Measuring the Comparability of Company Accounts Conditionally: A Research Note

Comparability indices summarize the level of comparability between companies at a national and international level, an issue of importance to investors, regulators, and standard setters. Comparability indices can identify areas where comparability is low and where comparability is deteriorating. Furthermore, they can be used to quantify the extent to which initiatives such as International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are successful in raising comparability between company accounts. Despite past literature emphasizing how factors other than country influence accounting methods used by companies, current comparability indices ignore these other factors. This paper introduces new national and international indices within the T index framework to fill this gap in the literature. Formula for the new national and international indices, and their standard errors, are provided. An example using European data is used to demonstrate the calculations and illustrate the importance of controlling for these firm specific factors.     

Measurement of de facto harmonisation: implications of non-disclosure for research planning and interpretation

Index-based harmonisation measurement techniques using company accounts data have been developed in prior research. Although the results of applying such measures have been reported in the literature as indicating actual levels of financial reporting harmony, such conclusions have not always been justified. In the first instance, it can be argued that the limitations of the indices as measures of financial reporting harmony in situations of non-disclosure were not always appreciated or highlighted. Secondly, data used for the purpose of measuring harmony was not always sufficiently robust to support the conclusions drawn. In this study, a generalised formula is presented, combining different categories of non-disclosure. It is reconciled to special cases derived in previous research and is then applied to company accounts data, which is sufficiently refined in detail to form a basis for answering illustrative exploratory research questions relating to the level of harmony and harmonisation trends. The specific analysis relates to deferred tax accounting in Ireland and Denmark over a period of eight years. Statistical analysis reinforces a discussion that warns researchers of the potential variations in results. Conclusions are drawn that the state of harmony is better estimated when the data is analysed to distinguish applicable from not-applicable cases of non-disclosure, and the index formulae applied are adjusted appropriately in both the numerator and the denominator. However, caution remains necessary where the non-disclosure level is relatively high.     

Statistical inference using the T index to quantify the level of comparability between accounts

The extent to which the accounts of companies are comparable is considered important to users and regulators. However, prior research has been restricted by a lack of appropriate statistical methods for testing comparability indices. This has made it difficult to assess the true level of comparability from sample data and to test research hypotheses such as whether the level of comparability (a) differs by policy, (b) differs by country, and (c) changes over time. This paper fills this gap by exploring the statistical properties of the T index. The T index generalises the H, C, I and various modifications of these indices and represents a unified framework for the measurement of the extent to which the accounts of companies are comparable. Formulae for the bias and standard error for any index under this framework are provided and proved. The bias is shown to equal zero or be negligible in most practical situations. Using historical data, the standard error is used to illustrate the accuracy with which comparability is estimated and to perform formal statistical inference using confidence intervals and p‐values. Furthermore, the sampling distribution of the T index is assessed for normality. Implications for research design and sample size determination are also discussed.     

The Impact of Adopting International Accounting Standards on the Harmonization of Accounting Practices

Over the past few decades numerous organizations have been actively participating in the efforts to improve the comparability of financial reporting. Many studies have discussed the benefits and drawbacks of comparability. This study investigated the affect on the harmonization, or comparability, of accounting practices when a sample of companies choose to use international accounting standards (IASs) when preparing financial reports.This study analyzed trends in the I index, a measure of concentration for the use of a particular accounting practice introduced by van der Tas, to determine if the choice of accounting methods by a sample of Swiss companies became more aligned with a sample of companies from three other countries. The study included a control sample of Swiss companies that did not switch from reporting using local Swiss standards during the same time period, 1988 through 1995. Four accounting practices were included; depreciation, inventory, financial statement cost basis, and consolidation practices. The practices used were compared with a sample of companies from three countries; Japan, the UK, and the US.The results indicated that across the 8-year period, the majority of the I indices comparisons were positive and statistically significant. However, the results did not support that these increases were due primarily to the adoption of IASs.     

Comparability in IPSASs: Lessons to be Learned for the European Standards

Abstract

In 2013 the European Commission started addressing issues concerning public sector accounting harmonization across EU Member States, embarking on a project to develop European Public Sector Accounting Standards (EPSASs). Although acknowledging the indisputable reference of the existing International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSASs), it highlighted that IPSASs, as they were, could not be suitably applied in the EU context (European Commission, 2013a). IPSASs were considered as not covering specific important matters of public sector accounting, not showing enough stability due to the need of constant convergence with IFRSs, and offering several options that compromised comparability.

Comparability of public sector accounts across Member States is one of the main objectives of EPSASs (EUROSTAT, 2016, 2019), clearly established as a qualitative characteristic in the draft EPSAS Conceptual Framework (EUROSTAT, 2018). It is critical for EU economic and fiscal convergence that countries’ accounts allow for substantial comparison and standardized transition to the National Accounts (Jorge et al., 2014).

The IPSAS Conceptual Framework (IPSASB, 2014), meanwhile issued, sustains that adopting these standards would improve comparability of General Purpose Financial Reporting (GPFR), in this way strengthening transparency and accountability of public sector finance.

Given that, despite the above concerns, EPSASs are to be developed on the basis of IPSASs (European Commission, 2019), the purpose of this paper is to show that IPSASs are not an adequate reference for EPSASs in terms of allowing the desired comparability of countries’ accounts in the EU. It relies on evidence gathered from IPSAS-based financial reports prepared by some Agencies of the United Nations System and from audit reports of the UN Board of Auditors.

The research illustrates that IPSASs only allow for de jure comparability of financial reports at a very broad level. Their implementation and interpretation in practice (due to the options permitted and the judgement required) does not allow for de facto comparable GPFR. European standard-setters need to be aware that the comparability EPSASs need to address across EU Member States’ accounts must go beyond the one that is permitted by IPSASs – EPSASs need to stretch IPSASs harmonization to a higher level of standardization.     

A Statistical Model of International Accounting Harmonization

This article shows how the difference between the observed frequencies of accounting policy choice and the outcome of a random policy choice, where each available method has an equal chance of being selected, may be fully explained with a statistical model. The process of harmonization is described in a way that identifies departures from equiprobable accounting policy choice as either: (a) the systematic effects of harmonization, or (b) the effects of systematic divergence from international harmony where the frequency of adoption of differing accounting methods varies across countries, or (c) the effects of company-specific accounting policy choices. The understanding of harmony that underlies previous attempts to measure harmonization is such that, with respect to a particular financial statement item, a situation of maximum harmony is reached when all companies in all countries use the same accounting method. From the standpoint of modelling the harmonization process. however, a different concept of harmony may be more useful. In this article, therefore, we posit a state of distributional harnzony in which, other things being equal, the expected distribution of accounting policy choices is the same in each country. In this theoretical state. the odds of selecting a given accounting method from those available for a particular financial statement item are identical for each country. A major advantage of this benchmark is that it provides a basis for distinguishing between two possibly conflicting components of the international harmonization process: between-country harmonization and within-country standardization. A hierarchy of nested statistical models is then used to describe accounting policy choices made by companies with an international shareholding and registered in Europe, where the European Union has been involved in a program of accounting harmonization. The accounting policies analysed in depth in this article comprise the treatment of goodwill and accounting for deferred taxation. The results are compared with the comparability index method used previously in harmonization research studies.     

The impact of national GAAP and accounting traditions on IFRS policy selection: Evidence from Germany and the UK

The adoption of IFRS in the European Union in 2005 aimed to increase the comparability of publicly traded companies’ consolidated accounts. However, previous literature questions whether IFRS are applied consistently across countries with differing institutional environments, and therefore, whether de facto harmony has been achieved. We further examine this question by investigating IFRS accounting policy choices of listed companies in Germany and the UK between 2005 and 2009. We find that most firms, when choosing IFRS options, tend to retain accounting policies required by national rules. We also investigate national accounting traditions in the case of options under national GAAP and find that most companies continue these after adopting IFRS. Moreover, there appears to be little significant change in accounting choices over time from 2005 to 2009. Given the differences in accounting rules and practices that exist across countries, our results suggest that international differences in financial reporting are likely to continue under IFRS.     

Harmony, Statistical Inference with the Herfindahl H Index and C Index

The Herfindahl H index and C index provide measures of harmony of accounting measurement practices by summarizing the extent to which companies use the same accounting practice. While the values of these indices are compared to obtain some idea concerning the relative harmony of accounting practice, standard errors for these estimates are not generally provided. That is, an index is calculated from a sample but no guidance is provided concerning likely values of the index in the population from which the sample was drawn. The present article fills this gap in the literature by providing formulae to estimate the standard error of the H and C indices calculated from a sample. The formulae are illustrated with several examples from the literature to show how conclusions are either enhanced or modified by the addition of these standard errors. It is shown that while both indices are biased, this bias is generally negligible. It is hoped that in future authors will quote not only the value of the index itself but also the standard error so differences between index values (both within and between studies) can be judged as being either significantly different or explainable by sampling variation alone.     

Measuring Country Differences in Enforcement of Accounting Standards: An Audit and Enforcement Proxy

In this paper we present an index designed to capture differences between countries in relation to the institutional setting for financial reporting, specifically the auditing of financial statements and the enforcement of compliance with each country's accounting standards. The use of a common set of standards such as International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) aims, in broad terms, to promote the comparability and transparency of financial statements and to improve the quality of financial reporting. However, the effectiveness of IFRS adoption may be hampered by differences, across countries, in the institutional setting in which financial reporting occurs. Studies of outcomes from adopting IFRS use a range of legal system proxies to capture these country differences, but the proxies are deficient in that they seldom focus explicitly on factors that affect how compliance with accounting standards is promoted through external audit and the activities of independent enforcement bodies. To address this deficiency, we calculate measures of the quality of the public company auditors’ working environment (AUDIT) and the degree of accounting enforcement activity (ENFORCE) by independent enforcement bodies. We do this for 51 countries for each of the years 2002, 2005 and 2008, using publicly available data provided by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), the World Bank and the national securities regulators. Preliminary tests suggest our indices have additional explanatory power (over more general legal proxies) for country‐level measures of economic and market activity, financial transparency and earnings management. We expect they will prove useful to researchers and other interested parties who require country‐level measures that focus on the degree of enforcement of financial reporting practices.     

Assessing financial reporting comparability across institutional settings: The case of pension accounting

The drive for comparability of financial information is to enable users to distinguish similarities and differences in economic activities for an entity over time and between entities so that their resource allocation decisions are facilitated. With the increased globalisation of economic activities, the enhanced international comparability of financial statements is often used as an argument to advance the convergence of local accounting standards to international financial reporting standards (IFRS). Differences in the underlying economic substance of transactions between jurisdictions plus accounting standards allowing alternative treatments may render this expectation of increased comparability unrealistic. Motivated by observations that, as a construct, comparability is under-researched and not well understood, we develop a comparability framework that distinguishes between four types of comparability. In applying this comparability framework to pension accounting in the Australian and USA contexts, we highlight a dilemma: while regulators seek to increase the likelihood that similar events are accounted for similarly, an unintended consequence may be that preparers are forced to apply similar accounting treatment to events that are, in substance, different.     

The Influence of U.S. GAAP on the Harmony of Accounting Measurement Policies of Large Companies in the U.K. and Australia

U.S. GAAP has increasingly become an influence on accounting practices in other countries, even aside from those traditionally considered under direct U.S. influence. The change arises from the large number of U.S. accounting standards, non-U.S. companies listing on U.S. stock exchanges, and the amount of U.S. direct investment abroad. As the impact of U.S. GAAP varies across countries, it may affect international accounting harmony. This idea is tested by examining the level of international harmony for eleven accounting measurement policies in matched pairs of large companies from Australia and the U.K., two countries with historically strong cultural and economic links. It is argued that, in recent decades, accounting practice in Australia, more so than in the U.K., has become increasingly U.S.-oriented. The concepts of harmony of Tay and Parker (1990) and Archer et al . (1996) are employed. International harmony is measured by the between-country C index and chi-square test; national harmony by van der Tas's (1988) H index. While considerable national harmony is found in the U.K. for seven and in Australia for five accounting policies, there is considerable or complete international harmony for only three policies. Evidence is presented of the influence of U.S. GAAP as one factor explaining the poor degree of U.K./Australia international harmony. Australian companies appear to follow U.S. GAAP to a greater extent than do U.K. companies. The state of partial harmony thus existing restricts international comparability of accounting reports and may cause problems for regulators.     

Economic and Accounting (Book) Rates of Return: Application of a Statistical Model

Harcourt's (1965) classic paper has spawned a considerable literature dealing with the relationship between economic and accounting rates of return. Kay (1976), Ijiri (1979), Salamon (1982) and Kelly and Tippett (1991), for example, can be interpreted as extensions of Harcourt's seminal analysis, while Kay (1976), Salamon (1982, 1985) and Gordon and Hamer (1988) provide empirical evidence on the sustainability of basic propositions. The present paper's focus is on the latter area; we apply the statistical procedures laid down in Kelly and Tippett (1991) to about 200 British companies to assess the correspondence between the ex post accounting rate of return and the prospective economic return. The economic return is estimated using three cash flow definitions. For all three, the accounting rate of return is significantly lower than the economic return. Further tests show the economic return to be inversely related to the accounting rate of return, although the relationship is weak. In addition, ‘large’ firms tend to report lower accounting rates of return than ‘small’ firms, but again the relationship is weak.     

Financial statement comparability and segment disclosure

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (FAS) No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information (FASB [1997]), reestablishes standards for how public business enterprises report segment information in financial statements. A prevailing criticism of FAS 131 is that it likely reduces financial statement comparability for firms with similar lines of business. This study estimates comparability of accounting disclosures surrounding the implementation of FAS 131 to examine potential variation in comparability associated with the segment reporting regime shift. Financial statement comparability is operationalized following the De Franco et al. (2011) accounting system comparability measure as the degree that firms have similar mappings for economic performance into financial statements. Results indicate decreased comparability for firms following FAS 131 adoption. Specifically, segment information reformulated according to how companies manage their businesses marginally limits this reduction in comparability, but greater segment information disaggregation through an increase in the number of reported segments attributed to FAS 131 application diminishes comparability overall. This study contributes to the standard setting process, as the FASB has assigned comparability to an important position in its conceptual framework and has made the goal of increasing comparability a vital component of its agenda that drives the need for accounting standards.     

The “real” cultural significance of accounts

Typically, accounting is portrayed as a passive information service, dedicated to faithfully reporting on economic reality. This paper, in contrast, investigates the re-presentional aspects of accounting, and the part it plays as a symbolic, cultural and hegemonic force, in struggles over the distribution of social income. The issues are examined empirically through the publishing patterns of the Journal of Accountancy, Accounting Review, and Fortune magazine between 1960 and 1973. Chronicling the changes in accounting literature is not our primary concern however. Rather, this work explores the relationships between accounting discourses and the conditions of social conflict in which these discourses are embedded. The evidence suggests that: different accounting journals specialize in different rhetorical functions; that these functions are discharged in harmony with other media and cultural forces (data on Fortune's discursive practices is provided for comparison); and that, over time, the discursive roles of accounting journals change with the evolving hegemonic climate. This paper contends that viewing accounting literature as disinterested inquiry or rigorous scholarship understates the social origins of research. Instead, we suggest that discursive accounting practices are more productively regarded as ideological weapons for participating in conflicts over the distribution of social wealth.     

Interventionist research in accounting: reflections on the good,the bad and the ugly

Our paper advances understanding of interventionist research (IVR) as a qualitative accounting research approach. It reflects on the potential value, challenges and key issues, as manifested by the good, the bad and the ugly. The reflection contributes towards clarifying the IVR landscape, thereby forging a future path for IVR as a legitimate qualitative methodology, to enthuse qualitative researchers to produce accounting research relevant to theory, practice and society. The primary contribution is synthesising the interventionist theory and practice literature encompassing a view of the good, the bad and the ugly in interventionist accounting research.     

Are IFRS and U.S. GAAP converging? : Some evidence from People's Republic of China companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange

This research investigates the comparability and convergence of two sets of accounting standards from 1996 to 2002: United States’ Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The investigation involves a sample of companies from the People's Republic of China (PRC) that are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). PRC companies traded on the NYSE generally prepare IFRS financial statements and provide a limited reconciliation to U.S. GAAP, creating a unique quasi-experimental opportunity to examine differences between two sets of accounting numbers produced by two different sets of accounting standards while holding the company constant. Comparability is measured by using Gray's index of comparability, and a set of measures are introduced to capture several dimensions of convergence over time in reported net income, net assets, return on net assets, and earnings per share. The evidence shows lack of comparability, caused largely by the revaluations of property, plant and equipment permitted under IFRS, but not permitted under U.S. GAAP. There is, however, substantial evidence of convergence over time.     

Delivering the goods at TNT: the role of the performance measurement system

This paper explores the characteristics of the performance measurement system atTNT (UK) Ltd.which facilitate the translation of strategy into action.TNTis a successful and growing service organization and a market leader in the overnight distribution of parcels within the U.K. The performance measurement system and how it is used atTNTare described in detail. The authors then draw on the management accounting literature to provide an analysis framework which answers three central questions for performance measurement systems: whatdimensionsof performance to measure, how to setstandardsfor those measures and whatrewardsare to be associated with the achievement of those standards. The performance measurement system atTNTis appraised against this framework. AtTNTthere are five properties of the performance measurement system which have facilitated the translating of strategy into action. Three of these relate to the framework above; the company measures the right things in that dimensions are consistent with corporate strategy, it provides standards for performance through internal benchmarking, and adopts a mixture of financial and non-financial based rewards. In addition, however, there are two further properties of the system; the use of league tables to report the relative performance of the depots, and the presence of a strong corporate champion who drives the message and importance of the performance measurement system from the centre to the depots.     

Accounting comparability and relative performance evaluation by capital markets

This paper examines how accounting comparability affects the monitoring role and the risk allocation role of capital markets. We develop the statistical and informational properties of accounting reports under varying degrees of comparability. A perfectly comparable accounting information system enables investors to perfectly infer the difference between any two firms' future cash flows although investors remain uncertain about either firm's cash flow. Comparability alleviates entrepreneurs' moral hazard problem by strengthening the price response to the relative accounting performance, but can induce excessive price risk as well as residual systematic cash flow risk. Unlike the investors (users) who earn their surplus by bearing the residual systematic risk, the entrepreneurs (preparers) do not find perfect comparability desirable. Hence, a standard setter would mandate higher comparability than preferred by preparers, but not perfect comparability.     

Agency and the Excessus Balance in Manorial Accounts

This paper examines some accounting and legal aspects of the excessus balance in mediaeval manorial accounts. Earlier findings that such a balance may represent unpaid creditors are supported here with evidence from the Crowland Abbey estates, but it is also suggested that such a balance may possibly be explained as the outcome of an incentive arrangement in an agency relationship between the lord and the reeve. An attempt is made to apply the agency concepts of incentives, bonding and monitoring to this relationship. There is a discussion of whether manorial accounts and audit can be explained in terms of agency theory or whether the existence of the action of account implies a pre-existing legal obligation to account and submit to audit. The paper concludes with a consideration of the excessus balance in relation to the action of account.     

A Note on Credit Risk of Vertical <Emphasis Type="Italic">Keiretsu</Emphasis> Firms: Preliminary Evidence from the Japanese Automobile Industry

This paper empirically examines the relationship between the credit risk of Toyota, Nissan and Honda keiretsu-affiliated firms and the credit risk of the respective parent company. As credit spread data for keiretsu-affiliated firms were not available we create a keiretsu default index, as a proxy, using expected default probabilities obtained from the KMV and Leland and Toft (J. Finance 51, 987–1019, 1996) option pricing models. We find parent credit spreads do not Granger cause our keiretsu default index and vice versa in a bivariate vector autoregressive (VAR) framework.JEL classification: G3, L62