US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles Research Articles

Principles based accounting standards, audit fees and going concern: evidence using advanced machine learning

PurposeThe current study uses an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, this study aims to explore the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables.FindingsThe paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism, the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors’ risk assessments.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or pre- and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006.Practical implicationsThe study has major public policy suggestions as it responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks such as climate change.Originality/valueThe study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US SEC, to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the IASB Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards.

Financial sector and outbreak of the economic crisis in 2008: IFRS versus US GAAP

PurposeTesting a total of five hypotheses, the paper contributes to overall comparison of the two regimes, as it scrutinises whether these improvements have helped regulate this sector. Although it appears that, for the first time, International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) had a more timely effect than US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), multiple parameters must be taken into consideration. The banking system has additional rules that may affect financial statements, such as the Basel Accord which sets many policies closely related to the IFRS, such as deferred tax credits. In this way, this paper aim to enrich the results of these decisions, and illuminate aspects of amendments to IFRS and US GAAP in light of the crisis. Focussing on the financial sector, the author sought to critically evaluate their reactions, and to question some of their fundamental rules in practice. This is vital for accounting researchers and analysts, allowing for the first time to compare IFRS performance between Europe and the US, and make better investment evaluations.Design/methodology/approachThe study sought to detect whether IFRS and US GAAP protected firms from abnormal sales arising from the outbreak of the crisis, whether the reclassification option under IFRS was an answer to the crisis, and whether IFRS and US GAAP succeeded in regulating shadow banking through their amendments. Therefore, it processes five hypotheses. In order to detect the effects of the crisis on accounting regimes, the analysis focused only on companies from the financial sector composed of the banking industry, insurance companies and shadow banking. The author included firms from Australia, Germany, Greece, the UK and the US, and collected information on 679 financial institutions for the period 2009–2013. The author settled on these time frames because the author aimed to capture IFRS performance surrounding the crisis effects in 2008 and the amendments that followed. In this way, the author applied quantitative methods using only numerical data over a given period.FindingsThe results suggest that the reclassification option was successful, helping firms to perform better amid the crisis, indicating that the manipulation of the crisis was appropriate. It seems therefore that US GAAP should have activated this option for US firms. However, the US may not have hurried to act because its banking sector seemed to recover more quickly than in Australia and Europe. Either way, both regimes need to consider speculative market cases that might have appeared during the crisis, as the author have detected cases of abnormal returns. Finally, concerning regulation of the shadow banking sector, the results seem to be encouraging only with regard to the latest improvements and only for all countries examined.Originality/valueThe project contributes to debate on the reactions of both IFRS and US GAAP during and after the economic crisis. For this, it addresses several questions to investigate the performance of the financial sector under both regimes, identifying possible additional effects and considerations. More specifically, it answers if the fair value orientation actually contributes to the financial crisis through contagion effects, while it addresses additional questions. Have these two global accounting regimes succeeded in overcoming the consequences of the crisis? Have amendments and the introduction of new standards to IFRS and US GAAP achieved regulation of shadow banking? Which of the two has performed better? As aforementioned, the analysis focused only on companies from the financial sector composed of the banking industry, insurance companies and shadow banking firms from Australia, Germany, Greece, the UK and the US, for the period 2009–2013.

The New Accounting for Operating Leases: Unintended Consequences in the Airline Industry

By 2020, new accounting rules for operating leases were applicable to publicly traded companies reporting under either the US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) or International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The accounting authorities under both standards noted that the new rules were developed to increase the transparency of lease transactions to provide more relevant and comparable information. We compare two Brazilian airlines reporting under IFRS, Azul and Gol, with an operationally similar US airline reporting under US GAAP, JetBlue, to determine whether the new standards improve the ability to understand, evaluate, and compare performance, managerial decision making and credit metrics. We conclude that unintended consequences of the new rules have in some areas hindered rather than enhanced the comparability and transparency. Based on our analysis, we recommend two changes that would enhance comparability and transparency in the airline industry as well as other industries with heavy reliance on operating leases.

INTERNATIONAL CONVERGENCE OF FINANCIAL REPORTING

The purpose of this article is to study the state of global convergence of financial reporting standards at the present stage, as well as to consider the key points of the process of unification of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). To achieve this goal, the article considers the concepts of convergence, harmonization and standardization, presents an analysis of the intensity of use of these concepts, which are associated with the dynamic development of recent global accounting transformations and major trends in international convergence of financial reporting. The key stages of the process of unification of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) are considered. For decades, the European Union, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the Committee on International Accounting Standards have supported international efforts to harmonize US GAAP and IFRS. accounting and reporting standards used in different countries. We have determined that while both IFRS and GAAP aim to provide transparency, informational content and usability in financial statements, these standards use different approaches to achieve this. We indicated that at present IFRS is the dominant accounting and reporting system, in fact, only third world countries do not apply it. We have proven that in the process of achieving convergence, a single set of understandable and feasible international accounting standards must be developed, requiring high quality, transparent and comparable information in financial statements in order to ensure convergence of IFRS and GAAP. We analyzed the intensity of the use of the concepts of IFRS and GAAP, which are associated precisely with the convergence of these accounting systems using the Google Ngram Viewer (GNV) tool. We have proved that the Convergence of IFRS and GAAP also applies to Ukraine, since the convergence is bilateral, any change in IFRS will ultimately affect the Ukrainian accounting and reporting system.

Detecting accounting fraud in companies reporting under US GAAP through data mining

The accounting fraud detection models developed on financial data prepared under US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) in the current literature achieve significantly weaker performance than models based on financial data prepared under different accounting standards. This study contributes to the US GAAP accounting fraud data mining literature through the attainment of higher model performance than that reported in the prior literature. Financial data from the 10-K forms of 320 fraudulent financial statements (80 fraudulent companies) and 1,200 nonfraudulent financial statements (240 nonfraudulent companies) were collected from the US Security and Exchange Commission. The eight most commonly used data mining techniques were applied to develop prediction models. The results were cross-validated on a testing dataset and then compared according to parameters of accuracy, F-measure, and type I and II errors with existing studies from the US, China, Greece, and Taiwan. As a result, the developed predictive models for accounting fraud achieved performance comparable to those achieved by models built on data from other accounting standards. Moreover, the developed models also significantly outperformed (accuracy 10.5%, F-measure 16.1%, type I error 12.2% and type II error 15.2%) existing studies based on US GAAP financial data. Furthermore, this study provides an extensive literature review encompassing recent accounting fraud theory. It enhances the existing US fraud data mining literature with a performance comparison of studies based on other accounting standards.

The relationship between financial reporting standards and accounting irregularities: evidence from US banks

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore whether the choice of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) vs Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) is associated with the frequency and likelihood of accounting irregularities and fraud in US banks.Design/methodology/approachThe authors examine the relationship between financial reporting standards and accounting irregularities in publicly listed US banks. Using a sample of 4,284 banks with accounting irregularities observed in the USA over the period of 1996–2014. They used logit model to estimate the likelihood of corporate misreporting having been committed in terms of accounting irregularities.FindingsThe authors show that banks that use US GAAP exhibit better operating performance than fraudulent banks that use IFRS except for certain variables. They also find that fraudulent banks are more likely to commit accounting irregularities when they have to follow IFRS and banks have relatively better bank performance.Practical implicationsOverall, the empirical findings result consistent with Kohlbeck and Warfield’s (2010) find that accounting standards are linked to fewer accounting irregularities.Originality/valueIn this study, accounting irregularities have a significant effect on bank performance during the Dodd–Frank period. It finds that banks that choose to use IFRS are more likely to have accounting irregularities and to engage in fraud.

Effect of eliminating mandatory reconciliation requirements for foreign issuers in the U.S.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of choice of accounting standards on the value relevance and accrual quality of reported earnings and book values under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) versus US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).Design/methodology/approachThe authors examine the effect of choice of accounting standards on the value relevance and accrual quality of reported earnings and book values under IFRS versus US GAAP using 404 firms from 37 countries listed in the USA. They use the modified Jones (1991) model to measure accruals.FindingsThe authors find that value relevance of the book value of equity is increasing (significantly) when the sample firms use IFRS to prepare their financial statements. They also find some evidence in support of the mediating effect of the choice of accounting standards on the accrual quality of the sample firms. The results of this paper indicate that sample firms with lower accrual quality (larger discretionary accruals) experience higher returns during the fiscal year. However, the authors also find that the positive association between size of discretionary accruals and returns is decreasing in the use of IFRS by the sample firms.Originality/valueThis paper adds to prior literature on the harmonization of accounting standards and emphasizes the role of accounting standards in the quality of financial reporting. By using the financial data of all foreign registrants listed in the USA, the authors are able to provide deeper and more representative evidence.

Accounting Standards and Earnings Quality — Evidence from Registered ADRs

This paper examines the changes in earnings quality of registered American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) as a result of switching accounting standards. We aim to shed light on the potential impact of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) adoption on US firms. A suboptimal approach to achieve this goal is through examination of US firms’ surrogates such as ADRs. Unlike previous studies, we made a distinction between registered and unregistered ADRs and affirmed that registered ADRs are the closest surrogates with which to conduct our analysis because they are exclusively required to adhere to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)’s stringent disclosure requirements. When cross-listing their equity on the US exchanges, foreign issuers can file their financial reports with the SEC using IFRS, US GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles), or their domestic GAAP with reconciliation to US GAAP. An improvement in earnings quality is documented when ADRs adopt US GAAP or IFRS versus domestic GAAP. However, when the comparison is made between US GAAP and IFRS, no difference in earnings quality is documented. These results indicate that switching to high-quality accounting standards is likely to improve earnings quality. This improvement is maximized when the difference between reporting standards is high and minimized if otherwise. Our conclusion is that the adoption of IFRS in the US is unlikely to change earnings quality of local issuers. Moreover, we drew a distinction between reconciliation with and adoption of high-quality accountings standards and find that while the former can enhance earnings quality, the latter can further improve it.

Egy vállalat fizetőképességének vizsgálata nemzetközi számviteli viszonylatban

It is highly important for every business to be solvent for both short and long term. Solvency is a prerequisite for the operation of a company, especially short term solvency, also known as liquidity. Liquidity plays a prominent role in the life of a given business. For this it is important for a business to strive to avoid liquidity problems. In the present article we examine the short term solvency of an American corporation, which prepares its financial statements according to the US GAAP (The United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). We present the fundamental short term solvency ratios, and the subsequent conclusions. Since for the calculation of the ratios the data of the examined company’s financial statement is needed, which shows differences from the yearly report of a Hungarian company, in the article we will also discuss the differences between the two accounting systems with regard to those items, which have an effect on the liquidity ratios, in particular current assets and short-term liabilities.

Information content of IFRS versus GAAP financial statements

PurposeThis study aims to determine whether financial statement users suffered a significant loss of information when, in November 2007, the SEC dropped the requirement for foreign private issuers using International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS firms”) to reconcile their financial statements to US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).Design/methodology/approachThe study investigates whether analyst forecast errors and forecast dispersion increased for IFRS firms to a greater extent than for US GAAP firms after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) dropped the reconciliation requirement. Using a treatment group comprised of IFRS firms and a matched sample of US GAAP firms, this study uses regression analyses to compare forecast errors and dispersion for the last fiscal year the reconciliation was available and the first fiscal year during which the reconciliation was unavailable to analysts.FindingsThe study finds evidence that forecast errors for IFRS firms exhibited no systematic change after the reconciliation was no longer available for analysts covering those firms. Thus, it does not appear that dropping the reconciliation requirement was associated with a change in forecast accuracy. However, the study does find evidence of increased dispersion in the IFRS firms’ forecasts relative to their US GAAP counterparts after the reconciliation requirement was dropped.Practical implicationsThese findings have implications for evaluating the Securities and Exchange Commission’s 2007 decision to eliminate the reconciliation for IFRS firms. Specifically, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s decision does not appear to have significantly altered analysts’ information environments.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to the understanding of how a group of sophisticated financial statement users adapt to different sets of accounting standards.

The role of local accounting standard setters in institutional complexity

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to locate the role of local standard setters in institutional complexity, where multiple sources of pressure for change and continuity coexist. The existing research does not fully explore this since it tends to illustrate the way in which a particular interpretation concerning certain accounting standards prevails over time (Archel et al., 2011; Murphy and O’Connell, 2013; Pelger, 2016; Young, 2014).Design/methodology/approachIt empirically examines and critiques the Japanese experience through the concepts of institutional complexity and translation that specify the relationship between the name and types of practice of accounting standards in the local context (Czarniawska and Sevón, 1996, 2005; Erlingsdóttfr and Lindberg, 2005; Røvik, 2016; Sahlin and Wedlin, 2008). Data sources are texts produced (between 2001 and 2015) by the local accounting standard setter and relevant organisations that represent firms, the certified public accountants and regulatory agency, respectively.FindingsThe local accounting standard setter in Japan was exposed to competing pressures between change and maintenance, which was translated by the standard setter in Japan. Consequently, the translation led to an “explosion” of local accounting standards (“pure” International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), Japanese Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), modified IFRS and US GAAP).Originality/valueThis paper is the first attempt to systematically examine the role of a local standard setter under institutional complexity. It illustrates how institutional complexity is turned into divergent outcomes against the assumption of previous research that indicates multiple interpretations of particular accounting standards finally merging into a specific one.

Difficulties converging US GAAP and IFRS through joint projects: The case of business combinations

In order to converge US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), the US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) agreed in the 2002 Norwalk Agreement to participate in several joint projects with the intention of developing common standards. This exploratory research study investigates the first major joint project, Business Combinations. In 2005 the FASB and IASB issued joint Exposure Drafts (ED) for comment. Despite the Boards' intentions of creating a single high-quality standard, two separate standards with many differences were ultimately issued. The purpose of this article is to better understand the various issues related to using joint EDs as a means toward the goal of convergence. The results suggest systematic differences in comment letter quality, ED question response and agreement rates depending on CL Board audience, stakeholder interest group, and region. The analysis of the 283 comment letters submitted finds that different stakeholders responded to the FASB and IASB, and that respondents to the joint ED differ from those normally responding to FASB or IASB EDs. Compared to single Board EDs, the number of letters to the FASB dropped substantially while those to the IASB increased. Significant differences are found between different stakeholder interest groups and regions in their levels of support for proposed changes as well as in the quality of the comment letters submitted to the FASB and IASB. Letters written to the FASB are significantly shorter than those to the IASB, and those written to both Boards and by international accounting firms are significantly longer. This is especially noticeable for those key issues where the final standards for the Boards differ. Non-US letter writers much more frequently cite national accounting standards in their opposition to proposals. National accounting standard-setters frequently have different levels of support than writers to the FASB, which are over 90% from the US. The results support concerns that convergence efforts may be hampered by the Boards having their own constituent groups and that these diverse groups engage in the “joint” due process in different ways that will need to be addressed.

Restatements and accounting quality: a comparison between IFRS and US-GAAP

PurposeThis paper aims to examine whether sanctioning adoption of IFRS for US firms would produce accounting information of the same quality as those produced under US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). This is a timely research since the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC; 2014) has asked for further review.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses restatements of financial statements made by a sample of foreign firms listed on US stock exchanges using International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in comparison to a control sample of US firms using US GAAP during the period of 2001to 2010. Statistical analysis of the frequency, sources and magnitude of the restatements and market revaluations to the announcement of the restatements are examined. Cross-country differences are also examined.FindingsThe results indicate that IFRS firms have a lower rate of restatements than US GAAP firms but with no significant differences in terms of sources of restatements and the impact on net income or shareholders’ equity. The market revaluations to restatement announcements show no significant differences between the two accounting regimes. Cross-sectional analyses indicate IFRS firms are on average from countries characterized by weak rule of law, ineffective corruption controls and lower efforts to promote private sector advancement.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample size in the paper is relatively small. To increase validity of the inferences from the Results, this issue should be readdressed with larger sample.Practical implicationsResults are important to accounting practitioners and policymakers.Social implicationsResults are contributing in clarifying the SEC’s concerns of adopting the IFRS by US-based firms; thus, saving the investors the additional efforts and costs in comparing financial statements prepared under different accounting regimes.Originality/valueThis research is the first to use restatements as accounting quality criteria. The results suggest that adoption of IFRS by US-based firms would not produce accounting information that is significantly different in quality from those generated under US GAAP. This result should be of interest to the SEC in clarifying its concerns.

‘Fair Value’ of Core Deposits in the EU version of IFRS: A Critical Review

The paper presents seven impacts of the introduction of core deposits models in credit institutions into International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). First, the equity of the credit institution will be higher for the core deposit premium adjusted for deferred tax. Second, the models make it possible for some financial instruments (e.g., interest rate swaps where the credit institution receives fixed payments and pays floating payments) to be designated as hedging instruments. Third, there is lower comparability of financial statements, as no standard business model of core deposits exists. Fourth, the models can be understood at the next step of relaxing of prudence (conservatism) and neutrality of IFRS. Fifth, there is inconsistency in the core deposit definition. By definition, these deposits should be stable for a long (infinite) period. Then, the present value of core deposits should be zero which is flawed. Sixth, there is inconsistency in the interest rate risk definition. Seventh, according to available information, the core deposits models have not been introduced into accounting in any national generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) such as US GAAP. Thus the fair value of core deposits should be equal to the nominal value of these deposits. The accounting should not reflect the core deposits models. The carve-out in the European version of IFRS should be removed.

IFRS and value relevance: evidence based on Canadian adoption

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether financial information prepared and disclosed under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) has incremental value relevance vs information prepared under generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) in Canada. Design/methodology/approach – The authors employ a difference in differences methodology and estimate value relevance using: first, the adjusted R2 of regressions of stock price on book value and earnings; second, the adjusted R2 of regressions of stock returns on earnings and changes in earnings; and third, a time series incremental association return estimation. The authors use multiple models including a model similar to the Ohlson (1995) model and a modified Balachandran and Mohanram (2011) model to investigate value relevance in the period 2008-2013. Findings – The authors provide empirical evidence, based on unique Canadian environment, that accounting information prepared and disclosed under IFRS exhibits higher price and returns value relevance than accounting information prepared previously under local GAAP. Sensitivity analyses and yearly trends regressions produce collaborating evidence. Originality/value – The study provides early empirical evidence that value relevance increases in mandatory IFRS adoption, based on unique Canadian adoption. The Canadian adoption is unique because Canada: first, is the first G7 non-European country to adopt IFRS; second, had pursued a dual strategy of harmonizing with the US GAAP while supporting IFRS convergence; third, provided information environment that mitigates the problems associated with measuring the effects of IFRS adoption in the European countries where IFRS or its predecessor – international accounting standards – had permeated the reporting environment prior to the mandatory adoption in 2005; and fourth, allowed firms listed on the US exchanges to continue to use or adopt the US GAAP for financial reporting and thus, provided a group of benchmark firms drawn from the same social-political and economic environment as the treatment firms. The study clarifies prior inconsistent results from European samples.

An Investigation into the Potential Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards in the United States: Implications and Implementation

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) have been adopted by most of the G20 countries. Given the broad worldwide acceptance of IFRS and significance of attaining comparability to facilitate free flow of capital, the US standard setter, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) made a commitment to jointly work with the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) to explore the possibilities of convergence of US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) with IFRS. In 2007, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) eliminated the requirement that foreign companies listed on the US stock exchanges reconcile their IFRS‐based financial statements with the US GAAP. In the same year the US SEC issued a concept release to the public requesting comments on a proposal to allow US issuers to prepare financial statements in accordance with IFRS. Following these initiatives by the FASB and SEC, the aim of the present study is to investigate the implications of a potential full adoption of IFRS by the US. The present study details the challenges and benefits of adoption and outlines the steps required for a successful outcome of this process.

Pro forma disclosure practices of firms applying IFRS

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is empirically investigate the pro forma disclosure behavior of US-listed foreign firms applying International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Design/methodology/approach – The annual earnings press releases of US-listed foreign firms on the New York Stock Exchange are analyzed to compare the effect that reporting standard (specifically IFRS) has on pro forma disclosure frequency, disclosure characteristics and benchmarking. Findings – US-listed foreign firms applying IFRS report pro forma disclosures more frequently than firms using the USA’s generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), but less opportunistically. Originality/value – This paper extends Epping and Wilder’s (2011) study and contributes to the pro forma disclosure literature by providing a cross-country analysis of non-GAAP disclosure based on reporting standard (IFRS or US GAAP). Understanding the non-GAAP disclosure of firms applying IFRS is useful to investors and regulators, as more countries adopt IFRS.

Impact of ADR Forms 20-F reconciliation on trading volume

Purpose – This paper aims to investigate the impact of the filing of Form 20-F to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on short-term trading volume and return by those foreign firms which list their securities in the US Stock Exchanges. Design/methodology/approach – The authors collected 402 American depository receipt (ADR) firms from 38 different countries that listed their securities in the US Stock Exchanges over a 10-year period of 2000-2009. A regression model was used to examine such impact, including the post year 2007 SEC elimination of reconciliation. Findings – This paper found significant abnormal trading volumes and abnormal returns one day, two days and three days following the 20-F report for the sample firms whose financial statements were prepared under both home-country accounting principles and US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Firms originally using international financial reporting standards (IFRS) do not present abnormal return and abnormal trading volume. This indicates that US investors view IFRS to be as high-quality as US GAAP. Research limitations/implications – The findings might be limited to this period and might not draw statistical inference for the future period. This evidence offers support for the SEC’s elimination of the reconciliation requirement to US GAAP. Practical implications – This study was carried out with the aim to investigate whether the release of Form 20-F by ADR firms offers any additional information useful to investors incorporating both abnormal return and trading volume, which is thought to be more sensitive. Originality/value – This paper investigates the short-term return and volume reactions caused by the earnings and equity reconciliation from home-country accounting standards or IFRS to US GAAP for foreign cross-listed firms in the USA.

Differences in earnings management between firms using US GAAP and IAS/IFRS

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the relatively rules-based US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and the more principles-based International Accounting Standards/International Financial Reporting Standards (IAS/IFRS) provide different opportunities for earnings management (EM). Such an examination is critical as the world moves toward principles-based standards. Design/methodology/approach – Financial information for the fiscal years 1999-2004 from the annual reports of firms listed under the Prime Standard on the Germany Frankfurt Stock Exchange is analyzed. Data from the German Frankfurt Stock Exchange are used to resolve the difficulty in comparing accounting standards across different markets and countries with different institutional factors and corporate governance issues. The unique feature of dual listing in the German Frankfurt Stock Exchange allows firms listing shares under the Prime Standard to report in accordance with either the US GAAP or the IAS/IFRS before the IFRS adoption by the European Union in 2005. Strong legal enforcement in Germany ensures that reporting under each standard is in close compliance to the standard under comparison. Extending extant IFRS vs US GAAP EM research with discretionary accruals, this research contributes to a more comprehensive understanding by also examining EM through deferred tax expense and EM through research and development investment. Findings – The findings reveal that EM through research and development investment is significantly higher for the IAS/IFRS firms. Similar to prior findings, EM through accruals is not found to be significantly different between US GAAP and IAS/IFRS firms. Originality/value – The findings of this study advance the understanding of differences between US GAAP and IFRS with data from Germany where legal enforcement of standards is strong. In particular, this study reveals that principles-based standards with imprecise rules like IAS/IFRS may encourage structured management due to the expectation of error costs and compliance uncertainty. The results inform regulators considering IAS/IFRS adoption. In addition, this research highlights the importance of considering real EM in US GAAP vs IAS/IFRS studies.

US GAAP Conversion To IFRS: A Case Study Of The Cash Flow Statement

International Reporting Standards (IFRS) has become the required framework for most of the world financial market economies as of January 1, 2011. This includes, in a non-comprehensive listing, the many European Union countries - Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In the United States, US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) is still required. However, plans are presently in place by the SEC to abandon US GAAP and to adhere to IFRS requirements by as early as for the period ending December 31, 2014. As such, it is important to introduce IFRS accounting rules in the college curriculum and make it a major component of accounting classes. This case study takes a US GAAP Prepared Cash Flow Statement and, based on the facts of the case, requires students to prepare an IFRS-based Cash Flow Statement. The need to understand both US GAAP and IFRS rules is required to adequately address this case study, which is most suitable for an Intermediary Accounting, Accounting Theory and a Financial Statement Analysis class, as well as an Investment Finance course, at the graduate level.