Asset Recognition And Probabilistic Judgments

With the issuing of Statement of Accounting Concepts 4 on the definition and recognition of elements of financial statements, research into the possible ramifications of the application of recognition criteria in that statement is timely. Using 60 experienced Australian auditors as subjects, this study provides information on the numerical equivalents of uncertainty expressions such as "beyond any reasonable doubt" and "virtually certain" (as per the asset-recognition criteria of AASB 1020), and "probable" (as per Statement of Accounting Concepts 4). In addition, it compares the decisions made by auditors under the criteria included in AASB 1020 and SAC 4. The results indicate that the regognition criteria in AASB 1020 are a higher test of stringency for the recognition of assets than those adopted in the new SAC 4.     

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.     

Changes in Segment Reporting in the Australian Banking Industry

This paper examines changes in segment reporting in the Australian banking industry following the introduction of the revised AASB 1005 Segment Reporting. We find that the standard has implications for the qualitative characteristics of "understandability" and "comparability". Feedback on the revised standard is timely, as both the AASB and the IASB have recently issued new segmental reporting standards that are based on US GAAP's management approach of determining operating segments.     

AASB 1037 Sows the Seeds of Change: A Survey of SGARA Measurement Methods

International developments are set to reignite the controversy over how self-generating and regenerating assets (SGARAs) are measured. The International Accounting Standards Committee is working on an international accounting standard on agriculture due to be effective some time after 1 January 2002. The standard is expected to be similar to AASB 1037 Self-Generating and Regenerating Assets. This is an interesting development since the Australian Accounting Standards Board was urged to not move ahead of international developments when it released Exposure Draft 83 Self-Generating and Regenerating Assets
This paper surveys Australian SGARA measurement practices to assess the extent of reporting change required by AASB 103 7 and its international counterpart.     

Capitalized intangibles and financial analysts

We examine whether firms that capitalize a higher proportion of their underlying intangible assets have higher analyst following, lower dispersion of analysts’ earnings forecasts and more accurate earnings forecasts relative to firms that capitalize a lower proportion. Under Australian generally accepted accounting principles, capitalization of intangible assets has become increasingly ‘routine’ since the late 1980s. It is predicted that this experience leads Australian analysts to expect firms with relatively more certain intangible investments to signal this fact by capitalizing intangible assets. Our results are consistent with this. We find that capitalization of intangible assets is associated with higher analyst following and lower absolute earnings forecast error for firms with a stock of underlying intangible assets. Our tests suggest a weaker association between capitalization and lower earnings forecast dispersion. We conclude that there are benefits for analysts, for management to have the option to capitalize intangible assets. These findings suggest that IAS 38 Intangible Assets and AASB 138 Intangible Assets reduce the usefulness of financial statements.     

All for Nothing? Accounting for Land under Roads by Australian Local Governments

Accounting for land under roads by local governments has been one of the most controversial and protracted episodes in the setting of Australian accounting standards. However, after more than two decades of exposure drafts, regulation, transitional provisions and re‐regulation, most land under roads has not been recognised in local government balance sheets. Australian Accounting Standard AAS 27 Financial Reporting by Local Governments was first issued in 1991 and, among other significant reforms, proposed that local governments report land under roads as an asset in their financial reports. However, persistent opposition to this requirement and practical difficulties associated with its implementation gave rise to a succession of transitional provisions deferring its mandatory application. Finally, in 2007 – 16 years after AAS 27 was first promulgated – the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) sought to bring closure to this issue with the release of AASB 1051 Land Under Roads. However, in the interim some state governments had pursued their own resolutions, forbidding the recognition of land under roads. This research reports the results of a survey of the impact of land under roads on local government financial reports. After two decades of debate and regulation, diversity is found to persist in the extent and manner of recognition of this ‘asset’. However, recognition remains the exception rather than the norm and is typically confined to recent acquisitions that comprise only a very small portion of total assets. These circumstances are suggestive of an episode of regulatory failure.     

An Evaluation of the Decision Usefulness of Cash Flow Statements by Australian Reporting Entities

In June 1991, the Australian Accounting Standards Board issued AASB 1026, Statement of Cash Flows. Since replacing the funds flow statement, the new accounting standard has become a compulsory part of Australian corporate financial reporting. In contrast to cash flow developments in the US and UK. the emergence of AASB 1026 has been preceded by almost no significant research attention by Australian academics. This study surveyed the attitudes to cash flow statements of 210 public companies listed on the Australian stock exchange. Findings revealed that there was particularly strong support for the essential provisions of AASB 1026 and the underlying principles of cash flow reporting. The results indicated that the cash flow statement is important for a wide variety of internal and external decision contexts, and appealed to a wide range of users. Furthermore, compared with previous research (e.g. McEnroe, 1989), the present survey demonstrated that operating profit was not considered by a large number of Australian companies to be a superior measure of business performance to operating cash flow.     

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.     

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.     

Reaction To The Mandatory Write-Down Provisions Of AASB 1010: Accounting For The Revaluation Of Non-Current Assets

Commentators in the financial press claimed that the amendments to AASB 1010, Accounting for the Revaluation of Non-Current Assets, issued in September 1991, would have "disastrous" implications for the accounts of companies. This paper is concerned with whether the amendments did indeed affect asset write-down activities. An analysis of write-down practices of 75 Australian companies before and after the amendments were operative suggests that the commentators' judgment could have been hasty.     

Accounting for SGARAs: Towards Comparability and Consistency

The objectives of this study were to examine whether consistency and comparability has been achieved through the introduction of AASB 1037 and the subsequent adoption of AASB 141. We find that consistency in measurement methods has not been achieved through the introduction of a prescribed accounting method under AASB 1037 and is not likely to be achieved through the application of AASB 141. Consistency was found however in the application of measurement methods over time and, in particular, in these SGARA types of native forests and plantation timber. The study contributes to an understanding of the issues faced by Australian firms surrounding the processes leading to the introduction of a new accounting standard.     

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.     

Accounting Problems in Infrastructure Asset Valuation and Depreciation in New South Wales Local Government

The aim of this paper is twofold: (i) to investigate whether New South Wales (NSW) local government councils comply with Australian Accounting Standards in accounting for revaluation of their infrastructure assets and (ii) to assess any consequences for the reliability of financial reporting in NSW local government. Using road assets as an example, we analyse the results of revaluations of road assets undertaken by 89 NSW councils as reported in their financial statements during the period 2013 to 2016. In this analysis we focus on the effect of a change in accumulated depreciation and impairment loss component of fair value as a percentage of the gross replacement cost of the revalued assets. The analysis reveals that in most cases this effect is significant. However, the accounting and reporting of this effect is strikingly inconsistent between the councils. Based on a critical analysis of the accounting framework and disclosure of the revaluation effects, we conclude that the main reason for the change in the fair value of assets is altered estimates of remaining useful life. Furthermore, we argue that councils did not comply with the requirements of AASB 116 in determining the useful life of the assets.     

Direct or Indirect Cash Flow Statements?

The Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) and the Financial Reporting Standards Board (FRSB) have issued a joint proposal that will allow reporting entities to choose between the direct and indirect method of reporting cash flow statements. This evidence presented in this paper indicates that the direct cash flow reporting format, relative to the indirect method, leads to better prediction of future firm performance and has a stronger association with share prices. The AASB and the FRSB have to decide whether to support high quality reporting or harmonisation.     

Developing Accounting Regulations that Reflect Public Viewpoints: The Australian Solution to Differential Reporting

In this paper, we analyse the factors that have shaped the approach taken by the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) in addressing the issue of differential reporting in Australia. In contrast to its early adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards in 2005, the AASB has signalled an independent approach to differential reporting. Still in progress at the time of writing, we show how the AASB's approach has been shaped by feedback from key stakeholder groups, as well as by influential individuals and key events. In the face of strongly held views on both sides of the debate, the Board has moved from reliance on discursive techniques to develop and justify proposed policies to embracing to a greater extent, the use of more objective research evidence to resolve the empirical questions presented in the public debate.     

SAC 4: A Source Of Accounting Change

Despite its long gestation, the latest release in the Australian Accounting Research Foundation's conceptual framework, Statement of Accounting Concepts 4 Definition and Recognition of the Elements of Financial Statements (SAC 4), is poorly understood by many accountants. The statement specifies definitions for the elements which form the basis of the information in financial reports and sets out the criteria to be used in deciding when these elements should be recognised (reported) in the reports. Statements of accounting concepts do not attract the same direct legal force as AASB accounting standards. Nevertheless, this statement promises significant reforms to financial reporting. Because of its potential to create far-reaching changes, it is essential that accounting professionals are familiar with its contents and application. This paper describes the structure of SAC 4, comments upon some of its important components and illustrates its operation and key features in the context of one element, “assets”.     

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 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.