Effect of foreign GAAP earnings and Form 20-F reconciliations on revisions of analysts' forecasts

A controversial area of U.S. securities regulations involves the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) financial reporting requirements for foreign firms, specifically, the necessity of providing a quantitative reconciliation to U.S. GAAP (Form 20-F). The results of earnings-returns research to date indicate that the release of foreign GAAP earnings provides important information. However, the results of earnings-returns studies using reconciled information are mixed. Instead of using an earnings-returns methodology adopted in prior research, this study utilizes analysts' revisions as a market indicator of the effect of information released in foreign GAAP earnings and the reconciled information in Form 20-F. Additionally, the study investigates the influence of four firm-specific variables in the firm's information environment—similarities of accounting systems, analyst following, difference between reconciled earnings and foreign GAAP earnings, and dispersion of analysts' expectations—on positive abnormal revision activities of financial analysts at the time of filing Form 20-F.The results indicate that the release of foreign GAAP earnings (at earnings announcement dates) and reconciled information (at the time of filing Form 20-F) contains relevant information as measured by analysts' revisions. Further, variables representing analyst following, change in reconciled earnings, and dispersion of analysts' expectations are significant in explaining the variation observed in positive abnormal revisions.     

Earnings changes associated with relaxing the reconciliation requirement in non-U.S. firms’ SEC filings

We investigate the changes in earnings information content and earnings attributes for non-U.S. firms listed in U.S. equity markets following the 2007 relaxation of the SEC requirement to reconcile IFRS earnings and stockholders’ equity to U.S. GAAP in annual regulatory filings. We analyze a sample of non-U.S. firms listed on U.S. exchanges from 2005 to 2008 that use IFRS, and compare them to non-U.S. firms that continue to use domestic GAAP or U.S. GAAP. Prior literature finds no changes in informativeness following the regulatory change for IFRS-using firms. However, when we partition the IFRS-using firms into two groups based on their history of providing reconciliation information, we find that firms which previously provided more information about the differences between their reporting GAAP and U.S. GAAP had significant increases in the information content of their earnings. In contrast, there is no change in earnings informativeness for firms that provided less informative reconciliations. We regard the reconciliation informativeness as a proxy for firms’ efforts to provide more informative disclosures, which is driven by their disclosure incentives. We also document that the change in the information content of earnings for more informative reconcilers was contemporaneous with a change in earnings attributes for these firms. Consistent with no change in earnings informativeness for less informative reconcilers, there is little change in their earnings attributes. Our results underscore the importance of incorporating disclosure incentives when examining the consequences of a regulatory change.     

Does trading volume detect information content in earnings reconciliations of foreign firms?

Currently, foreign firms trading securities on U.S. markets provide periodically a quantitative reconciliation of selected financial data consistent with U.S. GAAP (hereafter referred to as reconciled information) in Form 20-F. The SEC is examining whether users believe that this reconciliation process provides additional information above that provided by the foreign GAAP earning announcement and whether this incremental information enhances usefulness for market participants. We examine whether the reconciliation affects a primary indicator of information usefulness: the trading volume of capital markets participants.We use a regression model to examine the relation between a measure of abnormal trading volume and four firm-specific variables in the firm's information environment: similarities of accounting systems, analyst following, difference between reconciled earnings and foreign GAAP earnings, and dispersion of analysts’ expectations. We find a significant relation between abnormal volume and the reconciled earnings number and between abnormal volume and the dispersion of analysts forecasts. Our findings suggest that market participants may use the 20-F reconciliation in trading decisions.     

Eliminating the 20-F reconciliation from IFRS to U.S. GAAP: Short-term and long-term liquidity effects

This paper examines the effects of the SEC’s 2008 decision to no longer require foreign private issuers using IFRS and trading on U.S. exchanges to reconcile their financial statements to U.S. GAAP. Extant research has found conflicting results using short event windows, while studies using longer event windows have found limited capital market impact from eliminating the reconciliation. Motivated by the SEC’s interest in understanding how disclosure rules impact market liquidity, we examine changes in effective bid-ask spreads, the price impact of trades, and quoted depth around 20-F filing dates for a sample of foreign private issuers. We find that effective spreads increase more around 20-F filing dates for filers using IFRS than for filers using U.S. GAAP, suggesting the 20-F report is more informative for filers using IFRS. We then find, in a subsample of filers using IFRS, that the increase in effective spreads for IFRS firms around 20-F filing dates is directly related to the magnitude of differences in book values between IFRS and U.S. GAAP. In sum, our results suggest a loss of useful information after the SEC’s rule change.     

VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE PRACTICES: THE USE OF PRO FORMA REPORTING

This article looks at how U.S. managers supplement GAAP earnings with pro forma reporting. Pro forma measures, which are not audited, are typically determined through an adjustment to GAAP-based earnings. For example, a manager may choose to present an alternative to GAAP earnings that excludes period write-offs and one-time restructuring charges in order to present a more value-relevant picture of the company's performance.
The authors find that 77% of S&P 500 companies report pro forma results, and that pro forma measures are generally given greater prominence than GAAP earnings in corporate press releases. Based on the evidence, U.S. managers are using pro forma reporting strategically to affect investor perception of corporate performance. The SEC has recently issued rules to ensure that pro forma disclosure is not misleading. The authors present some guidelines on voluntary disclosure that might help forestall further regulation and preserve the ability to pursue this potentially informative practice.     

Individual investors’ attitudes towards listing requirements for foreign entities on U.S. stock exchanges and the promulgation of international accounting standards

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) currently requires foreign issuers of securities listed on U.S. securities exchanges to either employ U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) or include a statement of reconciliation to U.S. GAAP if they use their home country's accounting standards. With some exceptions, they are also required to comply with the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOA). John Thain, CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, states that these requirements hamper U.S. investments, economic growth, and employment opportunities. The Chairman of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), Sir David Tweedie, echoed Thain's comments. An important stakeholder who is affected significantly by the U.S. listing requirements is the U.S. individual investor. Accordingly this study examines their attitudes involving the extant rules for foreign listings on U.S. exchanges and other aspects of the issue. The study also examines their perceptions regarding accounting standard promulgation authority and the use of a global set of accounting principles. The results indicate that although U.S. investors are very much in favor of the listing of foreign companies on U.S. exchanges, they also endorse the current rule requiring either employment of U.S. GAAP or reconciliation to it as well as mandatory adherence to the SOA. In the area of accounting standards, although a large majority believed that the U.S. should control the accounting standards for U.S. listings, a smaller majority also believed that there should be a universal set of accounting principles for all stock exchanges.     

Attribute differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS earnings: An exploratory study

In this study we explore attribute differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS earnings. Our study is motivated by the ongoing harmonization process in accounting standard setting as well as by recent convergence projects by the FASB and the IASB. We test two market-based earnings attributes, i.e., value relevance and timeliness, as well as two accounting-based earnings attributes, i.e., predictability and accrual quality. These attributes are tested for German New Market firms as they are allowed to choose between IFRS and U.S. GAAP for financial reporting purposes. Overall, we find that U.S. GAAP and IFRS only differ with regard to predictive ability. The fact that U.S. GAAP accounting information outperforms IFRS also holds after controlling for differences in firm characteristics, such as size, leverage and the audit firm. However, our results also seem to suggest that these differences are not fully valued by investors, as we do not observe significant and consistent differences for the value-relevance attribute.     

Contracts valuation assessment noise and cross-border listing of equities on U.S. and U.K. stock markets

This study develops and tests the hypothesis that firms in the home country have capital market incentives to cross-border list on foreign stock exchanges that have similar financial reporting with local generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Non-U.S. firms' contracts and the underlying GAAP are based on the home-country culture and institutional climates. This connection with culture and institution makes the local GAAP's assessment of the contracts less spurious relative to foreign GAAP. Ball et al. [J. Account. Econ. 29 (2000) 1] note that contracting with stakeholders in the home markets is based on local GAAP's numbers, while cross-border listing provides settings in which the value relevance of local GAAP-based contracts is assessed based on foreign GAAP. Therefore, foreign investors' assessment of the contracts using foreign stock exchange GAAP or mindset of foreign GAAP is likely to result in an assessment noise, which is value irrelevant. The level of assessment noise depends on the differences between foreign and local GAAP. Because of the valuation implications of the assessment noise, we expect cross-border listing to diminish as the likelihood of assessment noise increases.As predicted, we find that assessment noise undermines cross-border listing on U.S. stock exchanges. Because U.S. and local GAAPs are based on different cultural and institutional environments, assessment noise arises if U.S. investors use the mindset of U.S. GAAP financial reports to assess local GAAP-based contracts of cross-border firms. The results are robust in the London Stock Exchange in which assessment noise is induced by interpreting local GAAP contracts as if they were based on U.K. GAAP. As expected, the influences of assessment noise on cross-border listings are more robust in the United States than in the United Kingdom. Our results suggest that harmonization of financial reporting is critical in attenuating the influences of assessment noise on global capital market developments.     

The valuation properties of earnings and book values reported under IAS,domestic GAAP and U.S. GAAP: Evidence from China,Hong Kong,Japan, Korea and Singapore

This paper examines whether earnings or book value is the dominant valuation accounting measure for companies reporting under alternative accounting standards — International Accounting Standards (IAS)/International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) or domestic accounting standards of China, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea and Singapore. Our sample consists of domestic firms in the five Asian countries and firms from these countries cross-listed in the United States as American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) from 2002 to 2011. For domestic firms, book value is more informative than earnings for firms from Hong Kong, Singapore, China, Japan and Korea during 2002–2011 although their accounting standards are influenced by different systems. For the ADR sample, book value is more informative than earnings for U.S. GAAP reporters and reconcilers during 2002–2007. However, earnings are more informative than book value for U.S. GAAP reconcilers from China. After 2007, ADRs in our sample from Hong Kong, Japan and Korea continued to file under U.S. GAAP. Some ADRs from China filed under U.S. GAAP and some filed under IFRS. Earnings are more informative than book value for IFRS users; however, book value has higher incremental value relevance than earnings for U.S. GAAP users. We contribute to prior research by providing evidence on the valuation properties based on accounting measures reported under different GAAPs for the Asian countries.     

Differential levels of disclosure and the earnings-return association: evidence from foreign registrants in the United States

Foreign companies listing on U.S. exchanges are required to report financial information under U.S. GAAP on form 20-F using either Item 17 or Item 18 disclosure rules. These two disclosure rules differ in that Item 17 allows many exemptions from U.S. GAAP, while Item 18 requires disclosure of all financial information in accordance with U.S. GAAP. This study examines the differential earnings-return association between Item 17 and Item 18 filers.We find significantly higher earnings-return associations for Item 18 filers than for Item 17 filers. While the earnings-return association of Item 18 foreign firms is not different from that of matched U.S. firms (which fundamentally use Item 18 rules), the earnings-return association of Item 17 foreign firms is significantly lower than that of matched U.S. firms. Overall, the results are consistent with the idea that higher levels of disclosure may be related to lower discount rates and higher earnings response coefficients (ERCs).     

An investigation of SEC “Speech GAAP”

This study investigates the financial reporting regulation effects of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) staff comments made during the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Annual Current SEC & Public Company Oversight Board (PCAOB) Developments Conference in Washington, D.C. (SEC Conference). At this conference, the SEC staff communicates its preferences about areas where it believes companies are misapplying GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). We call this communication SEC Speech GAAP. One outcome of the SEC Conference may be that companies re-evaluate their previous financial reporting by restating their financial statements. We find, first, that firms with restatement issues similar to those covered at the SEC Conference experience a decrease in the association between earnings and future cash flows after the restatement. Second, we find little market reaction to the disclosure of restatements related to SEC Conference issues, but the disclosure of non-conference related restatement issues has a significantly negative affect on investors’ valuation decisions. Our findings suggest that SEC Speech GAAP is associated with financial statements that are less informative to investors and investors find the valuation consequences of restatements prompted by SEC Speech GAAP to be less important than the valuation consequences for restatements prompted for other reasons.     

The Impact of Media Attention on the Use of Alternative Earnings Measures

The practice of reporting earnings measures that deviate from generally accepted accounting principles (non‐GAAP measures) has received negative attention in the media. In a period of increased regulatory concern for these reporting practices, we explore whether there has been a shift away from the use of non‐GAAP metrics. This study focuses on the Dutch situation, where regulators responded conservatively (‘light’) to the accounting scandals. This contrasts with the U.S., where regulators intervened with a radical (‘heavy’) reform of regulation. We analyse a sample of earnings press releases published in the period 2000–05 from companies listed at Euronext Amsterdam. Our findings indicate that Dutch companies report non‐GAAP measures frequently and prominently. However, companies' reporting behaviour changes after a peak in negative media attention for non‐GAAP reporting. The magnitude of the adjustments to GAAP earnings becomes smaller and companies seem to have different reasons to report non‐GAAP measures. The effect of the media attention is stronger when companies have been criticized for their non‐GAAP reporting in the press. Investors seem to have become more hesitant towards the use of non‐GAAP measures for their decision‐making after negative media attention. Together, these findings suggest that the negative media attention for non‐GAAP measures has influenced the decisions of investors and managers.     

Do earnings reported under IFRS tell us more about future earnings and cash flows?

We contribute to the debate about the relative benefits and costs of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption by examining whether earnings persistence and the association between current accounting earnings and future cash flows differ for firms reporting under IFRS versus firms reporting under United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) and firms reporting under non-U.S. domestic accounting standards (DAS). Using samples comprised of 58,832 firm-year observations drawn from 33 countries from 2002 through 2008, we find that positive earnings reported under IFRS are no more or less persistent than earnings reported under U.S. GAAP but losses reported under IFRS are less persistent than losses reported under U.S. GAAP. Moreover, we find that earnings reported under IFRS are no more or less persistent and are no more or less associated with future cash flows than earnings reported under non-U.S. DAS. However, we find that earnings reported under U.S. GAAP are more closely associated with future cash flows than earnings reported under IFRS. This is important if a key role of reported earnings is to help investors form expectations about future cash flows. These results should be of interest to academics and standard-setters as they debate the merits of transitioning to IFRS, and to parties who use reported earnings to form expectations about future earnings and cash flows.     

Does accounting quality change following a switch from U.S. GAAP to IFRS? Evidence from Germany

This study examines whether accounting quality changed following a switch from U.S. GAAP to IFRS. Using a sample of German high tech firms that transitioned to IFRS from U.S. GAAP in 2005, we find that accounting numbers under IFRS generally exhibit more earnings management, less timely loss recognition, and less value relevance compared to those under U.S. GAAP. In addition, after analyzing the accounting quality of firms that applied IFRS throughout the entire sample period, we find that, for the metrics suggesting a decline in accounting quality for both groups of firms, the change is significantly more pronounced for firms switching to IFRS from U.S. GAAP. Overall, our findings indicate that the application of U.S. GAAP generally resulted in higher accounting quality than application of IFRS, and a transition from U.S. GAAP to IFRS reduced accounting quality. Our findings provide the first evidence on the potential consequences of a switch from U.S. GAAP to IFRS.     

The real earnings management of cross-listing firms

We examine the existence of real and accrual-based earnings management before and after cross-listings on the U.S. market. The results indicate that firms actively manage their earnings around cross-listing events, using both accrual and real earnings management, but real earnings management is dominant. American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) cross-listed at Level 1 and sponsored ADRs show the largest increase in real earnings management from before to after the listing. Firms that have adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) display lower increases than firms under domestic GAAP. Finally, our results confirm a significant negative relationship between long-run performance and real earnings management before and after major corporate events.     

Do Japanese Analysts Overreact or Underreact to Earnings Announcements?

Several recent studies have used U.S. analysts' forecasts to test for underreaction or overreaction to information in earnings announcements. These tests have provided mixed results. Evidence in Mendenhall (1991) is that analysts underreact. By contrast. results in De Bondt and Thaler (1990) show overreaction by U.S. financial analysts to earnings announcements. The current study contributes to this topic by examining over/underreaction by Japanese financial analysts. Test results show that Japanese analysts do not overreact to earnings announcements, market to book ratios and sales growth. Instead. there is strong evidence that Japanese analysts underreact to earnings announcements and that their underreaction is more pronounced for firms with mostly permanent earnings. Our results also show that Japanese analysts display larger forecast biases for earnings reported under U.S. GAAP as opposed to Japanese GAAP. Finally, we find that US. analysts discount information in earnings announcements to a larger degree (relying to a greater extent on information in past prices instead) when compared to their Japanese counterparts. Further, in contrast to their Japanese counterparts, these analysts display no optimistic bias. The results above suggest that the impact of each country's unique culture and capital norms will have to be taken into account by policy makers in evaluating the feasibility of harmonization of accounting standards.     

IFRS and U.S. GAAP: Assessing the impact of reporting incentives on firm restatements in foreign and U.S. markets

This study examines the impact of reporting incentives on firm restatements in foreign and U.S. markets. We investigate whether financial reporting, using International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) results in quality disclosures, given differences in institutional and market forces. This study examines the quality of financial statements prepared in accordance with IFRS and U.S. GAAP by concentrating on firm restatements as a measure of earnings management. Our results indicate that there is no significant difference in the value of restatements due to differences in accounting standards when the rule of law is high in the international market. Furthermore, firms with better law enforcement and higher traditions of law and order, tend to have smaller restatement amounts or less earnings manipulation. This study contributes to the literature by providing evidence of the quality of financial information prepared under IFRS and its dependency on the institutional factors and market forces of a country.     

Did the FASB Codification Reduce the Complexity of Applying U.S. GAAP?

We examine whether the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Codification made it easier for preparers and auditors to locate relevant accounting guidance. We find that areas of U.S. GAAP with more dispersed and voluminous guidance before the Codification experience a larger post-Codification reduction in restatements. We find a similar decline in SEC comment letter questions referencing areas of U.S. GAAP with more dispersed and voluminous pre-Codification guidance. Our results suggest that before the Codification, preparers and auditors had difficulty in locating the appropriate accounting guidance and that the Codification mitigated this difficulty.     

Foreign macroeconomic and industry-related information transfers around earnings announcements: Evidence from U.S.-listed non-U.S. firms

This study examines information transfer regarding how investors react to new foreign macroeconomic and industry-related information embedded in foreign firms' earnings releases. Using non-U.S. firms listed in the U.S. as our main setting, we find that U.S. investors react significantly to foreign macroeconomic information and to information generated by the interaction between macroeconomic and industry-related information. We also find that the benefits (costs) of processing earnings reports increase (decrease) both types of information transfers. In addition, we find macroeconomic information transfers in an international cross-listing setting and both types of information transfers in an international non-cross-listing setting.     

The Information Contained in Reconciliations to Earnings Based on US Accounting Principles By Non-US Companies

To improve comparability of financial statements across countries, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requires non-US registrants to either issue financial statements based on US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) or provide in their footnotes a reconciliation of their foreign accounts to their US GAAP counterparts. The New York Stock Exchange has requested the elimination of this requirement on the basis that it serves as a barrier to non-US companies that desire to enter the US market. The SEC maintains that the reconciliations provide important information to investors when assessing the value of a company's stock. This study investigates the information content claim made by the SEC. An event study methodology is utilised that measures the stock price reaction within a short window surrounding the SEC filing date of the firm's 20-F (analogous to the 10-K for US firms). A significantly positive correlation is documented between the stock price reaction and the change in the aggregate reconciliation. This result implies that US GAAP disclosures provide information to the market when the 20-F arrives at the SEC.