Achieving High Quality, Comparable Financial Reporting: A Review of Independent Enforcement Bodies in Australia and the United Kingdom

This article provides a review of the activities of two quite different types of national enforcement body, the U.K.'s Financial Reporting Review Panel (FRRP) and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). We present material (some not available elsewhere) about their activities over the period 1998–2004 and show that both types of body can fulfil an enforcement role, albeit subject to political forces. We also assess the relevance of the bodies' past activities for comparable international enforcement following the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in 2005. A review of cases reveals that for both bodies approximately half were related to recognition and measurement issues, where interpretation can be crucial. Although there is potential for cross-country differences to arise, they may be mitigated by the participation of both bodies in international enforcement coordination activities. Past activities suggest that the scope of the bodies' activities and the extent of comparability of enforcement decisions are likely to reflect political views held within the government, corporate sector and accounting profession.     

Application of the Reporting Entity Concept in Australia

For decades, the reporting entity concept has been the foundation of differential reporting in Australia. Those entities classified as ‘reporting entities’ are, prima facie, required to produce full GAAP‐based financial reports while other (non‐reporting) entities are generally able to produce less complex and shorter ‘special purpose’ financial reports. In recent years, the application of the concept, as originally set out in the Statement of Accounting Concepts (SAC) 1 Definition of the Reporting Entity, has been criticized on several grounds—particularly, that it does not yield the reporting outcomes originally intended by regulators. Our analysis of 1,546 companies lodging financial statements with the corporate regulator in Australia (ASIC) shows the principles‐based criteria in SAC 1, designed to indicate the existence of a reporting entity, do not systematically explain its application by entities. Our findings are relevant for policy makers, researchers, and regulators concerned with how these choices might be more effectively regulated in future and whether this is best done through principles‐based or rules‐based approaches.     

大数据时代线领财务报告变革

财务报告的改进离不开信息技术的发展,可扩展商业报告语言（XBRL）推动了财务报告在互联网时代的发展,而大数据时代的技术变革和思维变革将再次引领财务报告新的突破,在财务报告模式的重构、信息披露制度的改进、网络财务报告方面产生重要的影响。     

The perils of working with big data,and a SMALL checklist you can use to recognize them

The use of big data to help explain fluctuations in the broader economy and key business performance indicators is now so commonplace that in some instances it has even begun to rival more traditional measures. Big data sources can very often provide advantages when compared with these more traditional data sources, but with these advantages also come potential pitfalls. We lay out a checklist called SMALL that we have developed in order to help interested parties as they navigate the big data minefield. Based on a set of five questions, the SMALL checklist should help users of big data draw justifiable conclusions and avoid making mistakes in matters of interpretation. To demonstrate, we provide several case studies that demonstrate the subtle nuances of several of these new big data sets and show how the problems they face often closely relate to age-old concerns that more traditional data sources are also forced to tackle.     

Corporate social responsibility assurance and reporting quality: Evidence from restatements

Previous research has shown that obtaining independent assurance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting has capital market benefits and that these benefits are amplified when accountants provide the assurance. Yet, little is known about whether and the manner in which CSR assurance improves the quality of CSR reporting, and whether accounting providers improve reporting quality to a greater extent than non-accounting providers. This study uses the unique setting of CSR restatements to examine these issues. We present theoretical and empirical evidence supporting a competitive advantage of using accounting firms as assurance providers as they not only identify inaccuracies in previous reports earlier than non-accounting providers, but also prevent future reporting inaccuracies. CSR assurance, from either type of provider, also leads to improved reporting definitions, scopes, and methodologies that require restatements for comparability. Results also indicate that CSR reporting frameworks (e.g., GRI) are not a substitute for obtaining CSR assurance as the latter has incremental benefits over GRI usage in terms of identifying errors and reporting improvements. These results have implications for public policy makers considering the merits of mandating CSR assurance and for organizations assessing the relative benefits and costs of preparing GRI-based CSR reports, obtaining CSR assurance, and choosing between accounting vs. non-accounting CSR assurance providers.     

The determinants of business contribution to the 2030 Agenda: Introducing the SDG Reporting Score

Within the 2030 Agenda, the United Nations have explicitly required that the Member States introduce within their jurisdictions new forms of regulations about non-financial reporting practices. The aim of this paper is to investigate the effects related to the transposition of Directive 2014/95/EU by analyzing firm-level, governance-level, and report-level determinants of business reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). To conduct such an analysis, this study defines and introduces the SDG Reporting Score (SRS)—a qualitative proxy representing a firm orientation toward SDG reporting. The study sample includes the non-financial reports of 153 Italian Public Interest Entities. The results show a positive relationship between a firm's SRS and various determinants, such as the presence of independent directors on the board, expertise with non-financial reporting, and length of the report. Finally, the highest levels of SRS are achieved by firms operating in environmental sensitive sectors.     

A Note on the Proprietary and Entity Perspectives in Financial Statements: The Implications for two Current Controversial Issues

Financial statements can portray the financial position and performance of an entity from different perspectives. Two dominant perspectives are the proprietary and entity perspectives. These perspectives also feature in recent discussions by the IASB and the FASB in relation to their conceptual framework project. The adopted perspective will yield different presentations for a number of issues. This paper illustrates the implications for two controversial issues currently under discussion by the IASB and the FASB: accounting for changes in a reporting entity’s own credit risk when liabilities are measured at fair value, and the classification of certain obligations as either equity or liabilities. The paper explains why the adoption and consistent application of one perspective are important for standard setting and financial reporting to ensure the consistent presentation of an entity’s performance and financial position that can be correctly interpreted by users of financial statements against the background of the chosen perspective.     

Corporate social responsibility,country-level predispositions,and the consequences of choosing a level of disclosure

We study the different levels of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosures of the largest European firms. We find that firms are more predisposed to disclose more CSR information in countries with better investor protection, higher levels of democracy, more effective government services, higher quality regulations, more press freedom, and a lower commitment to environmental policies. Our analysis of the association of different levels of CSR disclosure with share prices indicates that a high level of CSR disclosure is associated with higher share prices, whereas a low level of CSR disclosure in sensitive industries is associated with lower share prices (compared to no disclosure). These results are also present when we analyse changes in CSR disclosure and are robust to the inclusion of an accounting quality measure in our model. The overall effect of the association of higher levels of CSR disclosure with higher share prices is stronger in countries with more democracy, more government effectiveness, better regulatory quality, and more press freedom. Therefore, market participants find CSR disclosures more informative in countries where investors are in a better position to voice their concerns and where there is better regulation and more effective government implementation of regulations.     

Formal Participation in the EFRAG’s Consultation Processes: The Role of European National Standard-Setters

While the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) considers European national standard-setters (NSSs) as close partners that play a vital role in its legitimacy, empirical evidence on EFRAG’s consultation processes and the involvement of NSSs therein remains scarce. We use a multi-issue/multi-period approach to investigate the formal participation in EFRAG’s consultation processes. By examining 2,102 comment letters submitted to EFRAG in the 2002–2015 period, we find that NSSs typically outweigh other stakeholder groups in terms of level of participation across stages of the consultation process and project topics. Although NSSs’ level of participation is rather stable over time, it significantly varies across European countries. We also provide a recent classification of European NSSs and show that NSSs’ level of participation varies by their institutional status and is the highest for private NSSs. Our findings have implications for aspects of the legitimacy of both EFRAG and NSSs and shed light on the role of intermediaries in international accounting standard-setting.     

Exploring the Relationship between Sustainability Reporting and Sustainability Management Practices

There has been a dramatic uptake of sustainability reporting (SR) and sustainability management practices over the last two decades, in turn raising questions about the relationship between external disclosure and internal practice of corporate sustainability. Previous literature has emphasized the role of external pressures in driving SR adoption. However, as recent practitioner surveys also identify the existence of internal motives for SR, a more comprehensive analysis of this relationship is needed. In order to address this issue, we develop a framework accounting for four company‐level SR configurations, resulting from different levels of importance of external and internal motives for SR. Then, four exploratory cases serve to illustrate these configurations and to describe the respective roles of SR at the company level. As considerable diversity among these SR practices is found, our findings point to the relevance of both external and internal motives in understanding SR contribution to corporate sustainability. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment