Better Late than Never,the Timing of Goodwill Impairment Testing in Australia

The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) goodwill impairment testing regime has been in place in Australia for almost a decade. One of the burning issues arising from the adoption of the IFRS regime is whether firms have impaired goodwill in a timely manner. This study examines the timing of goodwill impairment decisions in the Australian context during the period 2007 to 2009. It is evident that a non‐trivial number of firms did not impair goodwill as called for under the standard governing asset impairment.     

Compliance Over Time by Australian Firms with IFRS Disclosure Requirements

Prior literature indicates that compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) is not complete in many countries. This study examines practice under the Australian version of IFRS by measuring compliance with the disclosure requirements of eight standards. The study focuses on data drawn from the consolidated financial statements of a sample of the top 200 Australian listed companies. To enable a time‐series analysis of compliance over time, this study examines three reporting years: 2006, 2010 and 2014. This research identifies material non‐compliance among Australian companies, finding that some disclosure items appear to be neglected by companies, such as some of the requirements of AASB 137 Provisions. This non‐compliance raises questions about accounting and audit quality in Australia. It may suggest poor regulatory oversight.     

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.     

Segment Reporting Practices in Australia: Has IFRS 8 Made a Difference?

This study examines changes in segment reporting in Australia following the adoption of the international accounting standard, IFRS 8 Operating Segments. We analyse segment disclosures of the top 200 companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange in their pre‐ and post‐adoption of AASB 8, the equivalent Australian standard to IFRS 8. Our findings indicate that the number of reportable segments and the extent of disclosure have increased post‐adoption of AASB 8. Contrary to expectations, however, there is very little change in the identification of reportable segments. Companies, in general, have managed to retain their segment reporting formats and disclosures from the pre‐AASB 8 period.     

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.     

Did the goodwill accounting standard impose material economic consequences on Australian acquirers?

This research explores the empirical association between takeover bid premium and acquired (purchased) goodwill, and tests whether the strength of the association changes after the passage of approved accounting standard AASB 1013 in Australia in 1988. AASB 1013 mandated capitalization and amortization of acquired goodwill to the income statement over a maximum period of 20 years. We use regressions to assess how the association between bid premium and acquired goodwill varies in the pre‐AASB and post‐AASB 1013 periods after controlling for confounding factors. Our results show that reducing the variety of accounting policy options available to bidder management after an acquisition results in a systematic reduction in the strength of the association between premium and goodwill.     

Accounting for Income Taxes: Early Adoption Issues

This study investigates whether the revised AASB 1020 Income Taxes was adopted early by Top 100 publicly listed companies in Australia between 2000 and 2004. We found that only three of the companies adopted the revised standard before its implementation date of 1 January 2005. Interviews with senior company representatives indicated that the three companies had quite different reasons for early adoption. Non-early-adopting companies had considered that the revised standard would not make a material difference to their reporting results. Tax consolidations and the impending international financial reporting standards were regarded as more important issues.     

GAAP,GFS and AASB 1049: perceptions of public sector stakeholders

Efforts by Australian standard‐setters to harmonise public sector financial reporting resulted in AASB 1049, which sought to bridge the divide between generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)‐based and government finance statistics (GFS)‐based financial statements. However, whether AASB 1049 has resulted in information that is considered appropriate for the public sector has not been examined. We explore this issue by comparing the requirements of AASB 1049 with the responses from a survey of public sector stakeholders on the appropriate accounting treatment and presentation of selected financial items. The analysis suggests consensus with AASB 1049 on presentation issues but less consensus on accounting treatments.     

The potential harms of goodwill impairment avoidance: Evidence based on future performance and stock prices

The rapidly increasing volume of goodwill assets in the capital market generates potential risks due to the possibility of an untimely recognition of goodwill impairment. In this paper, we investigate the financial consequences of goodwill impairment avoidance based on firms’ future performance and stock prices. Using Chinese A-share listed firms with goodwill balances, we find that avoiding goodwill impairments negatively affects a firm’s performance growth and increases its risk of a future stock price crash. These adverse effects continue for the three years following the goodwill impairment avoidance. Our results indicate that goodwill impairment avoidance has detrimental impacts on a firm’s future performance and stock price and that these impacts are persistent. Our conclusions are helpful for regulators on how to prevent the risks hidden in goodwill impairment recognition and maintain the stable development of the financial market.     

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.     

IFRS adoption and analysts’ earnings forecasts: Australian evidence

We study 145 large listed Australian firms to explore the impact of international financial reporting standards (IFRS) adoption on the properties of analysts’ forecasts and the role of firm disclosure about IFRS impact. We find that analyst forecast accuracy improves, and there is no significant change in dispersion in the adoption year, suggesting that analysts coped effectively with transition to IFRS. However, we do not observe the expected relationship between firms’ IFRS impact disclosures in their financial statements issued at the end of the transition year with forecast error and dispersion in the adoption year. The results question the timeliness and usefulness of financial statement disclosure, even in a setting where disclosure was mandated by accounting standards (AASB 1047 and AASB 1) and firms had strong incentives to provide information to analysts.     

Market reaction to and valuation of IFRS reconciliation adjustments: first evidence from the UK

We investigate the market reaction to, and the value-relevance of, information contained in the mandatory transitional documents required by International Financial Reporting Standards 1 (2005). We find significant negative abnormal returns for firms reporting negative earnings reconciliation. Although the informational content of the positive earnings adjustments is value-relevant before disclosure, for negative earnings adjustments it is value-relevant only after disclosure. This finding is consistent with managers delaying the communication of bad news until IFRS compliance. A finer model shows that adjustments attributed to impairment of goodwill, share-based payments, and deferred taxes are incrementally value-relevant but that only the impairment of goodwill and deferred taxes reveal new information. Our results indicate that mandatory IFRS adoption alters investors’ beliefs about stock prices.     

The Relevance of Asset Revaluations over an Economic Cycle

The results of tests reported in this paper show that asset revaluations accounted for in accordance with AAS 10/AASB 1010 provide information that is consistent with the information set used by investors in pricing the shares of a sample of Australian listed firms. The "value relevance" of asset revaluations occurs in periods of both rising and declining asset prices.     

The Impact of Audit Quality Indicators on the Timeliness of Goodwill Impairments: Evidence from the German Setting

This study investigates whether goodwill impairments are perceived as timely and whether specific auditor characteristics affect the perceived timeliness. It therefore contributes to central questions in accounting research: is managerial discretion over accounting numbers (accounting choice) good or bad for stakeholders and does audit quality have an impact on this relationship? It is motivated by the IASB's post-implementation review on business combinations and the Goodwill and Impairment project based on it, the ongoing debate on the decision usefulness of impairment testing, and the question whether auditors have an impact on firms’ reporting of impairment losses. Based on a sample of German listed firms for the period 2006 to 2013, the results indicate that goodwill impairments are not recognized in a timely manner and delayed by at least one to two years. Moreover, the findings suggest that the recognition of impairment losses is influenced by auditor characteristics. In particular, firms seem to report goodwill impairments in a more timely fashion when they are audited by a Big 4 auditor, whereas the timeliness seems to decrease with a higher non-audit fee ratio and a longer auditor tenure. Moreover, additional analyses indicate that higher audit fees lead to more timely impairments.     

REACTIONS TO REGULATION OF ACCOUNTING FOR GOODWILL

Regulations designed to achieve “uniformity in practice” in Australian firms' reporting of goodwill were first adopted in 1985 with the introduction of AAS18. Because of the requirement to amortise purchased goodwill, a number of firms either did not comply or took evasive actions to mitigate the effects of the standard. This paper documents and explains the pre-regulation cross-sectional variation in accounting practices. Reactions to the set of regulations introduced between 1985 and 1989 are then described and explained through a longitudinal study of accounting policy choice. We develop hypotheses which explain why the goodwill accounting rules reversed relations between the accounting methods adopted by firms and both the earnings effect of compliance and the market value of the firm's goodwill. The results are confirmatory.     

Commentary: Some Further Evidence on Discount Rate Selection in the Context of Goodwill Impairment Testing

In an earlier edition of this journal, we published evidence relating to the nature of discount rates chosen by a sample of large Australian‐listed firms in the context of their goodwill impairment testing ( Carlin and Finch 2009 ). We argued that our evidence suggested that the rigour of the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) goodwill impairment testing process was being undermined by inappropriate choice of discount rates on the part of many firms. In a commentary published alongside our article, questions were raised as to the validity of our conclusions and the methodology we applied in our study ( Gallery 2009 ). Subsequently, Bradbury has also contributed to the debate, raising similar concerns to those voiced by Gallery ( Bradbury 2010 ). In this brief paper, we provide further and better particulars in relation to our original dataset in a bid to assist those who have taken an interest in this debate to further inform their view of the merits (or otherwise) of the case we made in our original article.