Intangible Assets: Diversity of Practices and Potential Impacts from AIFRS Adoption

The adoption of Australian equivalents of International Financial Reporting Standards (AIFRS) radically alters Australian accounting practices for intangible assets. Under AIFRS, goodwill amortisation expense is replaced by goodwill impairment loss based on frequent tests of the value of goodwill, and Australian firms are no longer permitted to recognise certain internally generated intangibles. This paper provides statistics regarding intangible asset reporting by 476 firms listed on the Australian Stock Exchange in 2002. We find significant diversity in reporting practices relating to both goodwill and identifiable intangible assets. Accordingly, the new accounting rules will potentially reshape ASX-listed firms' financial statements by significant amounts.     

Intangible assets,IFRS and analysts’ earnings forecasts

We investigate whether the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in 2005 by Australian firms has been associated with a loss of potentially useful information about intangible assets. We find that the negative association between the accuracy and dispersion of analysts’ earnings forecasts and aggregate reported intangibles previously documented by Matolcsy and Wyatt (2006 ) becomes stronger subsequent to IFRS adoption, primarily for firms with high levels of underlying intangible assets. Our result is largely attributable to reported goodwill, rather than other intangible assets, suggesting that the impairment approach to goodwill valuation required by IFRS conveys more useful information than does the former straight‐line amortization approach. When we investigate a sub‐sample of firms that report lower intangibles under IFRS than under the prior Australian GAAP, we do find some evidence consistent with a loss of useful information relating to intangibles.     

Intangible assets and value relevance: Evidence from the Portuguese stock exchange

We assess the value relevance of the amounts for identifiable intangible assets and goodwill reported in the financial statements of all non-finance companies listed on the main market of the Portuguese Stock Exchange from 1998 to 2008. Additionally, we use panel data to explore the impact on value relevance of Portugal’s formal adoption of International Accounting Standards [IAS] and International Financial Reporting Standards [IFRS] in 2005. A distinctive feature of the accounting by our sample companies is that when they adopted IAS 38 and IFRS 3 in 2005, they were no longer required to recognise some intangible assets (such as start-up costs and research expenditures) and were no longer required to amortise goodwill.We find that net earnings, reported goodwill and other intangible assets are highly significantly associated with stock price. However, whereas earnings are related positively to stock prices when Portuguese Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) were applied prior to 2005, the value relevance of earnings appears to have declined after the adoption of IAS/IFRS in 2005. Although the change to IAS/IFRS had no impact on the value relevance of identifiable intangibles as a whole, the evidence suggests that there was a positive effect on the value relevance of goodwill. When the subclasses of identifiable intangible assets are considered, we found evidence of an increase in value relevance of goodwill, other intangible assets, and research and development expenditures.     

An Empirical Investigation of Accounting Methods for Goodwill and Identifiable Intangible Assets: 1985 to 1989

Accounting for intangible assets represents one of the more controversial accounting standards issues. This study examines the accounting policies adopted for goodwill and for identifiable intangible assets by a sample of 150 Australian Stock Exchange listed companies over the five-year period 1985 to 1989 inclusive. Findings reveal a general decrease in the diversity of goodwill accounting policies over the study period but the converse for identifiable intangible policies. In particular, an increase in the percentage of companies electing not to amortize identifiable intangibles was found. The study provides evidence to support claims that companies have been recognizing identifiable intangibles to reduce the impact on reported operating profits of the requirement of accounting standards for the amortization of goodwill.     

The Effects of International Financial Reporting Standards on the Accounts and Accounting Quality of Australian Firms: A Retrospective Study

We examine the effect of Australian equivalents to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) on the accounts and accounting quality of 1,065 listed firms, relying on retrospective reconciliations between Australian Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (AGAAP) and IFRS. We find that IFRS increases total liabilities, decreases equity and more firms have earnings decreases than increases. IFRS earnings and equity are not more value relevant than AGAAP earnings and equity and while adjustments for changes in accounting for provisions and intangibles other than goodwill are value relevant, they weaken associations with market value. Goodwill adjustments improve associations with market value. We also find that the reconciliation note for the earnings adjustments contained no new information.     

The response of Australian firms to AASB 138 disallowing the recognition of internally generated identifiable intangibles

This paper responds to a call by the Australian Accounting Standards Board to investigate how Australian firms responded to a perceived loss of information pursuant to AASB 138 (IAS38) which mandated the de-recognition of previously recognised internally generated identifiable intangibles, from its effective date of 1 January 2005. We find that the sample firms did not choose to provide alternative or substitute disclosure elsewhere in their annual report or financial statements anytime during our sample period (2005–2010). Prima facie, this is surprising given prior evidence from the value relevance literature that disclosures relevant to the value of internally generated intangibles are correlated with firm value and presumably informative for investors. However, we caution against the drawing of simple conclusions that this finding implies alternative disclosure may not be valuable. Rather, it is important to understand the forces or frictions that contribute to this result. Schipper (The Accounting Review, 82, 2007, 301) and Skinner (Accounting and Business Research, 38, 2008, 191) offer valuable insights into the potential issues such as the costs of alternative disclosure including proprietary costs of disclosing competitive information and, the lower credibility of financial disclosures outside of audited financial statements. These are important considerations in the on-going standard-setting debate on recognition versus disclosure of value relevant information on intangible assets.     

The Relevance to Firm Valuation of Capitalising Intangible Assets in Total and by Category

Debate about the appropriate treatment of intangible assets can benefit from knowledge about the relevance of their financial statement capitalisation to valuation of firms. With rules permitting or requiring intangible asset capitalisation, Australia provides an ideal setting to obtain this evidence. This paper reports findings that indicate that capitalisation of intangibles is value-relevant for Australia's largest firms. Results indicate that investors place greater value on capitalised goodwill than on other categories of capitalised balance sheet items. Similarly, capitalisation of identifiable intangible assets adds value to large firms. However, research and development capitalisation does not affect the value of firms in our study.     

The value relevance and reliability of reported goodwill and identifiable intangible assets

We examine the value relevance and reliability of reported goodwill and identifiable intangible assets under Australian GAAP from 1994 to 2003; a period characterised by relatively restrictive accounting treatment for goodwill and relatively flexible accounting treatment for identifiable intangible assets. Our findings, using an adaptation of Feltham and Ohlson (1995), suggest that for the average Australian company the information presented with respect to both goodwill and identifiable intangible assets is value relevant but not reliable. In particular, goodwill tends to be reported conservatively while identifiable intangible assets are reported aggressively.     

Accounting for Identifiable Intangibles — An Unfinished Standard-Setting Task

Years of debate have failed to produce an Australian consensus on accounting for identifiable intangible assets. The AASB in 1999 re-affirmed its view that assets such as brand names, mastheads, licences and trademarks have depreciable amounts that are required to be depreciated. Meanwhile, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission has increased the pressure on companies to amortise such assets. Following a submission from the Group of 100 and others in May 2000, the AASB resolved to place the topic back on its work program. Current proposals by the FASB to accept non-amortisation of goodwill and other intangibles with indefinite lives has "turned up the heat" for further AASB action.     

Identifiable intangible asset disclosures, stock prices and future earnings

As a consequence of regulatory reforms currently being initiated as part of international convergence, it is likely that the recognition and disclosure of identifiable intangible assets by Australian firms will cease. This study provides empirical evidence on how this will impact financial reports. First, evidence is provided of a positive association between stock prices and voluntarily recognized and disclosed identifiable intangible assets. Second, evidence is provided of a positive association between identifiable intangible assets and realized future period income. This provides insights into the nature of the information provided by intangible assets, and identifies a basis for the association between stock prices and identifiable intangible assets. This leads to the conclusion that identifiable intangible assets disclosures are value relevant, and that with the application of the restrictive recognition rules in AASB138 these disclosures in financial reports will be greatly diminished.     

High-Technology Intangibles and Analysts' Forecasts

This study examines the association between firms' intangible assets and properties of the information contained in analysts' earnings forecasts. We hypothesize that analysts will supplement firms' financial information by placing greater relative emphasis on their own private (or idiosyncratic) information when deriving their earnings forecasts for firms with significant intangible assets. Our evidence is consistent with this hypothesis. We find that the consensus in analysts' forecasts, measured as the correlation in analysts' forecast errors, is negatively associated with a firm's level of intangible assets. This result is robust to controlling for analyst uncertainty about a firm's future earnings, which we also find to be higher for firms with high levels of internally generated (and expensed) intangibles. Given that analyst uncertainty increases and analyst consensus decreases with the level of a firm's intangible assets, we also expect and find that the degree to which the mean forecast aggregates private information and is more accurate than an individual analyst's forecast increases with a firm's intangible assets. Finally, additional analysis reveals that lower levels of analyst consensus are associated with high-technology manufacturing companies, and that this association is explained by the relatively high R&D expenditures made by these firms. Overall, our results are consistent with financial analysts augmenting the financial reporting systems of firms with higher levels of intangible assets (in terms of contributing to more accurate earnings expectations), particularly R&D-driven high-tech manufacturers.     

Management incentives to recognise intangible assets

The paper examines whether the introduction of the international financial reporting standards (IFRS) in Australia changed management incentives to recognise intangible assets. We examine post‐IFRS changes in managerial opportunism and economic benefits associated with the recognition of intangible assets. We find evidence after IFRS of significant change in intangible asset recognition concurrent with share issues. We also find that the association between economic benefits and intangible assets changed following IFRS. Evidence is provided that the economic benefits associated with goodwill were enhanced by IFRS, whereas IIA and E&E asset information became less useful to financial report users.     

Value relevance of customer-related intangible assets

This study examines the stock market's valuation of customer-related intangible assets for a sample of publicly-traded U.S. firms. Customer-related intangible assets are found to be positively associated with equity prices, but valued at a discount relative to goodwill. These results suggest that value-relevant information is lost if customer-related intangible assets are subsumed into goodwill rather than being reported separately. This evidence can be useful to standard setters potentially considering extending to public companies a recent FASB Accounting Standards Update allowing private companies not to recognize separately from goodwill certain customer-related intangible assets.     

The value-relevance of adopting IFRS: Evidence from 145 NGAAP restatements

Firms listed on stock exchanges within the European Economic Area are required to report consolidated financial statements according to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) since 2005. The firms that adopted IFRS in 2005 were also required to restate their 2004 financial statements from national GAAP to provide comparable accounting figures. These two sets of financial statements for 2004 are thus based on identical underlying economic activities and are fully specified according to two different reporting regimes. Our sample consists of 145 restatements from Norwegian Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (NGAAP) to IFRS for firms listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange in Norway. We test whether the IFRS accounting figures correlate more strongly with stock market values than the corresponding NGAAP figures. We find little evidence of increased value-relevance after adopting IFRS when comparing and evaluating the two regimes unconditionally. On the other hand, when evaluating the change in the accounting figures from NGAAP to IFRS, we find evidence that the reconcilement adjustments to IFRS are marginally value-relevant due to increased relevance of the balance sheet and the normalized net operating income. By weighting our sample by firm size, intangible asset intensity and profitability, we learn that the increased value-relevance of the net operating income stems from different reporting of intangible assets. Since more intangible assets are capitalized according to IFRS than NGAAP, our finding is consistent with the view that capitalizing intangible assets is more value-relevant than expensing them as incurred or through goodwill amortization.     

Corporate Disclosure Quality: Lessons from Australian Companies on the Impact of Adopting International Financial Reporting Standards

For annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2005, Australian companies were required to comply with the Australian equivalents of International Financial Reporting Standards (AIFRS). To ensure a smooth transition, a broadly defined standard (AASB 1047) mandated pre-adoption company disclosures of the AIFRS' impact. The standard provided managers with the opportunity to exercise considerable discretion in complying with the underlying disclosure requirements. We examine how this discretion impacted on the quality of pre-adoption AIFRS disclosures provided by a sample of large Australian companies. Using a disclosure quality index, we find considerable evidence of a cross-sectional variation in disclosure quality that varies according to differences in the AIFRS financial impact, size, industry and profitability factors. Importantly, we also observe individual Big 4 audit firm influences on disclosure quality. These findings highlight consequences of mandating corporate disclosures based on broadly defined principles.     

The adoption of IFRS in Australia: The case of AASB 138 (IAS 38) Intangible Assets

AASB 138 Intangible Assets, adopted by reporting entities in Australia for annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2005, required derecognition of internally generated intangible assets. Prior to its adoption, the standard was widely expected to have a substantial impact on the reports of affected listed entities. On the basis of information available in the 2004/05 annual reports, this paper projects the expected effects of AASB 138 on reported intangible assets and on key financial measures. It compares these projected measures to the realised measures, reported under both Australian GAAP and AIFRS in the 2005/06 reports. While reported intangible assets and the debt to equity ratio were expected to change significantly as a result of AASB 138, the reported AIFRS results show a significant change in only the debt to equity ratio. The paper considers reasons why the pre-adoption expected changes did not eventuate, and also how the actual changes were reported to stakeholders in the management discussion sections of the annual reports. The conclusion draws implications regarding the transparency of communication in annual reports.     

The Recognition of Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets in Business Combinations – The Portuguese Case

In this study, we investigate the magnitude of goodwill recognised in business combinations during the years 2005 to 2009 by the Portuguese companies listed on Euronext Lisbon, and characterise the amount of the other intangible assets recognised separately from goodwill. We also analyse the level of compliance of those companies with the main disclosure requirements of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 3 – Business Combinations. Our study, which involves the analysis of 197 business combinations, reveals that the amounts of goodwill continue to be highly material, while conversely, the value of identifiable intangible assets in those acquisitions is very low. The results suggest that Portuguese companies do not undertake sufficient efforts to individually identify and disclose intangibles acquired in business combinations. This fact is reinforced by the reduced level of compliance with the disclosures required by IFRS 3, particularly the factors that contribute to the recognition of goodwill. Our findings provide feedback to standard setters in an effort to improve practice in the application of IFRS 3. Moreover, they reinforce their recent concerns regarding the post‐implementation review of business combinations, as well as the ongoing project of the IASB, whose objective is to improve disclosures in existing standards.     

Capitalizing R&D expenses versus disclosing intangible information

We study how to improve the value-relevance of financial information for intangible-intensive firms by investigating two alternatives: capitalizing research and development (R&D) expenses and disclosing intangible information. Using patent counts/citations to proxy for intangible intensity, we find that the incremental value-relevance of disclosing patent counts/citations is greater than that of capitalizing R&D expenses for the high-patent group and vice versa for the low- or medium-patent group. Investors favor the disclosure of patent information for firms with more successful innovations. Since disclosing intangible information may lead to appropriation by rivals, we find that, for the high-patent group, the incremental value-relevance of disclosing patent counts/citations is more pronounced for firms in industries with stronger protection of intellectual property. Overall, our results suggest that disclosing R&D outputs can improve the value-relevance of financial statements for firms rich in intangibles and the incremental benefits of such disclosure will be greater in industries with strong protection of intellectual property.     

Empirical findings from the reconciliations in the first IFRS compliant reports prepared by Japanese-owned subsidiaries in Australia

In Japan, a Japanese version of International Financial Reporting Standards (J-IFRS or JMIS)² will be adopted from March-ending in 2016, but exactly when the IFRS mandate will start is still unknown. The Australian regulators required not only publicly listed companies but also private and foreign-owned entities to prepare their financial statements to comply with Australian IFRS (A-IFRS) on or after 1 January 2005. Around the time of the transition to A-IFRS, more than 400 local subsidiary companies in Australia operated businesses which were invested in by Japanese multinational corporations. Thus, Australia was in a unique place to explore the IFRS reporting practices for Japanese-owned entities. We examined the reconciliations of the accounting figures made under the prior Australian generally accepted accounting principles (AGAAP) to those made under A-IFRS, and explored explanations for the reconciliations stated in the first A-IFRS compliant annual reports. On average, the net profits reported under AGAAP were 13% higher than those measured by A-IFRS for the Japanese subsidiaries, while the matched sample Australian companies' profits were on average 2% lower under AGAAP than the accounting figures reported under A-IFRS. Moreover, we described the following four accounting standards which were most frequently cited in the explanations of the impacts of the A-IFRS implementation: financial instruments, income taxes, provisions and employee benefits. Firstly, this study found that the reporting practices of the Japanese subsidiaries and Australian matched sample firms were less likely to be similar in the same Australian institutional setting. Secondly, the differences of the institutional factors in the countries of origin somewhat influenced the financial reporting of the Australian subsidiaries. Finally, the strict and wide scope of recognition and disclosure requirements under A-IFRS led to a significant increase in assets and liabilities. The monetary values materially changed under AGAAP compared with those made under A-IFRS, but these reporting entities attempted to comply with the new accounting regulations on time. We expect that information disclosure will increase and become more standardised under A-IFRS, compared with under AGAAP.     

Financial sector diversification and MNC valuation

We extend the literature on MNC performance by examining the relationship between market valuation of MNCs and intangibles associated with financial expertise. We identify firms as having financial expertise if they have diversified their business in the financial sector. We argue that financial expertise enhances the ability of MNCs to internalize financial transactions and take advantage of financing and investment opportunities around the world. Therefore, it is a potentially significant source of market power. Our test results demonstrate that as the degree of multinationality increases market valuation is positively related with financial expertise even after we account for several other control factors. Our findings imply that MNCs with financial expertise can be viewed as possessing an additional intangible, which essentially is the financial equivalent of the traditionally examined intangible assets, such as technological “know-how,” goodwill, and managerial expertise.