Pub Date : 2018-10-16DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1531141
Mostafa Harakeh, Edward Lee, M. Walker
Abstract We examine the potential for IFRS to influence the market for SEOs in the UK and France. The divergence between the UK domestic accounting standards and IFRS is minor (low-divergence firms) whereas domestic accounting standards in France differ materially from IFRS (high-divergence firms); however, both countries have similar legal enforcement and institutional settings that might confound the effect of IFRS adoption. We argue that IFRS adoption serves to mitigate information asymmetry and improve accounting quality. Accordingly, we find that, following IFRS adoption, earnings management activities decrease among high-divergence firms prior to issuing SEOs. As a result of the lower levels of earnings management and information asymmetry, we predict and find that the market reaction to issuing SEOs improves significantly for high-divergence firms following IFRS. Given that equity financing becomes less costly, we find that the propensity to issue new SEOs increases among high-divergence firms after IFRS adoption. We find no similar changes among low-divergence firms. The results persist after running a matched-sample analysis and controlling for potential self-selection bias.
{"title":"The Differential Impact of IFRS Adoption on Aspects of Seasoned Equity Offerings in the UK and France","authors":"Mostafa Harakeh, Edward Lee, M. Walker","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1531141","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1531141","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract\u0000 We examine the potential for IFRS to influence the market for SEOs in the UK and France. The divergence between the UK domestic accounting standards and IFRS is minor (low-divergence firms) whereas domestic accounting standards in France differ materially from IFRS (high-divergence firms); however, both countries have similar legal enforcement and institutional settings that might confound the effect of IFRS adoption. We argue that IFRS adoption serves to mitigate information asymmetry and improve accounting quality. Accordingly, we find that, following IFRS adoption, earnings management activities decrease among high-divergence firms prior to issuing SEOs. As a result of the lower levels of earnings management and information asymmetry, we predict and find that the market reaction to issuing SEOs improves significantly for high-divergence firms following IFRS. Given that equity financing becomes less costly, we find that the propensity to issue new SEOs increases among high-divergence firms after IFRS adoption. We find no similar changes among low-divergence firms. The results persist after running a matched-sample analysis and controlling for potential self-selection bias.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"16 1","pages":"106 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1531141","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46563447","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-26DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1519320
Jörg-Markus Hitz, H. Schnack
Abstract This paper provides descriptive evidence on voluntary firm disclosures related to enforcement reviews. Our analyses are set in the German institutional environment, where firms are mandated to disclose error announcements if enforcement institutions, after conclusion of the review, formally establish financial statements to contain material errors. We find that firms provide voluntary disclosures about ongoing enforcement reviews on rare occasions while they opt to disclose information about concluded reviews more frequently. Content analyses reveal that the format of disclosures about ongoing reviews is potentially associated with the eventual review outcome, which is consistent with firms deliberately using these disclosures. This interpretation is supported by additional multivariate analyses of disclosures relating to ongoing reviews, which turn out more likely for contentious reviews. Analysis of market reactions provides weak evidence that investors price these disclosures, as negative market responses to the disclosure of error findings are mitigated. Hence, our paper provides a novel angle on the growing literature on accounting enforcement and yields insights into firm-level incentives for strategic disclosures.
{"title":"Firm Disclosures about Enforcement Reviews","authors":"Jörg-Markus Hitz, H. Schnack","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1519320","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1519320","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper provides descriptive evidence on voluntary firm disclosures related to enforcement reviews. Our analyses are set in the German institutional environment, where firms are mandated to disclose error announcements if enforcement institutions, after conclusion of the review, formally establish financial statements to contain material errors. We find that firms provide voluntary disclosures about ongoing enforcement reviews on rare occasions while they opt to disclose information about concluded reviews more frequently. Content analyses reveal that the format of disclosures about ongoing reviews is potentially associated with the eventual review outcome, which is consistent with firms deliberately using these disclosures. This interpretation is supported by additional multivariate analyses of disclosures relating to ongoing reviews, which turn out more likely for contentious reviews. Analysis of market reactions provides weak evidence that investors price these disclosures, as negative market responses to the disclosure of error findings are mitigated. Hence, our paper provides a novel angle on the growing literature on accounting enforcement and yields insights into firm-level incentives for strategic disclosures.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"16 1","pages":"105 - 82"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1519320","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42950598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1514124
Martin Gäumann, M. Dobler
Abstract While the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) considers European national standard-setters (NSSs) as close partners that play a vital role in its legitimacy, empirical evidence on EFRAG’s consultation processes and the involvement of NSSs therein remains scarce. We use a multi-issue/multi-period approach to investigate the formal participation in EFRAG’s consultation processes. By examining 2,102 comment letters submitted to EFRAG in the 2002–2015 period, we find that NSSs typically outweigh other stakeholder groups in terms of level of participation across stages of the consultation process and project topics. Although NSSs’ level of participation is rather stable over time, it significantly varies across European countries. We also provide a recent classification of European NSSs and show that NSSs’ level of participation varies by their institutional status and is the highest for private NSSs. Our findings have implications for aspects of the legitimacy of both EFRAG and NSSs and shed light on the role of intermediaries in international accounting standard-setting.
{"title":"Formal Participation in the EFRAG’s Consultation Processes: The Role of European National Standard-Setters","authors":"Martin Gäumann, M. Dobler","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1514124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1514124","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) considers European national standard-setters (NSSs) as close partners that play a vital role in its legitimacy, empirical evidence on EFRAG’s consultation processes and the involvement of NSSs therein remains scarce. We use a multi-issue/multi-period approach to investigate the formal participation in EFRAG’s consultation processes. By examining 2,102 comment letters submitted to EFRAG in the 2002–2015 period, we find that NSSs typically outweigh other stakeholder groups in terms of level of participation across stages of the consultation process and project topics. Although NSSs’ level of participation is rather stable over time, it significantly varies across European countries. We also provide a recent classification of European NSSs and show that NSSs’ level of participation varies by their institutional status and is the highest for private NSSs. Our findings have implications for aspects of the legitimacy of both EFRAG and NSSs and shed light on the role of intermediaries in international accounting standard-setting.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"16 1","pages":"44 - 81"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1514124","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45889457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-02DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1514123
F. A. Bilgic, S. Ho, A. Hodgson, Zhengling Xiong
Abstract We investigate whether the value relevance of earnings and book values in Turkey significantly changed across periods of financial uncertainty. Our enquiry differs from the mainstream literature that posits a unidirectional association determined by the ‘quality’ of individual firm accounts towards price. We find divergence in accounting value relevance components across the 1997–2012 period. Dominant value relevance shifts from earnings and negative interest rates in hyper-inflation, to the balance sheet after IFRS in 2005. On the other hand, the global financial crisis (GFC) is associated with diminished accounting value relevance for all variables. Policy issues are raised about value relevance consistency, the use of negative (low) interest rates as fiscal policies and the asymmetric application of market based valuations in emerging economies.
{"title":"Do Macro-economic Crises Determine Accounting Value Relevance?","authors":"F. A. Bilgic, S. Ho, A. Hodgson, Zhengling Xiong","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1514123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1514123","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We investigate whether the value relevance of earnings and book values in Turkey significantly changed across periods of financial uncertainty. Our enquiry differs from the mainstream literature that posits a unidirectional association determined by the ‘quality’ of individual firm accounts towards price. We find divergence in accounting value relevance components across the 1997–2012 period. Dominant value relevance shifts from earnings and negative interest rates in hyper-inflation, to the balance sheet after IFRS in 2005. On the other hand, the global financial crisis (GFC) is associated with diminished accounting value relevance for all variables. Policy issues are raised about value relevance consistency, the use of negative (low) interest rates as fiscal policies and the asymmetric application of market based valuations in emerging economies.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"15 1","pages":"402 - 422"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1514123","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47155231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-13DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1496269
I. Dennis
ABSTRACT Despite more than forty years of exploration into constructing a conceptual framework (CF) for financial reporting the question ‘What is a CF?’ has not been adequately answered. The result is that those who construct CFs are not guided by a clear concept of a CF and communication about CFs is undermined by differences in understanding what it is. There has been a failure to undertake conceptual enquiry into the nature of a CF or into the expressions used in describing it. This paper addresses this failure by undertaking such a conceptual enquiry. Existing explanations of CFs are examined and found to be inadequate. What is wanted from a CF is identified and explained and this is used to prescribe what should be understood by the expression ‘conceptual framework’. A new characterisation of CFs is given that should assist any future construction of new CFs. Problems that may be faced by those who seek to construct a CF are identified.
{"title":"What is a Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting?","authors":"I. Dennis","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1496269","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1496269","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite more than forty years of exploration into constructing a conceptual framework (CF) for financial reporting the question ‘What is a CF?’ has not been adequately answered. The result is that those who construct CFs are not guided by a clear concept of a CF and communication about CFs is undermined by differences in understanding what it is. There has been a failure to undertake conceptual enquiry into the nature of a CF or into the expressions used in describing it. This paper addresses this failure by undertaking such a conceptual enquiry. Existing explanations of CFs are examined and found to be inadequate. What is wanted from a CF is identified and explained and this is used to prescribe what should be understood by the expression ‘conceptual framework’. A new characterisation of CFs is given that should assist any future construction of new CFs. Problems that may be faced by those who seek to construct a CF are identified.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"15 1","pages":"374 - 401"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1496269","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44970752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-01DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1501502
M. Klein, Rolf Uwe Fülbier
Abstract We provide evidence on the little researched internal sphere of private IASB standard setting, more specifically, on the dynamic of board discussions and the respective impact of exogenous input such as comment letters, the array of arguments evoked in IASB debates, individual board member contribution and board-staff relations. We conduct a content analysis of audio recordings of 14 IASB meetings on the amendment of IAS 19 Employee Benefits (2011) between November 2008 and February 2010. Our main findings comprise the argument-based handling of comment letters not being conditioned by the political or economic importance of the senders, the gatekeeper role of staff members in channelling exogenous input and their equal role in board discussions and the dominant reference to conceptual arguments there. We also point to the heterogeneous involvement of board members, their different attribution to key issues and to further observations regarding the meeting governance, board’s discussion culture and etiquette. Our paper adds to the literature on private IASB standard setting, pension accounting and group decision making. Data: All data are available from the public sources identified in this paper
{"title":"Inside the Black Box of IASB Standard Setting: Evidence from Board Meeting Audio Playbacks on the Amendment of IAS 19 (2011)","authors":"M. Klein, Rolf Uwe Fülbier","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1501502","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1501502","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We provide evidence on the little researched internal sphere of private IASB standard setting, more specifically, on the dynamic of board discussions and the respective impact of exogenous input such as comment letters, the array of arguments evoked in IASB debates, individual board member contribution and board-staff relations. We conduct a content analysis of audio recordings of 14 IASB meetings on the amendment of IAS 19 Employee Benefits (2011) between November 2008 and February 2010. Our main findings comprise the argument-based handling of comment letters not being conditioned by the political or economic importance of the senders, the gatekeeper role of staff members in channelling exogenous input and their equal role in board discussions and the dominant reference to conceptual arguments there. We also point to the heterogeneous involvement of board members, their different attribution to key issues and to further observations regarding the meeting governance, board’s discussion culture and etiquette. Our paper adds to the literature on private IASB standard setting, pension accounting and group decision making. Data: All data are available from the public sources identified in this paper","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"16 1","pages":"1 - 43"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1501502","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41966738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-05DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1479531
D. Vural
Abstract I investigate the effect of family ownership on firms’ disclosure practices in their annual reports. In specific, I study Swedish publicly listed firms, which are typically characterized by controlling owners that have a strong influence in the corporate governance decisions of the firm, including corporate disclosures. To measure disclosure, I construct a comprehensive disclosure index covering information on (1) corporate governance, (2) strategic and financial targets and (3) notes to the financial statements. The results reveal that overall, family firms provide less disclosure in annual reports than non-family firms do. The finding is consistent with the premise that through their management positions, family owners can directly monitor managers and avoid costly public disclosures. Overall, the results suggest that ownership structure of firms is important to consider in understanding firms’ disclosure incentives, particularly in settings where controlling owners play a significant role in the governance of the firm.
{"title":"Disclosure Practices by Family Firms: Evidence from Swedish Publicly Listed Firms","authors":"D. Vural","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1479531","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1479531","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract I investigate the effect of family ownership on firms’ disclosure practices in their annual reports. In specific, I study Swedish publicly listed firms, which are typically characterized by controlling owners that have a strong influence in the corporate governance decisions of the firm, including corporate disclosures. To measure disclosure, I construct a comprehensive disclosure index covering information on (1) corporate governance, (2) strategic and financial targets and (3) notes to the financial statements. The results reveal that overall, family firms provide less disclosure in annual reports than non-family firms do. The finding is consistent with the premise that through their management positions, family owners can directly monitor managers and avoid costly public disclosures. Overall, the results suggest that ownership structure of firms is important to consider in understanding firms’ disclosure incentives, particularly in settings where controlling owners play a significant role in the governance of the firm.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"15 1","pages":"347 - 373"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1479531","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47549012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-05-06DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1468913
Alexandra Fontes
Despite the worldwide diffusion of IFRS, several questions regarding the national implementation of IFRS arise. These are necessarily linked to the impact of a range of country-specific factors. Th...
{"title":"The Role of the State and Accounting Transparency – IFRS Implementation in Developing Countries","authors":"Alexandra Fontes","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1468913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1468913","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the worldwide diffusion of IFRS, several questions regarding the national implementation of IFRS arise. These are necessarily linked to the impact of a range of country-specific factors. Th...","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"15 1","pages":"426 - 429"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1468913","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45396562","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1476772
N. Hellman, J. Carenys, Soledad Moya Gutiérrez
Abstract The current paper was prepared for the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Research Forum 2017 and evaluates the effects of introducing more principles of disclosure as part of the IASB Disclosure Initiative. We perform a literature review of academic research on how entities have complied with disclosure requirements in the past. The review shows high levels of non-compliance and high volatility across entities, including poor disclosers being far below the average. We find no clear pattern of higher compliance for International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) with more reliance on disclosure principles as compared to specific requirements (i.e. IFRS 7, IFRS 8), but note the methodological problem of measuring compliance with disclosure principles. Academic research suggests that the degree of compliance depends on entities’ incentives for providing or withholding information in combination with local conditions for primary users, auditors and regulators. Based on our review, we argue that increased reliance on entities to act in ‘good faith’ when complying with disclosure requirements, in capital-market contexts where entities may be in high-incentive situations and have low costs of non-compliance, is potentially risky in terms of how well the Standards protect primary users from poor disclosers. More emphasis is needed on ensuring that the disclosure requirements are enforceable and auditable in order to secure a certain minimum level of disclosure.
{"title":"Introducing More IFRS Principles of Disclosure – Will the Poor Disclosers Improve?","authors":"N. Hellman, J. Carenys, Soledad Moya Gutiérrez","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1476772","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1476772","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The current paper was prepared for the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Research Forum 2017 and evaluates the effects of introducing more principles of disclosure as part of the IASB Disclosure Initiative. We perform a literature review of academic research on how entities have complied with disclosure requirements in the past. The review shows high levels of non-compliance and high volatility across entities, including poor disclosers being far below the average. We find no clear pattern of higher compliance for International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) with more reliance on disclosure principles as compared to specific requirements (i.e. IFRS 7, IFRS 8), but note the methodological problem of measuring compliance with disclosure principles. Academic research suggests that the degree of compliance depends on entities’ incentives for providing or withholding information in combination with local conditions for primary users, auditors and regulators. Based on our review, we argue that increased reliance on entities to act in ‘good faith’ when complying with disclosure requirements, in capital-market contexts where entities may be in high-incentive situations and have low costs of non-compliance, is potentially risky in terms of how well the Standards protect primary users from poor disclosers. More emphasis is needed on ensuring that the disclosure requirements are enforceable and auditable in order to secure a certain minimum level of disclosure.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"15 1","pages":"242 - 321"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1476772","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46175330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449480.2018.1448936
Carien van Mourik, Yuko Katsuo Asami
Abstract The 2015 International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Conceptual Framework Exposure Draft (2015 IASB CF ED) proposes a mixed valuation and transactions approach to income determination. Nevertheless, it does not clearly choose between single or dual concepts of profit, which renders the 2015 IASB CF ED’s financial accounting model somewhat incoherent. The 2015 IASB CF ED proposes a rebuttable presumption that profit or loss should be all-inclusive. Only the IASB can rebut this presumption, but the 2015 IASB CF ED provides no clear conceptual basis on which to rebut this presumption. In spite of considering dual measurement, the IASB believes that it is neither possible, nor necessary, to distinguish between profit or loss and other comprehensive income (OCI) on a conceptual basis. This paper suggests that the 2015 IASB CF ED’s approach to measurement can be improved by introducing a deprival value measurement rule in cases where fair value and historical cost are not appropriate. Furthermore, it argues that under dual measurement it is both necessary and possible to make a conceptual distinction between the realised items of income and expense in profit or loss and those recognised by accretion in OCI.
{"title":"Articulation, Profit or Loss and OCI in the IASB Conceptual Framework: Different Shades of Clean (or Dirty) Surplus","authors":"Carien van Mourik, Yuko Katsuo Asami","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2018.1448936","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2018.1448936","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The 2015 International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Conceptual Framework Exposure Draft (2015 IASB CF ED) proposes a mixed valuation and transactions approach to income determination. Nevertheless, it does not clearly choose between single or dual concepts of profit, which renders the 2015 IASB CF ED’s financial accounting model somewhat incoherent. The 2015 IASB CF ED proposes a rebuttable presumption that profit or loss should be all-inclusive. Only the IASB can rebut this presumption, but the 2015 IASB CF ED provides no clear conceptual basis on which to rebut this presumption. In spite of considering dual measurement, the IASB believes that it is neither possible, nor necessary, to distinguish between profit or loss and other comprehensive income (OCI) on a conceptual basis. This paper suggests that the 2015 IASB CF ED’s approach to measurement can be improved by introducing a deprival value measurement rule in cases where fair value and historical cost are not appropriate. Furthermore, it argues that under dual measurement it is both necessary and possible to make a conceptual distinction between the realised items of income and expense in profit or loss and those recognised by accretion in OCI.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"15 1","pages":"167 - 192"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2018-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2018.1448936","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60429797","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：