Do Firms Manage Fair Value Estimates? An Examination of SFAS 142 Goodwill Impairments

Abstract:  I find that goodwill write-offs under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142 (SFAS 142) are associated with future expected cash flows as mandated by the standard. However, there are indications that goodwill write-offs lag behind the economic impairment of goodwill. Additional analysis reveals that the association between goodwill write-offs and future cash flows is insignificant for firms with contemporaneous restructuring. I hypothesize that this finding is due to agency-based motives. Finally, I examine a sample of non-impairment firms in which there are indications that goodwill is impaired. I fail to find convincing evidence that these firms are opportunistically avoiding impairments.     

Evidence on the use of unverifiable estimates in required goodwill impairment

SFAS 142 requires managers to estimate the current fair value of goodwill to determine goodwill write-offs. In promulgating the standard, the FASB predicted that managers will, on average, use the fair-value estimates to convey private information on future cash flows. The current fair value of goodwill is unverifiable because it depends in part on management??s future actions (including managers?? conceptualization and implementation of firm strategy). Agency theory predicts managers will, on average, use the unverifiable discretion in SFAS 142 consistent with private incentives. We test these hypotheses in a sample of firms with market indications of goodwill impairment. Our evidence, while consistent with some agency-theory based predictions, does not confirm the private information hypothesis.     

Using Real Activities to Avoid Goodwill Impairment Losses: Evidence and Effect on Future Performance

We examine whether managers postpone the recognition of goodwill impairment by manipulating cash flows and the consequences of such a strategy on future performance. According to SFAS 142, an impairment loss must be recognized if the reporting unit's total fair value to which goodwill has been allocated is less than its book value. A growing body of empirical evidence shows that managers delay the recognition of goodwill impairment in accounting books. However, past literature is silent on how managers convince various gatekeepers (e.g., auditors, financial analysts) that recognizing an impairment loss is unnecessary although it seems economically justified. SFAS 142 requires managers to forecast future cash flows to justify the decision to recognize, or not, an impairment loss. Therefore, we predict that managers manipulate upward current cash flows to support their choice to avoid reporting an impairment loss. We also test whether or not this real earnings management is detrimental to future performance. Based on a sample of US firms over the period 2003–2011, we document that firms suspected of postponing goodwill impairment losses exhibit significantly positive discretionary cash flows compared to various control groups. We also find that this real activities manipulation is detrimental to future performance.     

Timeliness of impairment recognition: Evidence from the initial adoption of SFAS 142

This research investigates the timeliness of impairment recognition from the initial adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards no. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (SFAS 142). Using a sample of firms reporting goodwill at yearend 2001, we examine the lag between incorporation in returns and recognition in earnings of 2002 goodwill impairments to provide market-based evidence on the timeliness of goodwill impairments upon the adoption of the new rule. First, our results indicate that the market anticipated the initial adoption write-offs. Second, while the concurrent association between stock returns and newly incurred impairment losses indicates timely recognition of impairments after the new standard, the market also anticipated the new impairment losses subsequent to initial adoption. This indicates that timeliness can be improved further after the adoption of SFAS 142.     

The mixed attribute model in SFAS 133 cash flow hedge accounting: implications for market pricing

In this study, we examine the pricing of cash flow hedge adjustments reported in other comprehensive income (OCICF), under the mixed attribute model in SFAS 133 Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities. Our OCICF pricing investigation integrates empirical research on the derivatives use that gives rise to such mark-to-market adjustments with the accounting information pricing literature. Based on this integration, we generalize mispricing theory for the SFAS 133 mixed attribute model and predict both the direction and magnitude of OCICF pricing. Screening on U.S. multinationals with ex ante exposure to currency risk, we provide evidence of OCICF mispricing in the expected direction, consistent with the notion that SFAS 133 cash flow hedge accounting results in a mixed attribute problem (Gigler et al. in J Account Res 45:257–287, 2007). Moreover, we find that both OCICF gains and losses are inversely related to future cash flows and of the expected magnitude, consistent with our predictions based on valuation theory (for example, Ohlson in Rev Account Stud 4:145–162, 1999). Our results support the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s concern that the SFAS 133 mixed attribute model does not provide the information necessary for investors to understand the net economic effects of derivatives use (FASB in Accounting for financial instruments and revisions to the accounting for derivative instruments and hedging activities. FASB, Norwalk, 2010).     

The objectives of financial statements: An empirical study of the use of cash flow and earnings by security analysts

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has tentatively accepted that cash flows to the enterprise are the major focus of financial statements. This article highlights the importance with which security analysts view earnings information and cash flow information in compiling their professional reports.     

The relative and incremental value relevance of goodwill before and after SFAS No. 142

We explore the value relevance of goodwill against two benchmarks: other accounting information and long-lived tangible assets. Prior research suggests that fair value estimates for goodwill must be inferred from other available information because of the nature of goodwill, including its intangibility. Such inferences are highly discretionary and may limit the usefulness of reported goodwill estimates. Because Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 142 relies exclusively on fair value estimates to subsequently measure goodwill, reported values considering management’s increased discretion may be less reliable and less value relevant when presented in conjunction with other accounting information. However, the subsequent accounting measurement for goodwill is not dissimilar from the subsequent measurement for long-lived tangible assets, which are also subject to impairment. In general, impairment measurement is subjective; management may have greater insight, even in the presence of management incentives and other accounting information, that may help confirm or disconfirm investors’ own goodwill estimates. Using other accounting information and long-lived tangible assets as benchmarks for the value relevance of goodwill, we find that reported goodwill provides greater value relevance relative to other accounting information after SFAS 142 and that the difference between the value relevance of goodwill and other long-lived tangible assets is also significantly greater following SFAS 142.     

The impact of GAAP guidance on asset retirement obligations

In this study, we assess issues faced by accountants in implementing Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations (AROs) and Financial Interpretation Number (FIN) 47, which was issued to clarify accounting for conditional AROs. The assessments were made by accountants of companies belonging to the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) since the EEI originally initiated the Financial Accounting Standards Boards’ (FASB’s) ARO agenda item. The findings suggest that SFAS 143 and FIN 47 have provided accountants with increased clarity for ARO identification and have resulted in more meaningful recognition. In addition, more liabilities are reported even though it can be argued that ceteris paribus management will choose the method that minimizes the amount of the liability. Overall, the findings suggest that the FASB’s guidance on asset retirement obligations improved the reporting model and their implementation guidance improved companies’ application of the rules.     

Goodwill impairments and chief executive officer tenure

The purpose of this paper is to examine the tenure of the chief executive officers of publicly held companies and their corresponding goodwill impairment decisions. An opportunity for managers to manage earnings exists via the Financial Accounting Standards Board's (FASB) goodwill accounting rules. It is hypothesized that CEOs will recognize this impairment in the early years of their tenure because blame can be placed on prior management's acquisition decisions, expensing goodwill early will make future earnings look better, or an objective evaluation of the reporting unit increases impairments.     

Economic consequences of SFAS 142 goodwill write‐offs

This paper examines the economic consequences of goodwill write‐offs under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142 (SFAS 142). Although write‐off firms have performed poorly, it is evident that deteriorating economic performance explains only a small proportion of write‐offs. After controlling for endogeneity of write‐off choice, I fail to find evidence that investors and analysts fixate on SFAS 142 goodwill write‐offs. I also provide evidence that write‐off firms pay higher audit fees, suggesting that auditors charge higher fees in response to extra audit effort. These results are consistent with the principles of market efficiency, analyst‐forecast rationality and efficient audit pricing.     

The implications of unverifiable fair-value accounting: Evidence from the political economy of goodwill accounting

I study the evolution of SFAS 142, which uses unverifiable fair-value estimates to account for acquired goodwill. I find evidence consistent with the FASB issuing SFAS 142 in response to political pressure over its proposal to abolish pooling accounting. The result is interesting given this proposal was due in part to SEC concerns over pooling misuse. I also find evidence consistent with lobbying support for SFAS 142 increasing in firms’ discretion under the standard. Agency theory predicts such unverifiable discretion can be used opportunistically.     

The Relation Between SFAS No. 95 Cash Flows From Operations and Credit Risk

This study examines the relevance of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 95 operating cash flow disclosures for assessing a primary component of firm risk, namely credit risk. We find that SFAS No. 95 operating cash flows is an important determinant of credit risk, measured by debt ratings, incremental to other profitability and risk–related information. We also find that operating cash flows have a stronger incremental relation to credit risk for firms with a larger proportion of long–term debt and larger firms with lower operating uncertainty. Interestingly, cash flows appear to have less incremental importance for firms in high tech and regulated industries.     

The Relationship between Fair Value,Market Value,and Efficient Markets*

This paper proposes that an assumption of reasonable market efficiency is at the essence of the relevance of fair value for financial reporting purposes. The paper's examination of this proposal begins with a review of recent academic literature on market efficiency, and on evidence of inefficiencies and their implications for the ability of the efficient market hypothesis to explain what market prices represent. It concludes that there is wide acceptance in this literature that a reasonable level of efficiency can generally be presumed to exist in active, well‐regulated capital markets. The paper examines the essential attributes of a reasonably efficient market for fair value measurement purposes, and some basic implications for its reliable estimation. This is done in comparison with the provisions of the fair value measurement standard of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) (Statement of Financial Accounting Standards [SFAS] No. 157). It is concluded that the concept of reasonable market efficiency could provide a sound conceptual framework for defining fair value that is founded in real, observable market prices. It is demonstrated that, in contrast, SFAS No. 157 does not provide a clear, unequivocal concept of fair value, and that it permits estimates of fair value that have no demonstrable basis in real, observable market prices. Nevertheless, it appears that arguments typically put forward by the International Accounting Standards Board and the FASB for the relevance of fair value for financial reporting purposes do imply a presumption of reasonably efficient markets.     

Stock Market Reactions to SFAS No. 96: Evidence from Early Bank Adopters

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 96, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) in December 1987 changed accounting for income tax recognition and accrual. The original deadline for implementation of SFAS No. 96 was December 15, 1988, and earlier adoption was encouraged. This study examines empirically the stock price impact of four pertinent announcement dates regarding SFAS No. 96 for 19 banks that adopted the statement in late 1987 and early 1988. Our results suggest that these early bank adopters have different characteristics from other banks that cause them to benefit from the changes in accounting for deferred taxes and explain their voluntary adoption of the standard.     

The Impact of SFAS No. 131 on Information and Monitoring

We investigate the effect of the Financial Accounting Standards Board's (FASB) new segment reporting standard on the information and monitoring environment. We compare hand‐collected, restated SFAS 131 segment data for the final SFAS 14 fiscal year with the historical SFAS 14 data. We find that SFAS 131 increased the number of reported segments and provided more disaggregated information. Analysts and the market had access to a portion of the new segment information before it was made public, but analyst and market expectations were still altered by the mandated release of the new data. By increasing information disaggregation, the new standard induced firms to reveal previously “hidden” information about their diversification strategies. The newly revealed information affected market valuations and lead to changes in firm behavior consistent with improved monitoring following adoption of SFAS 131.     

A Critical Look at SFAS 34: Capitalization of Interest Cost

In 1974, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) noted that an increasing number of companies were capitalizing interest costs, and that this practice was not being adequately disclosed (FASB, 1979, par. 26). In light of the alternative practices concerning the accounting for interest and lack of adequate disclosure by companies that were already capitalizing interest, the SEC recommended that the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) consider the issue of accounting for interest cost. As a result of the SEC's initiative, in 1979 the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards [SFAS] No. 34, Capitalization of Interest Cost, which mandated uniform interest capitalization rules in accounting for interest costs associated with the acquisition of qualifying non-current assets. The purpose of this article is to examine SFAS 34 in terms of its financial statement impact, the congruence of its assumptions with economic behaviour, its effect on subsequent standards related to interest capitalization, and its implications on financial accounting standard setting. To explore these issues we first illustrate the extent to which interest capitalization affects financial statements. We then empirically analyse the measure employed in SFAS 34 for the capitalization of interest cost in cases where debt is not directly linked with the acquisition of qualifying non-current assets. In addition, we critically examine the treatment accorded interest cost in subsequent FASB standards. Our research suggests that SFAS 34′s rationale for interest capitalization is incompatible with firm behaviour, and that the rules for interest capitalization as reflected in various accounting standards are inconsistent. These findings suggest that in the case of interest capitalization the benefits of comparability in financial reporting are not realized. A policy recommendation is then offered to alleviate some of these difficulties. The recommendation is to disallow the capitalization of interest cost in the absence of a direct link between the debt and the acquisition of qualifying assets.     

On the value relevance of SFAS No. 158

After considerable discussion and some controversy, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158 entitled, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans” was implemented in 2006. An important goal of these standards was to enhance financial reporting transparency for defined benefit pension plans (FASB, 2006). This study evaluates how well SFAS No. 158 achieved its objective. In particular, we compare the respective pre and post-SFAS 158 incremental value relevance of the balance sheet and income statement for firms with defined benefit pension plans (DBPP). Results suggest that the value relevance of book value (net income) increased (decreased) for DBPP firms after the implementation of SFAS No. 158.     

Earnings Reported under IFRS Improve the Prediction of Future Cash Flows? Evidence from European Banks

This paper examines the relative costs and benefits of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption in the European Union by testing the ability of earnings computed under IFRS to predict future cash flows. The study considers the contribution of net income, comprehensive income and other comprehensive income to the usefulness of earnings to predict cash flows, and it compares IFRS with domestic Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Evidence from a sample of Continental European banks shows that IFRS improve the ability of net income to predict future cash flows. Comprehensive income, too, provides relevant information to predict future cash flows, although with a measurement error which is higher than that in net income for greater lags of time. In our interpretation, these findings are consistent with unrealised gains and losses recognised in other comprehensive income being more transitory and volatile in nature. Overall, our results are relevant to academics and standard setters debating the merits of IFRS adoption and to those who use financial statements and adopt reported earnings to form expectations about future cash flows.     

Does implementation guidance affect opportunistic reporting and value relevance of earnings?

In recent years, both the SEC (2003) and the FASB (2004) [Securities and Exchange Commission, 2003. Study Pursuant to Section 108(d) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 on the Adoption by the United States Financial Reporting System of a Principles-Based Accounting System. Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, DC; the Financial Accounting Standards Board, 2004. On the road to an objectives-oriented accounting system. Financial Accounting Series: The FASB Report (August 31), 1–5.] have indicated a need for accounting standards where principles are balanced by implementation guidance (i.e., a framework for exercising professional judgment). In this study, we take advantage of a jurisdictional split during 1996–2001 whereby the same economic event (i.e., an impairment in oil and gas assets) in the extractive petroleum industry was accounted for by “full cost” firms under a SEC standard (Regulation SX 4-10) which provides extensive implementation guidance, and by “successful efforts” firms under a FASB standard (SFAS No. 121) that provided relatively little guidance for implementing the standard.     

Accounting Quality in Private Firms During the Transition Towards International Standards

We study the historical development of Slovenian Accounting Standards (SAS) and their association with accounting quality (AQ). We focus on private firms where the financial reporting process is characterised by low demand for high-quality reporting. We investigate three distinct editions of SAS since 1994 and test how their development towards international standards is related to AQ. Aggregate earnings management measures indicate that the use of accounting discretion decreases with less earnings smoothing over time. The main features of AQ have been consistent throughout historical development. Asymmetric timeliness of earnings, the ability of earnings to predict future cash flows, and the ability of accruals to mitigate mismatching are all present throughout. We also document typical departures from properties of high AQ. For example, accruals do not (always) facilitate timely recognition of losses. However, these can be attributed to the overwhelming influence of reporting incentives (e.g. taxation, debt, size) rather than to the (lower) quality of accounting standards.