非美国通用会计准则每股盈利分母选择

Kurt H. Gee, Thomas J. Linsmeier, Clay Partridge
{"title":"非美国通用会计准则每股盈利分母选择","authors":"Kurt H. Gee, Thomas J. Linsmeier, Clay Partridge","doi":"10.2308/tar-2021-0554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title> We provide the first evidence after Regulation G on firms’ non-GAAP EPS denominator choices and whether they are informative or opportunistic. From 2013 to 2019, 17 percent of annual non-GAAP EPS numbers use denominators different from that of GAAP diluted EPS, which makes denominator adjustments among the most prevalent individual types of non-GAAP adjustments. For firms reporting GAAP and non-GAAP profits or GAAP losses and non-GAAP profits, we provide evidence consistent with denominator adjustments increasing non-GAAP EPS informativeness. Our evidence also suggests that opportunism in denominator choices is concentrated in firms reporting GAAP losses and non-GAAP profits and failing to adjust the denominator. Such nonadjustment is inconsistent with SEC requirements to report non-GAAP EPS “on a diluted basis” because the EPS denominator for a GAAP loss excludes dilutive claims. Although the SEC largely overlooks such firms, they are more likely, on average, to report non-GAAP EPS that analysts consider inflated. JEL Classifications: M40; M41; M48.","PeriodicalId":22240,"journal":{"name":"The Accounting Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Non-GAAP EPS Denominator Choices\",\"authors\":\"Kurt H. Gee, Thomas J. Linsmeier, Clay Partridge\",\"doi\":\"10.2308/tar-2021-0554\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title> We provide the first evidence after Regulation G on firms’ non-GAAP EPS denominator choices and whether they are informative or opportunistic. From 2013 to 2019, 17 percent of annual non-GAAP EPS numbers use denominators different from that of GAAP diluted EPS, which makes denominator adjustments among the most prevalent individual types of non-GAAP adjustments. For firms reporting GAAP and non-GAAP profits or GAAP losses and non-GAAP profits, we provide evidence consistent with denominator adjustments increasing non-GAAP EPS informativeness. Our evidence also suggests that opportunism in denominator choices is concentrated in firms reporting GAAP losses and non-GAAP profits and failing to adjust the denominator. Such nonadjustment is inconsistent with SEC requirements to report non-GAAP EPS “on a diluted basis” because the EPS denominator for a GAAP loss excludes dilutive claims. Although the SEC largely overlooks such firms, they are more likely, on average, to report non-GAAP EPS that analysts consider inflated. JEL Classifications: M40; M41; M48.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Accounting Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Accounting Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2308/tar-2021-0554\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Accounting Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2308/tar-2021-0554","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 我们提供了《G 条例》之后有关公司非美国通用会计准则每股收益分母选择的首个证据,以及这些选择是信息性的还是机会主义的。从 2013 年到 2019 年,17% 的年度非美国通用会计准则每股收益数字使用了不同于美国通用会计准则摊薄后每股收益的分母,这使得分母调整成为非美国通用会计准则调整中最普遍的个别类型。对于报告美国通用会计准则利润和非美国通用会计准则利润或美国通用会计准则亏损和非美国通用会计准则利润的公司,我们提供的证据表明分母调整增加了非美国通用会计准则每股盈利的信息量。我们的证据还表明,分母选择中的机会主义主要集中在报告 GAAP 亏损和非 GAAP 利润但未调整分母的公司。这种不调整不符合美国证券交易委员会关于 "在稀释的基础上 "报告非 GAAP 每股收益的要求,因为 GAAP 亏损的每股收益分母不包括稀释性索赔。尽管证交会在很大程度上忽视了这类公司,但平均而言,它们更有可能报告分析师认为虚高的非 GAAP EPS。JEL 分类:M40;M41;M48。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Non-GAAP EPS Denominator Choices
ABSTRACT We provide the first evidence after Regulation G on firms’ non-GAAP EPS denominator choices and whether they are informative or opportunistic. From 2013 to 2019, 17 percent of annual non-GAAP EPS numbers use denominators different from that of GAAP diluted EPS, which makes denominator adjustments among the most prevalent individual types of non-GAAP adjustments. For firms reporting GAAP and non-GAAP profits or GAAP losses and non-GAAP profits, we provide evidence consistent with denominator adjustments increasing non-GAAP EPS informativeness. Our evidence also suggests that opportunism in denominator choices is concentrated in firms reporting GAAP losses and non-GAAP profits and failing to adjust the denominator. Such nonadjustment is inconsistent with SEC requirements to report non-GAAP EPS “on a diluted basis” because the EPS denominator for a GAAP loss excludes dilutive claims. Although the SEC largely overlooks such firms, they are more likely, on average, to report non-GAAP EPS that analysts consider inflated. JEL Classifications: M40; M41; M48.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Effect of the Current Expected Credit Loss Model on Conditional Conservatism of Banks and Its Spillover Effect on Borrower Conservatism Switching Costs and Market Power in Auditing: Evidence from a Structural Approach Under the Hood of Activist Fraud Campaigns: Private Information Quality, Disclosure Incentives, and Stock Lending Dynamics Supervisor Impact on Employee Careers: The Role of Rating Differentiation Individual Auditor Turnover and Audit Quality—Large Sample Evidence from U.S. Audit Offices
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1