Developing Accounting Regulations that Reflect Public Viewpoints: The Australian Solution to Differential Reporting

In this paper, we analyse the factors that have shaped the approach taken by the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) in addressing the issue of differential reporting in Australia. In contrast to its early adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards in 2005, the AASB has signalled an independent approach to differential reporting. Still in progress at the time of writing, we show how the AASB's approach has been shaped by feedback from key stakeholder groups, as well as by influential individuals and key events. In the face of strongly held views on both sides of the debate, the Board has moved from reliance on discursive techniques to develop and justify proposed policies to embracing to a greater extent, the use of more objective research evidence to resolve the empirical questions presented in the public debate.     

Financial reporting by charities: a matched case study analysis from four countries

This paper analyses financial reporting requirements applicable to charities in four jurisdictions—Australia; England; Ireland; New Zealand—using case study analysis which compares the actual financial statements of four charities operating in the same field and with similar levels of total income. The authors highlight common issues and implications in terms of the concepts underpinning not-for-profit organization (NPO) financial reporting and argue the case for harmonized international NPO accounting standards.     

Financial Reporting for Private Companies: The Canadian Experience*

The issue of whether small and/or private companies should be allowed to use simplified accounting standards in financial reports has concerned the accounting profession for decades. It has been argued that preparing financial reports in accordance with the large volume of promulgated standards contained in generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), some of which are relatively complex, has put a significant strain on the resources of small/private business. Moreover, information produced and presented in accordance with at least some accounting standards within GAAP may not be relevant for the users of small/private companies' financial statements. In this paper we look at differential reporting in Canadian GAAP, which gives nonpublicly accountable enterprises the ability to opt out of certain CICA Handbook requirements with unanimous consent of the shareholders. We look at lobbying activity in response to the proposed differential reporting standard and at nonpublicly accountable company experience with the differential reporting opportunity in the period since the standard was promulgated.     

Have IFRS made a difference to intra-country financial reporting diversity?

According to the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are intended to provide a common set of globally applicable accounting standards, having the ultimate aim of reducing international financial reporting diversity. Much previous research on standards harmonisation has been conducted on relatively small samples and in periods which pre-date the introduction of mandatory IFRS in the EU and Australia. Most of these studies have also relied on some form of indexing technique to measure harmonisation (such as the modified C-index) which have since been challenged in the literature. Based on a sample of 81,560 firm years, this study examines whether the mandatory IFRS regime has led to any significant reductions in overall financial reporting diversity by companies within the EU and Australia. Financial reporting diversity is proxied by the variability of several balance sheet, income statement and cash flow statement ratios measured over the pre-IFRS and post-IFRS periods. Variability is measured by the coefficient of variation (CV), a scale neutral measure of dispersion of a probability distribution. This measure avoids many of the methodological problems associated with index techniques. Notwithstanding some mixed findings, the group mean comparisons and multiple regression results indicate some statistically significant reductions in the variability of ratio measures in the post-IFRS period, even after controlling for factors such as firm size, industry and adoption status (whether a country is an IFRS adopter or not). While the results should be viewed as preliminary, they provide some tentative support for IASB’s current policy direction towards global accounting standards convergence (for instance, the IASB-FASB convergence project). The results also have implications for other countries contemplating a shift to IFRS, such as the United States and several Asian nations, including Japan and India. A useful direction for future research is to determine whether the same results hold using a more extensive post-IFRS sample.     

Australian – USA Federal Government Accounting: Convergence or Divergence?

Despite moves toward international harmonisation of accounting standards, there is evidence that standards regulating government accounting in various countries are diverging. This paper argues that, despite their similar federal systems and ostensibly similar objectives for federal government reporting, the accounting standards of the USA and Australia differ significantly in detail. A comparison of their objectives and standards reveals that the standards particularly differ in relation to accounting for assets, and in determining the performance of a reporting entity. Although these divergences emanate from differing philosophies underlying the standards of the two countries, they have implications for international harmonisation of accounting standards, and for reciprocity agreements.     

A critique of the influence of globalization and convergence of accounting standards in Fiji

The globalization of the world's economies has inevitably brought with it moves to establish a single set of financial reporting standards. Prima facie, the formulation and promulgation of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) is concealed behind reified icons of ‘relevance’. This paper adds a new dimension to the international accounting debate by discussing themes of regulation, public and private interests, from a critical perspective. Specifically, this paper examines the reasons for the willingness to accept IFRSs in Fiji. A critical conception of ‘relevance’ and ‘accountability’ is developed to demonstrate how the needs of private interests’ are met in adopting the IFRSs. This paper demonstrates that in this process of convergence, the influence of these private interests – multinational enterprises and large international accounting firms – can lead to a transfer of economic resources in their favour, wherein the public interests are usually ignored. The paper offers suggestions on how public interest might be best served within the current financial reporting system and how, in principle, the needs to report both globally and locally can be reconciled.     

The Pivotal Role Of Accounting Concepts In The Development Of Public Sector Accounting Standards

Perhaps the most important decision made by the Public Sector Accounting Standards Board was taken soon after it was formed in 1983. That decision was to adopt a conceptual approach to the development of public-sector accounting standards. This paper explores the implications for the reform of public-sector financial reporting practices in Australia.     

Do cross-listers bond to U.S. markets? An examination of earnings quality around SOX

Sarbanes–Oxley [SOX, hereafter] was expected to improve the overall quality of financial reporting. A large amount of research has documented the influence of SOX on companies' reporting behaviors and how those behaviors have impacted the capital market as a whole (Cohen et al., 2008; Engel et al., 2007; Lobo & Zhou, 2006). While the assumption is that the far-reaching regulation impacts all U.S.-listed companies, this paper considers whether SOX has had a differential impact on the earnings quality of foreign filers that cross-list on U.S. exchanges. Despite some minor exceptions, these foreign companies are expected to meet the same reporting standards as domestic U.S. companies. Using a sample of cross-listers around the enactment of SOX, the results suggest that cross-listed companies do not strictly comply with SOX. At the same time, a size-matched sample of domestic U.S. companies shows significant improvement across the same set of earnings quality measures. This differential impact raises concerns about the ability of domestic regulations to impose compliance on foreign filers. While some may believe that cross-listed companies are bonding themselves to U.S. regulations and reporting quality, the evidence in this paper suggests that foreign companies are more interested in the reputational gains associated with a listing in the U.S.     

2005 — It's Here, Ready or Not: A Review of the Australian Financial Reporting Framework

This article reviews the current financial reporting framework in Australia by considering three groups that are involved in the production of companies' financial reports: rule-makers, financial report preparers and rule-enforcers. We outline dramatic changes to the financial reporting framework in the period 2002-04 (primarily from CLERP 9) and explore the effect on the roles and activities of various groups of the adoption of international accounting standards in Australia.     

Disharmony in international accounting standards setting: The Chinese approach to accounting for business combinations

The paper addresses two distinct aspects of disharmony in international accounting standards setting. The first aspect relates to the political economic context of financial accounting standards. This is illustrated by the Chinese standards setters’ decision to allow the pooling of interests method of accounting for business combinations despite the prohibition of this method by both the FASB and the IASB. This decision by the Chinese standards setters appears to have been based on political economic factors related to the need for industrial reorganization in China rather than a desire to serve the needs of global capital markets. The second aspect of disharmony relates to the role played by differential understandings of the fundamental objectives of financial reporting in an international context. The IASB's goal of producing one set of global accounting standards to serve the needs of global capital markets has led to a reduction in the number of permissible accounting methods and a move towards the fair value accounting model. In particular, the IASB concluded that the acquisition method of accounting for business combinations should be the only method allowed for business combinations. In contrast, the Chinese standards setters have recognized the existence of both mergers and acquisitions, and in response they created two different methods of accounting for business combinations. Effectively, the Chinese standards setters developed an alternative approach to accounting for business combinations which challenges the IASB's goal of achieving international accounting convergence through the fair value model.     

Harmonization and the Conceptual Framework: An International Perspective

The release of CLERP 9 (Commonwealth of Australia, 2002) requires the Financial Reporting Council and the Australian Accounting Standards Board to adopt International Accounting Standards (IAS) en bloc as domestic reporting standards by 1 January 2005. This article considers the current and future role and direction of the conceptual framework (CF) under the CLERP proposals and a potential IAS reporting environment after January 2005. It is argued that Australia, which has been a major innovator on CF issues, may suffer a major setback if the International Accounting Standards Board's CF is adopted in January 2005. Furthermore, while the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has been aggressively pursuing a set of global accounting standards, it remains unclear whether the IASB will, or can, develop an internationally relevant and generally accepted CF which can guide the development of a globally compatible set of accounting standards.     

Pension Accounting: How Large Australian Companies are 'Paying Up' for Superannuation

In Australia accounting requirements for companies to report on superannuation fund costs substantially lag those overseas and are unsettled. Superannuation commitments for defined-benefit funds are required to be disclosed by sponsoring employers, although corporations are not required to disclose interests in defined-contribution funds. This paper documents the extent of companies' annual report disclosures of interests in defined-benefit superannuation funds. The paper also reviews the debate on pension accounting overseas and examines the impact of AASB 1028 on the reporting practices of sponsoring firms.     

SME Reporting in Australia: Where to Now for Decision‐usefulness?

This paper develops recommendations for simplified decision‐useful SME financial reporting in Australia – a country that has traditionally allowed a wide range of reporting standards to be used by these entities. Drawing on interviews and comment letters from a number of stakeholders, and data from a survey of users of financial statements of non‐publicly accountable unlisted entities, we analyse stakeholder arguments for and against SMEs providing less detailed reports, and identify the line items that might be most useful to users for decision making.     

ACCOUNTING STANDARDS FOR THE PUBLIC SECTOR IN AUSTRALIA

The need for better financial reporting by public sector entities as a means towards greater accountability has been widely canvassed. This paper discusses the development and application of accounting standards in Australia in this context. The responses of the accounting profession, through its standard setting process, and of the Commonwealth and several State governments are described and the conclusion reached that these developments will mean significant improvement in the information content of public sector financial reports.     

Superannuation in Society: What are the Accountability Relationships and is there a Role for (Group) Accounting?

Superannuation fund reporting is a topical issue: it is in a state of flux and currently on the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) work program for 2012, with the release of ED 223 Superannuation Entities in December 2011. Issues under debate include uncertainty regarding the users of superannuation financial reports, and the application of the principle of ‘transaction neutrality’ to accounting for corporate groups by superannuation entities. Accountability reporting by superannuation funds has remained largely unchanged since the introduction of compulsory superannuation 20 years ago. This paper describes the changing nature of superannuation from a managerial gratuity to a type of deferred pay, and how accounting for superannuation is likely to increase in significance as it responds to the shifting economic nature of superannuation, especially since the global financial crisis. This paper uses basic content analysis to analyse member submissions to the Australian Government's Review into Governance, Efficiency, Structure and Operation of Australia's Superannuation System 2009, and submissions to the AASB's consultation paper on consolidation accounting for superannuation entities in 2007. Limited characterisations of members as being not interested in financial reporting are out of step with the underlying nature of superannuation, and will likely change as the economic significance of superannuation increases in the future.     

IAS Versus U.S. GAAP: Information Asymmetry–Based Evidence from Germany's New Market

Motivated by the debate about globally uniform accounting standards, this study investigates whether firms using U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) vis‐à‐vis international accounting standards (IAS) exhibit differences in several proxies for information asymmetry. It exploits a unique setting in which the two sets of standards are put on a level playing field. Firms trading in Germany's New Market must choose between IAS and U.S. GAAP for financial reporting, but face the same regulatory environment otherwise. Thus, institutional factors such as listing requirements, market microstructure, and standards enforcement are held constant. In this setting, differences in the bid‐ask spread and share turnover between IAS and U.S. GAAP firms are statistically insignificant and economically small. Subsequent analyses of analysts' forecast dispersion, initial public offering underpricing, and firms' standard choices corroborate these findings. Thus, at least for New Market firms, the choice between IAS and U.S. GAAP appears to be of little consequence for information asymmetry and market liquidity. These findings do not support widespread claims that U.S. GAAP produce financial statements of higher informational quality than IAS.     

Workplace Human Rights Reporting: A Study of Australian Garment and Retail Companies

The opening of the Australian economy in a globalised world has led to Australian garment and retail corporations moving their manufacturing overseas and acquiring goods from overseas providers. This is usually better for the corporations’ bottom‐line, as they can purchase goods overseas at a fraction of their local cost, partly due to cheap labour. Australia is one of the many OECD countries not to have a well regulated environment for workplace human rights. This study examines 18 major Australian retail and garment manufacturing corporations and finds that workplace human rights reporting is poor, based on content analysis of their annual reports, corporate social responsibility reports and websites. This is probably due to the failure of the Australian Government to provide adequate oversight by promulgating mandatory reporting standards for both local and overseas operations of Australian companies. This permits corporations to avoid reporting their workplace human rights standards and breaches.     

The Influence of Country‐ and Firm‐level Governance on Financial Reporting Quality: Revisiting the Evidence

This paper examines how firm‐level governance and country‐level governance interplay in shaping financial reporting quality. Using IFRS adoption as a source of variation in firms’ reporting discretion, and a large sample of European firms that mandatorily switch to the new set of standards, we find that in countries with low enforcement and weak oversight over financial reporting, only firms with strong board‐level corporate governance mechanisms experience an increase in financial reporting quality, consistent with firm‐ and country‐level governance mechanisms being substitutes. However, in countries with high enforcement and strict oversight over financial reporting, firms with either strong or weak board‐level governance mechanisms experience an increase in financial reporting quality, even if the increase is larger for the former group. Overall, our findings indicate that in the debate about the effects of governance on the quality of financial reporting, it is important to consider both country‐ and firm‐level corporate governance mechanisms.     

The Nature and Rationale of a Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting by Islamic Banks

Islamic banks have to abide by the revealed doctrines in Islam in conducting their business and financial transactions. They employ in-house religious advisers—often referred to as Shari'a Supervisory Board (SSB)—who issue a special report to inform users of financial statements whether or not the bank has adhered to the Islamic principles. Recently, a private standard-setting body—the Financial Accounting Organization for Islamic Banks and Financial Institutions (FAOIBFI)—has been set up to externally regulate the financial reporting by Islamic banks. The FAOIBFI has published two statements on the objectives and concepts of financial reporting to act as a framework in setting accounting standards for Islamic banks. This paper examines the FAOIBFI's approach for developing objectives and concepts of financial accounting and investigates its need for such a theoretical framework. It is argued that the FAOIBFI's objectives and concepts would not be useful in mandating accounting standards on issues that are affected by religious ruling. This does not necessarily mean that such a framework may not be useful in legitimating the FAOIBFI's role and in setting accounting standards for issues that are not governed by revealed moral doctrines although it will be subject to similar limitations to those found by other standard-setting bodies in utilising and applying their framework. However, it implies that the more the FAOIBFI sets accounting standards that incorporate religious ruling, the less it would tend to find its own objectives and concepts useful. The ambiguities that may arise from different interpretations of the religious rules will require resolutions primarily by reference to religious rather than accounting authority.