The ‘Cost’ of Climate Change: How Carbon Emissions Allowances are Accounted for Amongst European Union Companies

Following the withdrawal of IFRIC 3: Emissions Rights in 2005, European Union (EU) companies participating in an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) do not have definitive guidelines as to how to account for carbon emissions allowances. Using a content analysis methodology, this study examines the disclosed accounting policies of companies participating in the EU ETS, and reveals how, in the absence of clear guidance, they account for their carbon emissions allowances. As the accounting method adopted will impact upon a company's financial statements, these findings are of interest to accounting standards setters, investors, financial reporting preparers, auditors, and researchers.     

Modeling CO2 emission allowance prices and derivatives: Evidence from the European trading scheme

This paper studies the three main markets for emission allowances within the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS): Powernext, Nord Pool and European Climate Exchange (ECX). The analysis suggests that the prohibition of banking of emission allowances between distinct phases of the EU ETS has significant implications in terms of futures pricing. Motivated by these findings, we develop an empirically and theoretically valid framework for the pricing and hedging of intra-phase and inter-phase futures and options on futures, respectively.     

The European Emissions Trading Scheme: An exploratory study of how companies learn to account for carbon

European companies were confronted with new organisational challenges when the European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) was introduced in 2005. What were their cognitive sources for developing an orientation in this scheme? This paper presents original data from a survey of the University of Hamburg, dealing with companies’ responses to the EU ETS in 2005–2007. The survey was conducted three times and addressed all companies covered by the trading scheme in Germany, the United Kingdom, Denmark and the Netherlands (response rate of 19%–23% over three years). Results are provided on the share of companies that traded emission allowances, on the knowledge of their own CO₂ abatement costs, on the organisational unit that was responsible for decisions on emissions trading, and on the use of internal and external sources of advice. The data thus provides an insight into the cognitive resources that companies brought to bear when looking for an orientation in the new trading scheme. The sources of advice and the internal assignment of responsibility build the framework of competencies in which companies learn to account for carbon.     

Interpreting the European Union’s IFRS Endorsement Criteria: The Case of IFRS 9

EU Regulation requires that any international accounting standards (International Financial Reporting Standards, IFRS) and interpretations (IFRIC) pronounced by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) meet three sets of criteria before they become binding for EU-based companies: a ‘true and fair view’ criterion, a list of qualitative criteria, and a ‘European public good’ criterion. During the endorsement process, EU institutions evaluate each standard or interpretation’s compliance with these three criteria. Nevertheless, despite plenty of past endorsement decisions, there is still disagreement about a unanimous interpretation of the criteria in the literature. In this study, we interpret all three criteria against the background of European accounting law and academic accounting research. Then, the paper illustrates for the case of the new IFRS 9 standard on accounting for financial instruments how these criteria can be applied in the endorsement practice. We conclude that the standard cannot reasonably be rejected on grounds of the IAS Regulation. We also explain that the vagueness of the endorsement criteria and the inherent discretion in the eventual endorsement decision help maintain the EU’s political influence on the IASB’s standard-setting ex ante.     

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.     

Implementing IFRS from the perspective of EU publicly traded companies

This study examines implementation of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by European Union (EU) companies. All listed EU companies are required to prepare their consolidated financial statements in accordance with IFRS for years beginning on or after January 1, 2005 (Regulation (EC) 1606/2002). The paper provides insight into the IFRS adoption process based on a questionnaire sent to EU-listed companies in 2004. The 112 responses received indicate: (1) a majority of respondents have adopted IFRS for more than just consolidation purposes; (2) the process is costly, complex, and burdensome; (3) companies do not expect to lower their cost of capital by implementing IFRS; (4) the more comprehensive the approach to conversion, the more respondents tend to agree with the benefits and costs of the transition; (5) companies expect increased volatility in financial results; (6) the complexity of IFRS as well as the lack of implementation guidance and uniform interpretation are key challenges in convergence; and (7) a majority of respondents would not adopt IFRS if not required by the EU Regulation. The results of our questionnaire were confirmed by several personal interviews with finance and accounting executives of EU publicly traded companies.     

“De‐risking” Corporate Pension Plans: Options for CFOs

Until the stock market bubble burst in 2000–2002, most CFOs viewed their defined benefit pension plans as profit centers and relatively risk‐free sources of income. Since neither pension assets nor liabilities were reported on corporate balance sheets, and expected returns on pension stocks could be substituted for actual returns when reporting net income, the risks associated with DB plans were masked by GAAP accounting and thus assumed to have no bearing on corporate capital structure. But when stock prices and corporate profits fell together, the risks associated with conventional stock‐heavy pension plans showed up first in reduced pension surpluses (or, in many cases, deficits) and then later in higher required cash contributions and lower reported earnings. As a consequence, today's investors (and rating agencies) are viewing pension and other legacy liabilities as corporate debt, and demands for transparency and increased funding have triggered accounting changes and proposed legislative reforms that will further unmask the economics. This article aims to provide both private‐sector and public‐sector CFOs with suggestions for reducing and controlling the cost of providing for the retirement of their employees. Profitable, tax‐paying companies with DB plans should consider (1) funding any unfunded liabilities (if necessary, by issuing debt) and (2) reducing pension equity and interest rate exposures by shifting some (if not all) pension assets into bonds and defeasing the pension liability (achieving a tax arbitrage in the process). And in cases where the expected costs of maintaining DB plans outweigh the benefits, companies should consider freezing or terminating their plans and switching to a defined contribution (DC) or some form of hybrid plan. The authors also propose similar changes for public pension plans, where underfunding and mismatch problems are greater, less transparent, and in some ways less tractable than those of corporate DB plans.     

LARGE ACCOUNTING FIRMS’ SURVEY REVEALS EMERGENCE OF “TWO STANDARD” SYSTEM IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

Convergence with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as promulgated by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) is receiving great attention. In 2005, all listed companies domiciled in the European Union (EU) will be required to prepare consolidated accounts based on IFRS. Individual EU member states are, however, permitted to decide whether IFRS will be required or allowed for non-listed companies or for listed companies’ individual accounts. Based primarily on data collected by the six largest international accounting firms during their most recent convergence survey, this paper examines each of the 15 EU member states’ convergence plans and their perceived barriers to convergence.The findings indicate that most EU members do not plan to converge national GAAP with IFRS, thereby highlighting the great significance of the large firms’ concerns regarding emergence of a “two-standard” system in the EU. The survey indicates the majority of EU countries will continue to require or allow national GAAP for individual accounts. While Belgium is considering requiring IFRS for all consolidated accounts, other EU countries have decided to allow or are considering allowing non-listed companies to prepare IFRS consolidated accounts.In most EU countries, the link between financial accounting and tax accounting represents a major barrier to convergence. Other frequently cited barriers include disagreement with certain IFRS and the complicated nature of certain IFRS. International requirements for financial instruments are viewed as particularly problematic.     

Performance Reporting under Fair Value Accounting

Abstract

This paper compares performance measurement under fair value accounting vs. U.S. GAAP accounting. As illustrated in the paper, the main difference between fair value accounting and U.S. GAAP accounting lies in the treatment of gains and losses on both assets and liabilities. Fair value accounting would report all gains and losses on both assets and liabilities in the period in which they arise. U.S. GAAP on the other hand, recognizes gains and losses over the life of the block of business (or at the time of a transaction). When net gains and losses on assets and liabilities are immaterial, the pattern of earnings under both systems can be quite similar. However, If a company is generating significant gains or losses on its net book of business (such as in the case of an asset/liability mismatch), fair value accounting will reveal this much sooner than U.S. GAAP. When the full impact of its actions (including gains and losses) is reported in the current period, management is in a better position to understand how the value of the company is changing and adjust its decisions accordingly. This is one of the main reasons for moving to a fair value system and is expected to be a major benefit if fair value accounting is ultimately adopted.     

Disclosure of Private Information and Reduction of Uncertainty: Environmental Liabilities in the Chemical Industry

We investigate the potential uncertainty-reducing role of accounting information in the context of contingent Superfund liability valuation. We first develop theoretical arguments for the way reduction of uncertainty regarding these contingent liabilities is expected to affect security prices. Empirical proxies are developed for two types of uncertainty surrounding contingent Superfund liabilities: site uncertainty and allocation uncertainty. In a valuation framework, we then investigate whether financial statement disclosures and accruals reduce uncertainty and thereby affect security valuation. Specifically, we analyze the interaction of private information contained in firm disclosures and accruals with inherent uncertainty surrounding contingent Superfund liabilities. Results suggest that in a regulatory environment allowing substantial reporting discretion, firm-provided financial statement information affects valuation of contingent Superfund liabilities by reducing uncertainty. Further, we find that information revealed through accruals versus disclosures is differentially effective at reducing site and allocation uncertainty.     

Accounting as discursive construction: The relationship between statement of financial accounting standards no. 106 and the dismantling of retiree health benefits

This study explores reductions in benefits that occurred coincident with the passage of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard 106 requiring companies to accrue a liability for unfunded retiree health benefits. Congressional hearings and the business press reveal two competing discursive constructions of the retiree health benefits crisis. The first portrayed them as moral obligations that firms were attempting to avoid, the second as unexpected liabilities threatening corporations. Drawing on the work of Skocpol (1992), Weber (1949, 1978) and Burawoy (1983, 1985), we argue that characterizing these benefits primarily as accounting liabilities reinforced the second construction, facilitating corporate efforts to roll back retiree health coverage.     

Investment-Based Cost Accounting as a Fundamental Basis of Decision-Oriented Management Accounting

Decision making concerns over cost allocations, especially common cost allocations, have a long history. They are well canvassed in Thomas (1969 ) and Wells (1978 ). This article revisits the cost allocation debate, albeit in a new setting, and rehearses arguments relevant to long- and short-term decision contexts. Here a means is proposed to address those problems, namely to adopt the investment-based approach to cost accounting. This approach draws on ideas of Hotelling (1925 ), Preinreich (1938 ) and Schneider (1961 ), and applies the notion of net present value in another setting, namely to cost accounting theory. Research has revealed no discussion of this in the Anglo-American literature. This article shows analytically that the investment-based approach offers a general basis for decision-oriented cost accounting, as it combines investment theory with cost accounting and thereby connects long-term with short-term decisions. While reviewing primarily European literature, it also examines several Anglo-American works. The analysis reveals how for three classical decision problems—production program planning, purchase order lot sizes, and break-even price limits—two different types of costs, namely depreciation and material costs, have to be based on cash flows and net present value. The proposed investment-based approach permits an examination of the extent to which cost accounting concepts and cost information are relevant to those decisions. This theoretical concept is used to derive pertinent cost dimensions and to solve traditional problems of cost allocation. A caution is that the investment approach is limited to decision facilitating cost accounting. Whether it may be possible to couple it with agency theory and its focus on decision influencing has not been explored and is an issue for further research.     

Statement 133: Not Perfect, but a Step in the Right Direction

Statement 133 represents progress toward achieving the goals of GAAP. To the extent it requires companies to mark their derivatives to market, balance sheets will give investors a clearer, more complete picture of a company's assets and liabilities.
But if the fair value accounting prescribed by Statement 133 has provided clarity for investors about corporate derivatives positions, it has also forced some companies—those unable or unwilling to qualify for hedge accounting—to report more volatile earnings, causing the accounting rule to come under heavy criticism. As the author argues, however, such criticism is based on the misperception that the objective of GAAP income statements is to provide a "normalized" measure of financial performance—a single number that can be discounted or capitalized by analysts to arrive at a company's value. In fact, it is mainly the job of the analysts themselves, not accountants, to determine which elements of a company's income statement are recurring and central to the business.
What's more, the author argues that the FASB went too far when it allowed hedge accounting for forecasted transactions. Rather than expanding the use of hedge accounting, the FASB should promulgate a comprehensive fair value standard, one that aims to mark all corporate assets and liabilities to market—which would eliminate the need for hedge accounting or any of its associated complexity, and compensate for 133's dearth of disclosures.     

‘Old Hens Make the Best Soup’: Accounting for the Earning Process and the IASB/FASB Attempts to Reform Revenue Recognition Accounting Standards

Abstract

By developing a synthesis of documents that have been released officially under the revenue recognition project jointly run by the International Accounting Standards Board and Financial Accounting Standards Board, this article points out that the earning generation and realization process over time (that is to say, the traditional accounting model) is in reality still playing an important role without losing its raison d'être. Although this model is supposed to have been consistently rejected since the outset on the premise of the adoption of the assets and liabilities approach amid the Boards' attempt to establish a new revenue recognition model, this article aims to reconfirm the significance and validity of this earning process – that is, the corporate process of generating and realizing earnings over time – as the representational focus of accounting for revenue recognition. Through an internal critique, our article summarizes and discusses successive Boards' proposals under the same asset–liability approach that they have been advocating for revenue recognition. Through a comprehensive comparative analysis (external critique), our article further criticizes the usefulness and feasibility of this approach, especially the transfer-of-control basis of revenue recognition which the Boards propose. It argues then for an alternative approach that combines asset–liability with revenue–expense accounting while re-establishing focus upon the earning process over time.     

THE SUBSTANCE OF ACCOUNTING FOR PUBLIC‐PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

This article evaluates Public‐Private Partnerships (PPP) accounting practice and the related financial accounting and reporting requirements. Governments across the world are seeking to access private finance to improve public infrastructure. Accounting for PPPs has encountered many difficulties, one of which is the practice by which PPPs are not accounted for as fixed assets on the balance sheet of either the public sector client or the private sector operator. Accounting for PPPs has grown in importance at a time of transition from national Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (GAAP) to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Under UK GAAP, both client and operator accounting adopt the reasoning – familiar from leasing standards – of the allocation of risks and rewards between the parties to determine the party which should recognize the fixed asset on its balance sheet. The gap in IFRS with regard to operator accounting has been filled by the interpretation IFRIC 12 on service concession agreements: this moves the reasoning from risks and rewards to control, familiar from consolidation standards. The UK Treasury and the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) have required/proposed the adoption of the mirror‐image treatment of IFRIC 12. In most, but not all, cases, control will be assessed to rest with the client, which will recognize property, plant and equipment, and not with the operator, which will recognize either a financial asset or an intangible asset on the basis of an assessment of which party bears the majority of risks and rewards. Under both UK GAAP and IFRS, accounting policy choices are strongly influenced by, for the client, governmental control frameworks, and for the operator, by the implications for the profile of distributable profits and for taxation. An important public policy issue is that the national accounts, which for European Union member states must comply with European System of Accounts 1995, will remain on a risks and rewards basis. It is these numbers that will be used in assessments of macro‐fiscal policy and fiscal risks, notwithstanding that the Eurostat version of risks and rewards is even more open to manipulation than were the national financial reporting standards.     

Disincentives to exchange customized local GAAP for IFRS

The global adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) resulted in the loss of local Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Some local GAAPs were tailored to capture the adopting jurisdictions' economic nuances, which IFRS may not address. One example is our setting, where, unlike IFRS, Canadian GAAP allowed the recognition of regulatory claims (i.e., assets and liabilities). Given this disparity, Canadian regulators granted rate-regulated entities the choice to opt out of Canada’s mandatory adoption of IFRS. Leveraging this unique setting, we test whether the loss of allowances under local GAAP is costly enough to deter companies from adopting IFRS. We find evidence that utilities with a history of capitalizing regulatory assets under Canadian GAAP are significantly less likely to adopt IFRS. This relation is more pronounced when a company has higher regulatory assets recognized under local GAAP, engages with the US capital markets, and has a high perceived cost of raising future capital. However, we find that the future cost of capital is lower for entities that adopt IFRS after historically capitalizing regulatory assets. Our results identify a new cost of adopting IFRS largely unexplored in the literature: the cost of losing jurisdictionally tailored accounting standards not included within IFRS.     

Defeasing Legacy Costs*

The authors propose a new way to defease the legacy costs of America's defined benefit pension system that will help ensure its viability. The proposal would allow companies to exchange their legacy pension debt for another liability with more attractive terms—to the benefit of the sponsor, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), and the plan participants. The transparency gained by separating the past from future liabilities will give better insight into sponsors' balance sheets. And it could take the PBGC out of the impossible position of insuring against events over which the insured have considerable control.     

IFRS Ten Years on: Has the IASB Imposed Extensive Use of Fair Value? Has the EU Learnt to Love IFRS? And Does the Use of Fair Value make IFRS Illegal in the EU?

Abstract

This paper is a commentary on issues related to the first decade's mandatory use of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) in the EU. Three specific but related questions are addressed, as in the paper's title. On the first (imposition and use of fair value (FV)), I conclude that the International Accounting Standards Board has not substantially extended the use of FV in its 15 years of work and that most companies hold few assets or liabilities on the FV basis. On the second question (adoption in the EU), I analyse a consultation exercise which strongly suggests that the EU's imposition of IFRSs will continue. On the third question (legality of IFRSs), I explain why recent UK legal opinions that question the legality of reporting under IFRSs are not persuasive.     

The Cost of Carbon: Capital Market Effects of the Proposed Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)

In March 2008, the Australian Government announced its intention to introduce a national Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), now expected to start in 2015. This impending development provides an ideal setting to investigate the impact an ETS in Australia will have on the market valuation of Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) firms. This is the first empirical study into the pricing effects of the ETS in Australia. Primarily, we hypothesize that firm value will be negatively related to a firm's carbon intensity profile. That is, there will be a greater impact on firm value for high carbon emitters in the period prior (2007) to the introduction of the ETS, whether for reasons relating to the existence of unbooked liabilities associated with future compliance and/or abatement costs, or for reasons relating to reduced future earnings. Using a sample of 58 Australian listed firms (constrained by the current availability of emissions data) which comprise larger, more profitable and less risky listed Australian firms, we first undertake an event study focusing on five distinct information events argued to impact the probability of the proposed ETS being enacted. Here, we find direct evidence that the capital market is indeed pricing the proposed ETS. Second, using a modified version of the Ohlson ( 1995 ) valuation model, we undertake a valuation analysis designed not only to complement the event study results, but more importantly to provide insights into the capital market's assessment of the magnitude of the economic impact of the proposed ETS as reflected in market capitalization. Here, our results show that the market assesses the most carbon intensive sample firms a market value decrement relative to other sample firms of between 7% and 10% of market capitalization. Further, based on the carbon emission profile of the sample firms we imply a ‘future carbon permit price’ of between AUD$17 per tonne and AUD$26 per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted. This study is more precise than industry reports, which set a carbon price of between AUD$15 to AUD$74 per tonne.     

Constituent Participation and the IASB's International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee

Abstract

While international convergence of accounting standards is becoming more of a reality, the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) continues to seek greater acceptance and legitimacy as an institution. Constituent participation is one key component for an organization to obtain legitimacy and success. This study investigates constituent participation of one significant part of the IASB, the International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee (IFRIC). IASB/IFRIC constituents are classified in two ways: (1) geographically (by country and region); and (2) stakeholder interest group (the accounting profession, regulators, preparers and users). Respondents writing comment letters in regards to IFRIC's first 18 Draft Interpretations are examined. A total of 272 respondents from 40 countries generated 714 comment letters. The European Union provided a majority of writers and letters, with the UK being the largest contributor. The USA, Canada and developing countries generated few letters. Constituent participation significantly increased over IFRIC's predecessor committee, but responses remain concentrated with 35 respondents, mostly professional accountancy bodies and accounting standard-setters, generating 58% of the comment letters. Users accounted for only 5% of letters. While improved constituent participation may support the notion of increased legitimacy, limited participation by some IFRIC constituents suggests that the IASB should further promote constituent participation to achieve greater legitimacy.