Michael E. Bradbury; Laura B. Schröder

Abstract The Global Accounting Alliance has raised a call for different perspectives on principles-based accounting standards. Based on prior studies this paper identifies a number of characteristics of principles-based accounting standards. It uses content analysis to empirically test whether the asserted characteristics are consistent with the IASB... [view more]

Abstract

The Global Accounting Alliance has raised a call for different perspectives on principles-based accounting standards. Based on prior studies this paper identifies a number of characteristics of principles-based accounting standards. It uses content analysis to empirically test whether the asserted characteristics are consistent with the IASB and FASB standards on interest costs. We find that rules-based standards, relative to principles-based standards, have more rules, more justification, acknowledge less judgement is required, have more bright-line thresholds, have more scope exceptions, and are more verbose and complex. The main drafting difference between a rules-based or principles-based approach is whether extensional definitions or intensional definitions are used. Several policy implications are noted.

Isabel Gordon; Natalie Gallery

Abstract The drive for comparability of financial information is to enable users to distinguish similarities and differences in economic activities for an entity over time and between entities so that their resource allocation decisions are facilitated. With the increased globalisation of economic activities, the enhanced international comparability of financial... [view more]

Abstract

The drive for comparability of financial information is to enable users to distinguish similarities and differences in economic activities for an entity over time and between entities so that their resource allocation decisions are facilitated. With the increased globalisation of economic activities, the enhanced international comparability of financial statements is often used as an argument to advance the convergence of local accounting standards to international financial reporting standards (IFRS). Differences in the underlying economic substance of transactions between jurisdictions plus accounting standards allowing alternative treatments may render this expectation of increased comparability unrealistic. Motivated by observations that, as a construct, comparability is under-researched and not well understood, we develop a comparability framework that distinguishes between four types of comparability. In applying this comparability framework to pension accounting in the Australian and USA contexts, we highlight a dilemma: while regulators seek to increase the likelihood that similar events are accounted for similarly, an unintended consequence may be that preparers are forced to apply similar accounting treatment to events that are, in substance, different.

George Iatridis

Abstract This study examines the association between IFRS implementation, hedging and earnings management. It identifies the financial attributes of firms that utilise hedging and explores the IFRS transition process for hedgers and non-hedgers. This study also investigates the effects of a firm’s decision to use hedging ... [view more]

Abstract

This study examines the association between IFRS implementation, hedging and earnings management. It identifies the financial attributes of firms that utilise hedging and explores the IFRS transition process for hedgers and non-hedgers. This study also investigates the effects of a firm’s decision to use hedging or earnings management on firm value. The findings show that the transition to IFRSs has affected the equity, earnings, leverage and liquidity of hedgers in a significantly positive manner as opposed to non-hedgers, who presented a generally significant negative change in their respective figures. Hedgers tend to be larger sized and exhibit higher profitability, growth, leverage and liquidity. Hedgers also tend to have foreign revenues, be cross-listed in foreign stock markets and audited by a Big 4 auditor. This study reports that hedging and earnings management display an inverse relation. Firm value is found to be positively related to hedging and negatively related to discretionary accruals and managerial opportunism. Effective corporate governance mechanisms are found to display a negative association with discretionary accruals and a positive relation with firm value.

Sulaiman Mouselli; Aziz Jaafar; Khaled Hussainey

Abstract The impact of accruals quality and disclosure quality on stock returns is a topical issue in market-based accounting research. Most of the debate is centred on their incremental ability to predict future earnings. Recent studies suggest that higher information risk proxied by either lower accruals quality or... [view more]

Abstract

The impact of accruals quality and disclosure quality on stock returns is a topical issue in market-based accounting research. Most of the debate is centred on their incremental ability to predict future earnings. Recent studies suggest that higher information risk proxied by either lower accruals quality or lower disclosure quality results in higher stock returns. This paper examines the relationship between accruals quality and disclosure quality, and investigates whether they are complements or substitutes in explaining the time-series variation in portfolio returns. Applying portfolio groupings, we find a positive association between accruals quality and disclosure quality, suggesting that firms with higher disclosure quality engage less in earnings management and have higher accruals quality. Asset pricing tests show that an accruals quality factor and a disclosure quality factor explain the time-series variation in the excess returns of similar sets of portfolios. This suggests that they contain similar information and confirms the substitutive nature of accruals quality and disclosure quality factors.

Allan Barton