standard in the first quarter of 2007 (early adopters) versus first quarter of 2008 (regular adopters). We predict and find that early adopters with histories of managing accounting numbers were more likely to make opportunistic FVO elections, and we show that early adopters with low capital tended to exploit the FVO in the opposite direction as those with high capital. With intense regulatory scrutiny since April 2007, we predict and find that regular adopters’ FVO elections complied with SFAS No. 159’s intent. We further analyze the particular reasons why early and regular adopters most commonly elected the FVO for specific types of financial instruments. We find that early adopters’ elections for available-for-sale (AFS) securities and debt reflected opportunism, and regular adopters’ elections for loans held for sale reflected compliance with the standard’s intent to remedy accounting mismatches for economic hedges.
This paper provides evidence on several matters relating to accounting for government grants under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Focusing on grants related to assets, we trace the development of International Accounting Standard (IAS) 20, outline some of the problems of current accounting practice, and suggest why these have not been addressed by the standard-setter. Then, by hand-collecting data relating to 559 firms from 15 countries, we empirically analyze several issues. We show that asset grants are economically important for some firms and that the frequency of grants is significantly different across the countries. For the non-financial firms in our sample, we identify the grant-related accounting policy choice: a firm can either show the grant as deferred income or net it against the asset. The options are roughly equally popular overall but the firm's country of domicile is strongly associated with the choice. Further, as a key element of disclosure quality for this topic, we investigate whether or not the balance sheet-related numbers relating to grants are disclosed, finding that many firms do not disclose them. Disclosure quality is better for firms which use the ‘deferred income’ option, and it is also better in countries where a higher proportion of firms has received government grants. International differences and poor disclosure are detrimental to international comparisons, so we conclude that the policy choice should be removed from the accounting standard.
Purpose
The purpose of our study is to examine the determinants of accounting policy choices under International Accounting Standards (IASs) of listed firms in South Asia.
Design/methodology/approach
We selected three IASs-based accounting policy choices from 369 listed companies in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh for the financial year 2007/08.
Findings
Our results show that firm size, investment opportunity set, leverage and ownership by the general public are significant determinants of accounting policy choice in South Asian countries. However, we do not find a significant relationship between firms’ accounting policy choices and profitability, assets-in-place and taxes.
Practical implications
Our results suggest that since some flexibility exists in IASB’s accounting standards this may allow managers to use income-increasing/decreasing methods. There is scope for regulators and standards setters to reduce the alternative methods which are likely improve firms’ reporting quality.
Originality/value
Our study contributes to our understanding as to what determines managers’ choice of a particular accounting method allowed in International Accounting Standards.
This essay was a keynote address at the Third International Conference of the Journal of International Accounting Research in São Paulo, Brazil. It addresses the question of why the volume and quality of international accounting research have grown rapidly in recent years. It begins by asking why we do accounting research and moves on to discuss the reasons for conducting international accounting research. These include to better understand others (and in the process, to better understand ourselves), to provide more replication options, to exploit differences in national institutional structures when investigating the determinants and effects of institutional variables on accounting, to address some limitations of within-jurisdiction research, and to obtain a wider range of changes to exploit (the paradigm example being the advent of IFRS). I then offer some concluding comments. Despite its somewhat presumptuous title, I do not presume to speak for others; the essay reflects a purely personal viewpoint.
This study investigates whether differences in accounting standards across countries create information costs that inhibit firms from investing in foreign markets. Using the frequency and dollar magnitude of cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&A) from 32 countries over the period 1998-2004, we find that the aggregate volume of M&A activity across country pairs is larger for pairs of countries with similar Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and that this increased volume of M&A activity is driven by target countries that also have strong enforcement. We also find that the 2005 mandatory adoption of IFRS attracted more cross-border M&As among IFRS adopting countries, and that this increase in M&A activity within the IFRS countries is more pronounced for country pairs with low similarity in GAAP in the pre-IFRS adoption period. Overall, our results highlight the role of accounting standards and enforcement in shaping cross-border M&A activity.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
The claimed starting point for much recent literature is that International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) have been very widely adopted. That is somewhere between an error and a misleading simplification. This paper begins by providing an antidote by analysing the degree to which IFRS have not been adopted in the jurisdictions containing the world's largest 16 stock markets. This might help researchers with their institutional settings. The paper then examines several issues which can lead to international differences in IFRS practice, starting with language and enforcement, but focusing mainly on policy options. Previously published lists of these are up-dated, the extensive recent literature on IFRS policy choice and policy change is synthesised, and new data are provided. Finally, researchers are offered some lessons from the past and some directions for the future.
This paper proposes a framework for understanding management's decision-making on observable accounting policy choices. The framework is used to hypothesize how country, industry, and topic factors influence policy choice under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The hypotheses are tested on the choices made by the largest firms from 10 jurisdictions on a comprehensive set of IFRS policy topics, which are hand-collected from the financial statements. The results are consistent with the framework: country factors are particularly influential when the choice does not affect an important accounting number; and industry and topic factors influence the choice on some topics. Overall, we find that country factors have the greatest influence on IFRS policy choice.
The international accounting classification literature emphasises the importance of understanding how institutional factors shape accounting regulations and practices. With the mandatory adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in the European Union and Australia in 2005, our empirical study examines whether three international accounting classification systems relating to equity financing, law and culture still had merit as measured on transition to IFRS and explore whether they are effective in grouping accounting systems. Using IFRS as the yardstick, we find statistically significant differences in the measurement of shareholders’ equity as between strong (Class A) versus weak (Class B) equity financing systems, common law versus code law systems and cultural systems based on ‘Anglo’, ‘Nordic’ and ‘More Developed Latin’ cultural groups. With regard to the measurement of net income, however, we find statistically significant differences only in respect of strong (Class A) versus weak (Class B) equity financing systems. Our findings demonstrate that traditional international accounting system differences still persisted at the time of IFRS adoption even after long periods of harmonisation and growing international accounting convergence.
In this paper we provide a review of the empirical literature on the accounting for goodwill. We focus on research undertaken since the introduction of the "impairment-only approach" of SFAS 141/142 and IFRS 3/IAS 36 (rev. 2004). We distinguish three areas of work. The first area comprises studies on purchase price allocations and the determination of goodwill. The second comprises studies that analyze whether goodwill should be interpreted as an asset, especially value relevance studies and studies on the predictive value of goodwill. The third area of research is the subsequent measurement of goodwill. Here, we discuss, inter alia, studies on the determinants and on the timeliness of goodwill impairments. Finally, we summarize findings on the influence of earnings management on goodwill accounting. Despite the multitude of studies, the available evidence does not allow for an unambiguous answer to the question whether the decision-usefulness of goodwill information has improved or deteriorated following the introduction of the impairment-only approach. One reason for this is that direct comparisons of the situations before and after the introduction are problematic because in the early period companies under US GAAP could apply the pooling-of-interests method, and in many European countries companies could set off goodwill to reserves. The paper closes with look at avenues for future research on goodwill accounting.
The adoption of IFRS in the European Union in 2005 aimed to increase the comparability of publicly traded companies’ consolidated accounts. However, previous literature questions whether IFRS are applied consistently across countries with differing institutional environments, and therefore, whether de facto harmony has been achieved. We further examine this question by investigating IFRS accounting policy choices of listed companies in Germany and the UK between 2005 and 2009. We find that most firms, when choosing IFRS options, tend to retain accounting policies required by national rules. We also investigate national accounting traditions in the case of options under national GAAP and find that most companies continue these after adopting IFRS. Moreover, there appears to be little significant change in accounting choices over time from 2005 to 2009. Given the differences in accounting rules and practices that exist across countries, our results suggest that international differences in financial reporting are likely to continue under IFRS.
The compulsory use of IFRS for the consolidated statements of listed companies in the EU and elsewhere, and the convergence of IFRS with US GAAP, might imply the end of ‘international accounting’ as an important field of study. However, there are motives and opportunities for international differences of practice to exist within IFRS usage. Some of the original motives for international accounting differences may still be effective in an IFRS context, though in different ways. The opportunities for different IFRS practices are divided into eight types. Hypotheses relating to each of these are proposed, and some ways of testing them are suggested. Some implications of the existence of different national versions of IFRS are noted.
The process of preparing financial statements gives rise to numerous accounting choices. Understanding these choices is critical for an understanding of accounting practice. The 2005 transition to IFRS in Europe provides a unique opportunity for studying the forces and factors that shape accounting practices. Based on empirical data from a series of in-depth interviews focusing on the choices and problems listed companies faced in the transition to IFRS in Sweden, we suggest that it may be appropriate to enrich the accounting policy choice literature by recognizing a wider spectrum of management incentives and available alternatives when making accounting policy choice decisions. In particular, we suggest that it may be fruitful to explore the role of incentives arising from the management control function. Our findings underline the importance of addressing how management incentives shape accounting practices and hence influence the outcome of the IFRS transition. They also suggest that a better understanding of the relationship between standards, incentives and actual accounting practices requires distinctions of different degrees and aspects of compliance.
Building on literature that suggests motives and opportunities for national versions of IFRS practice, we examine whether there are systematic differences in IFRS accounting policies between countries. Using information from the annual reports of companies in the blue chip indices of the largest five stock markets that use IFRS, we reject a null hypothesis that IFRS practice is the same across countries. For 16 accounting policy issues, we find instead significant evidence that pre-IFRS national practice continues where this is allowed within IFRS. By this, we document the existence of national patterns of accounting within IFRS. We also point out some policy implications that arise from our findings.
Using an international sample of 222 banks from 41 countries, this study examines whether the fair value option (FVO) affects earnings volatility. Prior empirical studies associate higher levels of earnings volatility with fair value accounting (Barth et al. 1995; Hodder et al. 2006). In contrast, I find evidence that banks applying the FVO to reduce accounting mismatches exhibit lower earnings volatility than other banks. I assign this alternative outcome to the optional characteristic of the FVO. Banks can use the flexibility in accounting to reduce artificial earnings volatility. The cross-sectional results are robust against outliers and several model alterations, including controls for endogeneity bias. Furthermore, I predict and find that banks from countries with high regulatory quality are more likely to apply the FVO to reduce accounting mismatches. Overall, the findings confirm the IASB’s initial intention on introducing the FVO. Hence, the study contributes to the current debate on the use of fair values in financial reporting.
Research has shown that accounting follows different patterns in different parts of the world. There have been claims that national systems are determined by environmental factors. In this context, cultural factors have not been fully considered. This paper proposes four hypotheses on the relationship between identified cultural characteristics and the development of accounting systems, the regulation of the accounting profession and attitudes towards financial management and disclosure. The hypotheses are not operationalized, and empirical tests have not been carried out. They are proposed here as a first step in the development of a theory of cultural influence on the development of accounting systems.
This research develops and tests a model for the prediction of tender offer outcomes. Variables that increase the supply of "obtainable shares" (such as increased bid premiums or the payment of solicitation fees ) are shown to increase the probability of success. Increased ownership of target firm shares by the bidder also incease the probability of success. Variables that impede the tendering of hares (such as target management opposition or a competing bid) decrease the probability of success. Tests of the model utilizing both linear and logistic analysis support the theoretical constructs and help resolve the paradoxical findings of previous research.
This study investigates the use of fair value measurement by 228 listed companies in the UK and Australia around the time of adoption of IFRS from 1 January 2005. We test whether within and between country comparability in policy choices (as measured by T indices) has changed in relation to (a) mandatory and (b) optional use of fair value measurement. Mandatory requirements related to financial instruments (IAS 39) and share-based payments (IFRS 2) have increased comparability, with a weaker effect for biological assets (IAS 41). In relation to the optional use of fair value, comparability increased in relation to property (IAS 16) because some companies discontinued fair value measurement. Under IAS 39, the fair value option for other financial assets and other financial liabilities decreased comparability. Options to use fair value in other areas (intangible assets, plant and equipment and investment properties) are not generally taken up, either for on-going measurement or on IFRS adoption (under the ‘deemed cost’ option). The results suggest a conservative approach and/or lack of incentives to use fair value measurement for most companies. Exceptions include some banks and insurance companies (for other financial assets and liabilities) and companies holding investment properties.
We review research from the 1990s that examines the determinants and consequences of accounting choice, structuring our analysis around the three types of market imperfections that influence managers’ choices: agency costs, information asymmetries, and externalities affecting non-contracting parties. We conclude that research in the 1990s made limited progress in expanding our understanding of accounting choice because of limitations in research design and a focus on replication rather than extension of current knowledge. We discuss opportunities for future research, recommending the exploration of the economic implications of accounting choice by addressing the three different reasons why accounting matters.
The East Asian countries Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand provide rare insight into the interaction between accounting standards and the incentives of managers and auditors. Their standards derive from common law sources (UK, US, and IAS) that are widely viewed as higher quality than code law standards. However, their preparers’ incentives imply low quality. We show their financial reporting quality is not higher than under code law, with quality operationalized as timely recognition of economic income (particularly losses). It is misleading to classify countries by standards, ignoring incentives, as is common in international accounting texts, transparency indexes, and IAS advocacy.
This article examines equity accounting adoption by Australian companies before and after standard AAS 14 (1984), the first standard on equity accounting in Australia. To bypass a legal constraint, AAS 14 and its successor ASRB 1016 (1989) required that equity accounting of associates appear in supplementary disclosures (third-column or footnote) and not in consolidated accounts. Before AAS 14, extensive voluntary adoption of equity accounting occurred in consolidated accounts. Equity accounting adopters from 1971 to 1989 were matched in their adoption years with companies that could have used equity accounting but did not. Throughout, equity accounting adopters' EPS tended to be declining and equity accounting adoption tended to increase reported earnings. After AAS 14, adopters showed equity accounting via a third column if it increased reported earnings but in footnote disclosures if it reduced reported earnings. Leverage is associated with adoption before but not after AAS 14, perhaps because the standards required equity accounting in supplementary disclosures which had no impact on borrowing constraints, while no such restriction on equity accounting existed before regulation. Pre-AAS14 adopters tended not to be audited by large audit firms. Adopters after AAS 14 had higher ratios of investments in associates to total tangible assets; before AAS 14 they did not. The results are consistent with equity accounting being adopted opportunistically; there is limited evidence to support contractual efficiency motives.