Have ‘European’ and US GAAP measures of income and equity converged under IFRS? Evidence from European companies listed in the US

The EU's adoption of IFRS, combined with the SEC's removal of the US GAAP reconciliation requirement for non‐US registrants reporting under IFRS, signifies a major shift towards the acceptance of global standards. Based on 20‐F reconciliations provided by the population of US listed European companies filing IFRS‐based statements with the SEC in 2005, we examine whether ‘European’ and US GAAP measures of income and equity converged under IFRS. We find that during the period immediately preceding IFRS, for our sample companies, European and US GAAP measures are generally comparable in respect of income and equity. However, as an exception to the latter, we find that UK GAAP yielded significantly lower measures of equity than US GAAP For companies adopting IFRS for the first time in 2005, we find a significant gap between IFRS and US GAAP measures of income, thereby, signifying de facto divergence from US GAAP in regard to income determination. Furthermore, we find that, following IFRS adoption, significant differences with US GAAP equity persisted for companies that previously reported using UK GAAP. Our findings, thus, support critics’ claims that standard‐setters, most notably the IASB and FASB, have more work to do to achieve a sufficient degree of convergence between IFRS and US GAAP that will convince the SEC to require US companies to use IFRS.     

Has Adoption of IFRS Increased Non–North American Institutional Investment in the Canadian Stock Markets?

We investigate whether non–North American (non‐NA) institutional investment in firms listed on the Canadian stock markets increased between the pre‐ and post‐IFRS adoption periods relative to such investment in firms listed on the U.S. stock markets. Prior to IFRS adoption, Canada had high‐quality financial reporting standards that were similar to the U.S. standards. As consequences of IFRS adoption, Canadian financial statements became more comparable with European and other IFRS country financial statements and less comparable with neighboring U.S. financial statements. Thus, a question of interest is whether the enhanced comparability with non‐NA companies was beneficial in terms of attracting non‐NA investment to Canadian companies versus U.S. companies. We find that there was no significant change in non‐NA institutional investment in Canadian firms relative to U.S. firms for the very largest (fifth quintile) and for smaller (first, second, and third quintiles) Canadian companies. However, intermediate‐sized Canadian companies in the fourth size quintile lost non‐NA institutional investment relative to their U.S. peer companies, suggesting that non‐NA investors cared more about comparability with U.S. peer companies than non‐NA peer companies for companies in this size quintile.     

Transitioning to IFRS in Japan: Corporate Perceptions of Costs and Benefits

This paper examines the ongoing transition to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Japan with a particular focus on recent institutional developments and corporate concerns. While Japan has committed to the convergence of Japanese generally accepted accounting principles (J‐GAAP) with IFRS it has not as yet formally adopted IFRS. This paper reports on Japanese corporate perceptions of the likely costs and benefits of adopting and implementing IFRS using survey data collected from senior financial executives of 292 Japanese listed companies in 2013–14. Our findings reveal that Japanese companies identify a number of major areas of general concern with the adoption and implementation of IFRS. Most importantly, uncertainty regarding the interpretation of standards followed by staff training, IT systems, technical knowledge and differences between J‐GAAP and IFRS were reported as major concerns. Our survey also highlights that revenue recognition, depreciation, consolidated financial statements, financial statement presentation and the retrospective application of IFRS were viewed as key IFRS accounting issues. While the large majority of companies expected a moderate degree of benefits to arise from IFRS, substantial benefits were perceived more likely to apply to large and overseas listed companies mainly arising from improvements in the international comparability of financial statements.     

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.     

Auditors' Affirmations of Compliance with IFRS around the World: An Exploratory Study*

It is widely believed that international financial reporting standards (IFRS) have been adopted in many countries, at least for the consolidated reporting of listed companies. However, in nearly all cases, what the rules require is some national or supranational version of IFRS. This might create problems for investor confidence and comparability. We examine what companies and auditors report concerning compliance with IFRS, focusing on the first full year of IFRS reporting by companies in the stock market indices of four major European countries and Australia. We find that, even when companies were complying with IFRS, they were generally not saying so, which seems to miss part of the point of the 35‐year project on international harmonization. In a small number of cases, auditors provided dual reports: on full IFRS in addition to the mandated reference to national GAAP where the latter corresponds with full IFRS. These cases were found only in Germany and the United Kingdom, and mainly related to companies that filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as foreign private issuers. We propose explanations for the general lack of dual reports and for the exceptions. We call for widespread adoption of dual reporting where a plain report on IFRS is not yet possible.     

The effect of IFRS for SMEs on the financial reporting environment of private firms: an exploratory interview study

I investigate how the International Financial Reporting Standard for Small and Medium-sized Entities (IFRS for SMEs) contributes to the development of private firm financial reporting. I interview a sample of leading accounting experts from 24 jurisdictions around the globe to understand the role of private firm financial reporting and financial transparency in their jurisdiction as well as the importance of IFRS for SMEs. I find significant variation across jurisdictions in my sample and document that IFRS for SMEs predominantly influenced private firm financial reporting and transparency by serving as a blueprint for national regulatory reforms. In some jurisdictions, IFRS for SMEs has also been adopted as an optional reporting framework. Direct firm-level adoption of IFRS for SMEs has been low in these jurisdictions with the exception of South Africa where it seems to be used relatively widely. Based on my response data, I suggest some potential rationales for my findings and discuss potential reasons for the observed cross-jurisdiction variation in private firm financial transparency and IFRS for SMEs adoption.     

An Assessment of the Impact of IFRS Adoption on Public Sector Audit Fees and Audit Effort – Some Evidence of the Transition Costs on Changes in Reporting Regimes

While many countries have adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) for private sector enterprises, New Zealand (NZ), Australia and the United Kingdom adopted IFRS for all sectors, including the public sector. This approach is consistent with the concept of sector‐neutral accounting standards that gained wide acceptance in NZ and Australia in the early 1990s. Although a number of studies have assessed the impact of IFRS adoption in the private sector, and the public sector has provided some evidence as to the effects of IFRS adoption on financial statements, the costs of adopting IFRS have not been examined. One measure of cost is the change in audit fees in an IFRS reporting environment. The authors examine the impact of IFRS adoption in the NZ public sector on audit fees and audit effort. They obtained data regarding audit fees and audit effort in the NZ public sector and compared the pre‐adoption year with the first year of adoption for all segments. Their results indicate a substantial increase in audit fees and audit effort in the first year of IFRS adoption for all segments, with some variation across the segments. Two sectors, local authorities and energy companies, have had significant increases in audit fees and audit effort. These findings provide some empirical evidence regarding the cost of transition to IFRS and are of interest to researchers and regulators in countries that are currently considering transitioning to IFRS or IFRS‐based International Public Sector Accounting Standards standards in reporting for the public sector.     

Economic Benefits of Adopting IFRS or US‐GAAP – Have the Expected Cost of Equity Capital Really Decreased?

Abstract:   The question of whether the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) results in measurable economic benefits is of special interest, particularly in light of the European Union's adoption of IFRS for listed companies. In this paper, I investigate the common conjecture that internationally recognised financial reporting standards (IAS/IFRS or US‐GAAP) reduce the cost of capital for adopting firms. Building on Leuz and Verrecchia (2000) , I use a set of German firms that have adopted such standards and investigate the potential economic benefits of this reporting strategy by analysing their cost of equity capital through the use and customisation of available implied estimation methods. Evidence from the 1993–2002 period fails to document lower expected cost of equity capital for firms applying IAS/IFRS or US‐GAAP. During the transition period I analyse, the expected cost of equity capital in fact appear to have rather increased under non‐local accounting standards.     

Adopting International Financial Reporting Standards for Small and Medium‐sized Enterprises

Diverse complications and controversial issues in the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) for Small and Medium‐sized Enterprises (SMEs) have been reported by many jurisdictions, prompting them not to adopt this set of standards. Conversely many jurisdictions have adopted or are in the process of adopting IFRS for SMEs. This study considers the impetus for successfully achieving accounting convergence with IFRS for SMEs in those jurisdictions. The possible transition issues that may arise when countries adopt IFRS for SMEs are also highlighted. Furthermore, to provide pioneering evidence on the problems accountants encounter when applying IFRS for SMEs, we conduct a survey on accounting practitioners in Fiji – an early adopter of this set of standards. Both the insights provided on the process of embracing IFRS for SMEs in Fiji and the opinions elicited from accountants highlight new dimensions to the inherent problems in IFRS for SMEs. Scant attention has been given to this issue so far; hence the empirical evidence provided by our study informs not only the global convergence of SME accounting but also the quality of the current suite of IFRS for SMEs.     

Confirmation bias in accounting judgments: the case for International Financial Reporting Standards for small and medium-sized enterprises

We conduct an experiment that investigates confirmation bias in the reporting judgments of accountants when applying International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The results indicate that accountants’ judgments are biased towards the recognition and measurement principles of full IFRS when applying IFRS for SMEs. The results also suggest that confirmation bias in judgments can be mitigated by increasing accountants’ awareness of justification requirements and by using appropriate decision aids. These results are likely to be of interest to the 70-plus countries that have adopted the SME standard and countries that continue to contemplate its adoption.     

Segment Reporting Practices in Australia: Has IFRS 8 Made a Difference?

This study examines changes in segment reporting in Australia following the adoption of the international accounting standard, IFRS 8 Operating Segments. We analyse segment disclosures of the top 200 companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange in their pre‐ and post‐adoption of AASB 8, the equivalent Australian standard to IFRS 8. Our findings indicate that the number of reportable segments and the extent of disclosure have increased post‐adoption of AASB 8. Contrary to expectations, however, there is very little change in the identification of reportable segments. Companies, in general, have managed to retain their segment reporting formats and disclosures from the pre‐AASB 8 period.     

Countries’ adoption of the International Financial Reporting Standard for Small and Medium-sized Entities (IFRS for SMEs) – early empirical evidence

The International Financial Reporting Standard for Small and Medium-sized Entities (IFRS for SMEs) is increasingly being adopted in a number of jurisdictions. Despite the economic importance of non-publicly accountable entities, little is known about what factors influence countries' decisions to adopt IFRS for SMEs. In a unique sample of 128 countries, we find that countries that are not capable of developing their own local generally accepted accounting principles are more likely to adopt IFRS for SMEs. We also provide evidence that in jurisdictions where full IFRS have been applied to private firms, the likelihood of adoption of IFRS for SMEs increases, suggesting that jurisdictions reduce the financial reporting burden on SMEs. Moreover, in line with prior literature, there is evidence that countries with a relatively low quality of governance institutions are more likely to adopt this new set of accounting standards. The results also hold under alternative measures and different estimation approaches. Overall, our results are helpful in understanding the worldwide diffusion of IFRS for SMEs. Standard setters and regulators might consider our study in the future development of accounting harmonisation of non-publicly accountable entities.     

Implementing IFRS from the perspective of EU publicly traded companies

This study examines implementation of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by European Union (EU) companies. All listed EU companies are required to prepare their consolidated financial statements in accordance with IFRS for years beginning on or after January 1, 2005 (Regulation (EC) 1606/2002). The paper provides insight into the IFRS adoption process based on a questionnaire sent to EU-listed companies in 2004. The 112 responses received indicate: (1) a majority of respondents have adopted IFRS for more than just consolidation purposes; (2) the process is costly, complex, and burdensome; (3) companies do not expect to lower their cost of capital by implementing IFRS; (4) the more comprehensive the approach to conversion, the more respondents tend to agree with the benefits and costs of the transition; (5) companies expect increased volatility in financial results; (6) the complexity of IFRS as well as the lack of implementation guidance and uniform interpretation are key challenges in convergence; and (7) a majority of respondents would not adopt IFRS if not required by the EU Regulation. The results of our questionnaire were confirmed by several personal interviews with finance and accounting executives of EU publicly traded companies.     

The Impact of IFRS Adoption on Foreign Direct Investments: Insights for Emerging Countries

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption research supports the arguments of an increase in the credibility of corporate financial information. We investigate the association between IFRS adoption and foreign direct investments (FDI) inflows. The aim is to analyse several characteristics of the adoption process specific to European emerging countries. Our results indicate that the countries adopting IFRS are more likely to benefit from a higher increase in FDI inflows than the non-adopters. Additional tests reveal that the impact is driven by the adoption level related both to listed and unlisted companies. IFRS adoption by unlisted companies has a lower impact on FDI inflows, as compared to IFRS adoption by listed companies. Furthermore, difference-in-difference analysis illustrates a higher increase of FDI inflows after adopting IFRS in the case of non-European Union (EU) countries as compared to EU countries.     

The Role and Current Status of IFRS in the Completion of National Accounting Rules – Evidence from the UK

Abstract

Drawing on secondary data, we examine the transposition of the Accounting Directive 2013 into UK GAAP with a specific focus on references to IFRS. The process involved consultation and regulatory impact assessment on the options in the Accounting Directive and proposed changes to accounting standards for non-publicly accountable entities. This led to an IFRS-based approach from 2016 with three tiers: EU-adopted IFRS for group listed companies and other publicly accountable entities, an adaptation of IFRS for SMEs for non-publicly accountable entities, and a simplified version for micro-entities incorporating the requirements of the Accounting Directive. This outcome is not surprising since the UK was one of the founding members of the original International Accounting Standards Committee and a strong proponent of little GAAP. Indeed, the UK’s former Financial Reporting Standard for Smaller Entities provided a model for the IFRS for SMEs. In the past, there were few references to IFRS by the UK’s enforcement and interpretation bodies. Today, guidance is taken from IFRS Interpretations Committee. We contribute to the literature by describing the main processes involved in implementing the Accounting Directive and the move to an IFRS-based approach in UK GAAP. Our analysis should be of interest to researchers and policymakers alike.     

IFRS fair value measurement and accounting policy choice in the United Kingdom and Australia

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.     

Auditor Quality,IFRS Adoption,and Stock Price Crash Risk: Korean Evidence

This paper investigates the relationship among auditor quality, International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) adoption and stock price crash risk. Using 657 unique listed companies spanning 2002–2014 in Korea, this study finds that stock price crash risk decreases, especially for firms using Big 4 auditors, after IFRS adoption in Korea. Stock price crash risk decreases for a firm included in Big 4 auditors, while it does not increase for a firm excluded from Big 4 auditors after IFRS adoption. Finally, this study finds that Big 4 auditor decreases stock price crash risk only when the firm size is above-median.     

The impact of IFRS on accounting quality: Evidence from Greece

This paper examines the impact of IFRS adoption on the quality of accounting information within the Greek accounting setting. Using a sample of 101 firms listed in the Athens Stock Exchange (ASE) for a period of eight years (2001–2008) we find convincing evidence that the implementation of IFRS contributed to less earnings management, more timely loss recognition and greater value relevance of accounting figures, compared to the local accounting standards. Also, our findings document that audit quality further complements the beneficial impact of IFRS since those companies that are audited by Big-5 audit firms exhibit higher levels of accounting quality. Our findings are robust in regard to different model specifications and after controlling for firm-specific effects like size, risk, profitability and growth opportunities.     

The impact of national GAAP and accounting traditions on IFRS policy selection: Evidence from Germany and the UK

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.     

Firm Size and National Profiles of IFRS Policy Choice

Previous research on the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) policy choices of large listed companies found a very strong association between policy choice and country. Nationally based pre‐IFRS practices largely explain IFRS policy choices. Nevertheless, some of the policy choices appear to be influenced from abroad, perhaps chosen in order to increase comparability. It has been suggested that smaller companies might be less influenced from abroad, and therefore might display even clearer national profiles of IFRS practice. This paper examines the accounting policy choices made within IFRS financial statements by small listed companies in five major countries. We find highly significant differences between the policies of small and large companies. We also find that small companies make more homogeneous choices, within a country, than large companies do. As a result, the previously published national profiles of the IFRS practices of large companies are misleading in the context of smaller ones.