Does location matter for disclosure? Evidence from geographic segments

The segment disclosures of multinational companies provide strategic information. We use the location characteristics of geographic segments to identify the reasons for withholding or disclosing segments. We examine segment data from around the adoption of IFRS 8, a reporting standard that requires firms to reveal more disaggregated information. Consistent with a proprietary cost motive for nondisclosure, we find that segments in regions that are deemed better for business tend to be hidden, while higher entry barriers for a segment are positively related to disclosure. These effects appear to be stronger for firms for which proprietary cost motives are more important. Among the previously unrevealed segments, proprietary costs explain the nondisclosure of segment earnings and other relevant financial information for investors.     

Managers’ segment disclosure choices under IFRS 8: EU evidence

We examine the impact of proprietary and agency cost motives on segment disclosure quality and quantity and how the adoption of the principle IFRS 8 affects this impact. By using hand-collected data, our results show that proprietary and agency costs play a relevant role in determining the quality and quantity of segment disclosure. We find that proprietary costs are a particularly relevant reason for providing lower segment disclosure quality post-IFRS 8. Our results also suggest that firms’ segment disclosure choice is dependent on disclosure dimension. These results contribute to the ongoing debate regarding IFRS 8 and have valuable implications for accounting regulators.     

IFRS adoption and analysts’ earnings forecasts: Australian evidence

We study 145 large listed Australian firms to explore the impact of international financial reporting standards (IFRS) adoption on the properties of analysts’ forecasts and the role of firm disclosure about IFRS impact. We find that analyst forecast accuracy improves, and there is no significant change in dispersion in the adoption year, suggesting that analysts coped effectively with transition to IFRS. However, we do not observe the expected relationship between firms’ IFRS impact disclosures in their financial statements issued at the end of the transition year with forecast error and dispersion in the adoption year. The results question the timeliness and usefulness of financial statement disclosure, even in a setting where disclosure was mandated by accounting standards (AASB 1047 and AASB 1) and firms had strong incentives to provide information to analysts.     

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.     

An analysis of the impact of adopting IFRS 8 on the segment disclosures of European blue chip companies

Amidst the IASB's post-implementation review of IFRS 8, we examine how the standard's adoption changed the reporting of segments by European blue chips (i.e. companies comprising the top tier index of 14 European stock exchanges). We focus on anticipated benefits articulated in the IASB's Basis for Conclusions and concerns expressed by IFRS 8 opponents.In addition to convergence with U.S. GAAP, IFRS 8 results in the reporting of significantly more operating segments on average. However, most companies report the same number or fewer segments. Refuting claims regarding the loss of geographic data at the entity-wide level, we identify an improvement in the fineness of disclosures and a significant increase in the disclosure of geographic groupings. We do not identify an improvement in consistency of segment disclosures with other sections of the annual report, which is due to the consistency already achieved under IAS 14R.IFRS 8 results in a significant decline in the number of reportable segment information items (notably liabilities) and a significant decline in the reporting of capital expenditures at the entity-wide level. Furthermore, adoption of the standard produces a lack of comparability in segment profitability measures and extensive reporting of non-IFRS measures. However, almost all companies report a measure of segment profitability tied to a number on the consolidated income statement or reconciled to the income statement.     

Are analyst stock recommendation revisions more informative in the post‐IFRS period?

This paper investigates whether the mandatory IFRS adoption has affected the informativeness of analyst recommendation revisions in Europe. Although prior studies document that IFRS adoption improved analyst forecast attributes, the impact of IFRS cannot be completely assessed without examining how the market reacts to information‐rich events in an environment with enhanced disclosure. To examine this question we utilize a difference‐in‐differences design using as main control sample firms that had voluntarily adopted IFRS before the EU's mandated switch. Overall, our evidence suggests that after the mandatory adoption of IFRS, both analyst upgrades and downgrades are more informative. These results hold after controlling for a number of variables that capture analyst, firm and information environment characteristics and are robust to a number of sensitivity analyses including the use of a US control sample. Finally, we examine whether our results are sensitive to the level of accounting enforcement. We find that analyst downgrades are more informative in the post‐IFRS period for firms in both high and low enforcement environments. Analyst upgrades, however, are more informative only if they are issued for firms in high enforcement countries.     

Social disclosure, financial disclosure and the cost of equity capital

We test the relation between financial and social disclosure and the cost of equity capital for a sample of Canadian firms with year-ends in 1990, 1991 and 1992. We find that, consistent with prior research, the quantity and quality of financial disclosure is negatively related to the cost of equity capital for firms with low analyst following. Contrary to expectations, there is a significant positive relation between social disclosures and the cost of equity capital. This positive relationship is mitigated among firms with better financial performance. We consider some biases in social disclosures that may explain this result. We also note that social disclosures may benefit the firm through its effect on organizational stakeholders other than equity investors.     

The effect of more rules‐based guidance on expense disclosure under International Financial Reporting Standards

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are often described as principles‐based; however, we show that IFRS and Australian pre‐IFRS expense‐related standards are more rules‐based than pre‐IFRS expense disclosure in New Zealand. Thus, we examine expense disclosure in New Zealand and Australia around IFRS adoption to provide evidence on the effect of more or less rules‐based standards on voluntary disclosure. First, we add to the rules versus principles‐based standards debate by finding higher voluntary expense disclosure under more rules‐based standards (e.g. IFRS). This contrasts with expectations, as we would expect fewer voluntary disclosures under more rules‐based standards as there would be fewer possible voluntary disclosures. Second, we document that New Zealand firms have significantly less voluntary expense disclosure than size‐ and industry‐matched Australian firms in both the pre‐ and post‐IFRS period. However, all measures of expense disclosure significantly improved post‐IFRS for New Zealand, whilst little change occurred for Australian firms. Thus, there is greater financial statement comparability across these countries post‐IFRS, but not full harmonization. Third, we show that the relationship between most firm characteristics and expense disclosure is weaker post‐IFRS. In addition, cross‐listed firms and loss‐making firms have a higher level of expense disclosure, as contrasted with firms in the investment and property industry which have a lower percentage of unspecified expenses but also report fewer voluntary expenses.     

Continuous disclosure compliance: does corporate governance matter?

Our study investigates the quality of firms’ continuous disclosure compliance during mandatory continuous disclosure reform, and whether the compliance quality is impacted by corporate governance, using the New Zealand market as the setting. We use a novel coding of different categories of disclosures (non‐routine, non‐procedural and internal), which represents the extent of proprietary insider information inherent in disclosures, to evaluate firms’ compliance quality. Our findings provide evidence that firms’ compliance quality improved after the reform, and this improvement is inconsistently impacted by corporate governance. Our findings provide important implications for regulators in their quest for a superior disclosure regime.     

What Drives Quality of Firm Risk Disclosure? : The Impact of a National Disclosure Standard and Reporting Incentives under IFRS

This paper examines the impact of a detailed national disclosure standard on the quality of firms' overall risk reviews under IFRS. We use data from a sample of listed Finnish firms around the introduction of the standard and find that national regulatory bodies have been able to raise the quality of risk disclosure on several dimensions even under IFRS. We find increases in the quantity of risk disclosure with more extensive and more comprehensive information. We do not, however, find a corresponding increase in quantitative disclosures and therefore there is some question regarding the influence of the standard on the substance of the risk information provided. In addition to the coercive effect of the standard, several important reporting incentives, such as firm size, profitability, and foreign listing status are documented. We also find some evidence that the impact of the standard on quality is more pronounced among less profitable firms. Additional findings are that larger firms and firms reporting under the requirements of the SEC disclose more quantitative risk information, and that the quality improvements are permanent in the subsequent years. The findings have implications for standard-setters evaluating different strategies with the aim to increase the quality of the narratives in annual reports.     

Analyst Coverage,Market Liquidity and Disclosure Quality: A Study of Fair-value Disclosures by European Real Estate Companies Under IAS 40 and IFRS 13

Disclosures in notes have been criticized by practitioners for being unwieldy and contributing little to the quality of the financial information. This study presents evidence on the association between disclosure quality, analyst following and liquidity in the real estate sector. More specifically, we study the disclosure of the methods and significant assumptions applied in determining fair values of investment properties under IAS 40 and IFRS 13. We find that disclosure quality is significantly higher under IFRS 13. Furthermore, we show that the quality is associated with analyst following and bid-ask spreads. However, the improved disclosures following the adoption of IFRS 13 are not associated with any significant positive economic consequences. This result indicates that the revised disclosure requirements in IFRS 13 did not solve any market imperfections.     

Disclosure of GAAP line items in earnings announcements

We provide new evidence on the disclosure in earnings announcements of financial statement line items prepared under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). First, we investigate the circumstances that might provide disincentives generally for GAAP line item disclosures. We find that managers who regularly intervene in the earnings reporting process limit disclosures at the aggregate level and in each of the financial statements so as to more effectively guide investor attention to summary financial information. Specifically, this disclosure behavior obtains when managers habitually cater to market expectations, engage in income smoothing, or use discretionary accruals to improve earnings informativeness. Second, we predict and find that the specific GAAP line items that firms choose to disclose are determined by the differential informational demands of their economic environment, consistent with incentives to facilitate investor valuation. However, these valuation-related disclosure incentives are muted when managers habitually intervene in the earnings reporting process.     

The innovation consequences of mandatory patent disclosures

We investigate the effect of patent disclosures on corporate innovation. Using the American Inventor's Protection Act (AIPA) as a shock that increased patent disclosures, we find an increase in innovation for firms whose rivals reveal more information after the AIPA and a decrease in innovation for firms whose own disclosures are divulged to competitors as a result of the law. These findings suggest patent disclosures generate both spillover benefits and proprietary costs. Our findings provide justification for patent disclosure requirements by demonstrating positive externalities: rivals' disclosures facilitate a firm's innovation. However, we also highlight that mandatory patent disclosures can impose proprietary costs on firms. These results broadly contribute to our understanding of the real effects of disclosure, such that forcing firms to share proprietary information can be privately costly but beneficial to other firms.     

Firm-specific determinants of continuous corporate disclosures

Continuous disclosure is the immediate release of material information by issuers within a regulatory and information dissemination framework. Under such a regime, the market is informed at all times and no investor is disadvantaged by lack of access to information. We attempt to identify the firm-specific determinants of these disclosures.We examine the frequency and regularity of online announcements on the stock exchange websites of companies included in the Morgan Stanley Capital Index for small-cap firms in eight developed markets in Asia and Europe. We find that firms with higher information asymmetry have a higher frequency and regularity of continuous online reporting. Our results also show that the frequency and regularity of online disclosure is positively associated with agency costs, earnings, and analyst following and is inversely related to the length of the product cycle of a firm. Our results are more robust for discretionary disclosures. We also find variations in the frequency of disclosures by countries, some of which are explainable by the online disclosure settings of the countries.     

Credit ratings and disclosure channels

We study the relation between analysts’ ratings of firms’ credit worthiness and ratings of the quality of firms’ (1) annual report disclosures, (2) quarterly and other disclosures, and (3) manager-analyst communications. We find that credit ratings are better for firms with higher rated annual report disclosures. We also find that marked increases in analyst ratings of annual report quality are accompanied by improvements in credit ratings. We find no relation between credit ratings and analysts’ ratings of either quarterly report disclosures or management-analyst communications. Overall, the results suggest that a commitment to better annual report disclosure is related to a lower cost of credit capital.     

Firm Value and the Quality of Sustainability Reporting in Australia

This paper investigates the relationship between firm value and the quality of Australian listed corporations’ sustainability reporting. We examine whether firms that make higher‐quality sustainability disclosures exhibit systematically higher equity prices, through either (or both) cost of capital or expected future performance effects. Using proprietary data obtained from a specialist responsible investment research firm, we document a significant negative association between quality sustainability reporting and the cost of equity capital for ASX 200 firms from 2003–2005, and a significant positive association between expected future performance and the quality of sustainability reporting. We also test for industry‐specific associations and find that our main results are driven heavily by the reporting behaviour of, and market response to, firms in environmentally sensitive industries.     

Risk disclosures on the second tier markets of the London Stock Exchange

The identification, management and disclosure of risks have been the subject of recent legislation, directives and reporting standards issued across a number of international jurisdictions. To inform the disclosure debate, this paper provides a detailed analysis of the risk warning disclosures of initial public offering (IPO) companies and the factors that drive such disclosures. We find that risk disclosures of IPO companies contain a greater proportion of forward‐looking information but a lower proportion of information on internal controls and risk management than the disclosures of listed companies. We find evidence that such disclosure has increased across time but that larger directors’ shareholdings are associated with a reduction in risk disclosure.     

Voluntary disclosure practices by foreign firms cross-listed in the United States

This is one of the first large-scale studies to examine the voluntary disclosure practices of foreign firms cross-listed in the United States. We proxy for voluntary disclosure using three attributes of firms’ management earnings guidance: (1) the likelihood of issuance; (2) the frequency of earnings guidance; and (3) a guidance quality measure. After first establishing that market participants view these firms’ disclosures as credible and economically important (i.e., the disclosures are negatively related to analyst forecast errors and the implied cost of equity capital), we compare cross-listed firms’ disclosure practices with comparable US firms and explore variations in disclosure practices among cross-listed firms. We find that cross-listed firms issue less frequent and lower quality management earnings guidance than comparable US firms. We further show that the gap between US and cross-listed firms widened after passage of Regulation FD, a regulation which induced greater public disclosure of firm-specific information. Focusing on the sample of cross-listing firms, we show that firms from common-law countries disclose more than firms from code-law countries. Finally, our results indicate that cross-listed firms that do not list on an organized US exchange provide more frequent and higher quality disclosure than those that do list on organized exchanges.