Firm Size and National Profiles of IFRS Policy Choice

Previous research on the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) policy choices of large listed companies found a very strong association between policy choice and country. Nationally based pre‐IFRS practices largely explain IFRS policy choices. Nevertheless, some of the policy choices appear to be influenced from abroad, perhaps chosen in order to increase comparability. It has been suggested that smaller companies might be less influenced from abroad, and therefore might display even clearer national profiles of IFRS practice. This paper examines the accounting policy choices made within IFRS financial statements by small listed companies in five major countries. We find highly significant differences between the policies of small and large companies. We also find that small companies make more homogeneous choices, within a country, than large companies do. As a result, the previously published national profiles of the IFRS practices of large companies are misleading in the context of smaller ones.     

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.     

National influence on the application of IFRS: Interpretations and accounting estimates by German and British accountants

International comparability of financial statements under IFRS can only be achieved if standards are interpreted and applied consistently across countries. However, the different institutional and cultural environments of various countries in which companies operate and in which individuals make accounting decisions suggest that application of IFRS may differ. Building on previous studies that found evidence for this in the area of explicit options under IFRS, we examine the use of discretion in interpretations and accounting estimates by surveying German and British accountants, asking them to account for identical cases under IFRS. The results of this test provide only some evidence for international differences in accountants' judgments. This suggests that the national environment might be less relevant in those fields of room for maneuver in the application of IFRS. However, we find considerable variability of responses within jurisdictions and therefore further conclude that differences in personal characteristics might be more important than cultural factors.     

The Effect of IFRS Adoption Conditional Upon the Level of Pre-adoption Divergence

Prior studies on whether or not International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption improves earnings quality have found mixed results. We note that some of the countries that have adopted IFRS had national accounting standards similar to IFRS prior to adopting IFRS, while others had national accounting standards divergent from IFRS. We examine the effects of IFRS adoption by taking into account the level of divergence prior to the adoption of IFRS. We find that countries experience a greater drop in earnings management when they have a higher level of divergence from IFRS prior to IFRS adoption. More specifically, high divergence countries with higher levels of enforcement benefit the most followed by high divergence countries with lower levels of enforcement. Lower divergence countries with higher levels of enforcement do not significantly benefit from IFRS adoption. Lower divergence countries with lower levels of enforcement do not benefit from IFRS adoption at all. Our results support the contention that countries with lower quality local accounting standards prior to IFRS adoption benefit more from IFRS adoption.     

Changes in the value relevance of research and development expenses after IFRS adoption

We investigate whether the nature of differences between national GAAP and IFRS is associated with differential changes in the value relevance of R&D expenses after the adoption of IFRS across countries. Using a difference-in-differences study on a sample of public companies in nine countries that covers pre-IFRS and post-IFRS periods during 1997–2012, we find that the value relevance of R&D expenses declines after IFRS adoption in countries that previously mandated immediate expensing or allowed optional capitalization of R&D costs. On the contrary, there is no change in the value relevance of R&D expenses for countries that switched from the mandatory capitalization rule to IFRS. We also investigate the moderating effects of national institutions on the changes in the value relevance of R&D expenses after IFRS adoption. We find that in countries with stronger investor protection, the changes in the value relevance of R&D expenses are larger. In addition, changes in the value relevance of R&D expenses are smaller for countries whose national culture is characterized by higher uncertainty avoidance. Our findings highlight the importance of both accounting standards and national institutions in explaining the changes in the value relevance of accounting information after IFRS adoption.     

The Role of National Culture in International Financial Reporting Standards Adoption

Prior research shows that the development of national accounting systems follows different patterns in different countries over the world. This was recently supported by the staggered manner in which countries adopt IFRS. Extant evidence shows that IFRS adoption decisions at the country level are determined by institutional and economic factors. In this context, cultural factors have not been considered. This paper examines the relationship between five cultural dimensions and countries’ decisions to adopt International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) around the world during the period 2003-2014. We find that countries with higher levels of uncertainty avoidance are more likely to adopt IFRS. Additionally, they are more likely to commit to early adoption largely on a mandatory rather than voluntary basis. On the other hand, countries with higher values of masculinity are more likely to adopt IFRS early, but the extent (whether voluntary or mandatory adoption) of adoption is not significantly related to masculinity. Finally, we show that countries with higher power distance (long-term orientation) are more (less) likely to adopt IFRS on a mandatory basis. The results are in line with Gray’s theory of cultural influence and suggest that differences in national culture had a significant role in countries’ reaction to the introduction of IFRS as a set of unified accounting standards targeting the harmonization of accounting standards adopted across different jurisdictions.     

我国会计国际化进程刍议

本文分析了会计国际协调的成因和进展 ,论证会计国际化是必然趋势 ;探讨了主要发达国家和部分西方学者对会计国际化的态度 ,论证会计国际化是一个政治程序而非技术范畴 ;分析了国际会计准则的基本特点及其在我国的实践及研究发现 ,推论了国际会计准则的角色 ;讨论了国际财务报告准则的发展战略及其应用环境问题 ,并对我国会计国际化进程提出政策建议     

Extending the Classification of European Countries by their IFRS Practices: A Research Note

Abstract

This paper expands the IFRS accounting systems’ classification proposed by Nobes [(2011). IFRS practices and the persistence of accounting system classification. Abacus, 47(3), 267–283] to a broader set of European countries. The results suggest a classification distinguishing between four groups of European countries, and add to the evidence, reported by Kvaal and Nobes [(2010). International differences in IFRS policy choice. Accounting and Business Research, 40(2), 173–187] and Nobes (2011)., that pre-IFRS accounting differences influence the options adopted by firms. This study contributes to the literature suggesting that the widespread adoption of IFRS has not eliminated the differences between national accounting practices and that accounting systems classification did not lose its relevance.     

Implications of the ‘IAS Regulation’ for Research into the International Differences in Accounting Systems

Meek and Thomas (2004) call for research on the continued relevance of ‘rediscovered’ dichotomous accounting classifications. We provide such evidence by examining how developments surrounding the ‘IAS Regulation’ (1606/2002) influenced international differences in accounting systems in the European Union. Since a sufficient time series of actual post-2005 International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) reporting practice is not yet observable, we propose an initial re-classification of accounting systems based on evidence available to date, that is, the degree of implementation of the IAS Regulation in the Member States. Consistent with Nobes (1998), we find that the degree of public accountability to outside investors (the ‘public/private’ criterion) is becoming the primary differentiator for accounting systems in Europe, surpassing country-level variables such as legal system and culture. The distinction between consolidated and individual financial statements is the second emerging differentiator. While consolidated accounting is becoming more uniform across countries, cross-country cultural differences are most likely to persist in individual accounting. Based on our analysis we highlight two important areas of future research beyond the consolidated financial statements of listed firms (e.g. Nobes, 2005; Schipper, 2005). First, at the country level, the interaction of IFRS and individual financial statements will need to be reassessed. In addition, research could help introduce a degree of differentiation into financial reporting regulation for unlisted firms, because these firms are not a homogeneous group. Also, the convergence of national GAAP systems with IFRS will benefit from fresh research insights. Second, at the firm level, future research could analyze the extent to which the determinants and consequences of IFRS adoption, an area well researched for publicly traded firms (e.g. Cuijpers and Buijink, 2005), generalize to unlisted firms. Such research will help detect emerging patterns of accounting systems within an international context. It will generate insights into the disconnect of consolidated accounts from national influences, the degree of uniformity of consolidated accounts among international firms, the continued relevance of traditional classifications of international accounting systems for individual accounts and accounts of unlisted companies, and the convergence of national standards with IFRS.     

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.     

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.     

Accounting for government grants: Standard-setting and accounting choice

This paper provides evidence on several matters relating to accounting for government grants under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Focusing on grants related to assets, we trace the development of International Accounting Standard (IAS) 20, outline some of the problems of current accounting practice, and suggest why these have not been addressed by the standard-setter. Then, by hand-collecting data relating to 559 firms from 15 countries, we empirically analyze several issues. We show that asset grants are economically important for some firms and that the frequency of grants is significantly different across the countries. For the non-financial firms in our sample, we identify the grant-related accounting policy choice: a firm can either show the grant as deferred income or net it against the asset. The options are roughly equally popular overall but the firm’s country of domicile is strongly associated with the choice. Further, as a key element of disclosure quality for this topic, we investigate whether or not the balance sheet-related numbers relating to grants are disclosed, finding that many firms do not disclose them. Disclosure quality is better for firms which use the ‘deferred income’ option, and it is also better in countries where a higher proportion of firms has received government grants. International differences and poor disclosure are detrimental to international comparisons, so we conclude that the policy choice should be removed from the accounting standard.     

Using Google Trends to track the global interest in International Financial Reporting Standards: Evidence from big data

This study proposes a novel method for identifying international accounting differences under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Using Google Trends data extracted between January 2014 and August 2022, it creates an index, the Global IFRS/IAS Search Index (GISI), which comprises the search activities of 121 jurisdictions for 45 IFRS accounting standards. To assess its relative validity, I classify Nobes' (1983) 14 jurisdictions in addition to 20 OECD countries. The cluster analysis demonstrates that the GISI is a viable alternative for analyzing international differences under IFRS. The results indicate that incorporating big data could be beneficial for examining global accounting issues. A judgmental international classification of financial reporting practices     

The effect of information shocks on dividend payout and dividend value relevance

We exploit the mandatory adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as a source of exogenous shock to the corporate financial information environment to study the potential effect that this information shock might have on the dividend payout policy and dividend value relevance in the UK and France. We employ a difference-in-differences research design, in which our choice of the control and treatment groups is mainly based on the divergence between domestic accounting standards and IFRS, while holding institutional factors constant. The UK domestic accounting standards slightly diverge from IFRS (low-divergence firms), whereas French domestic accounting standards substantially diverge from IFRS (high-divergence firms). Nevertheless, both countries have similar institutional factors that might confound the effect of IFRS adoption. Our theoretical argument is that IFRS adoption is expected to mitigate information asymmetry, a major reason for the free cash flow problem (Jensen, 1986) and cash over-retention (Myers & Majluf, 1984). Our findings suggest that IFRS adoption is a major contributor in increasing dividend payouts among high-divergence firms via reduction of asymmetric information. Moreover, improving the information environment helps investors become more confident about using accounting numbers to assess firm financial performance, which causes a significant reduction in dividend value relevance among high-divergence firms.     

IFRS Practices and the Persistence of Accounting System Classification

The earliest paper on international classification of accounting systems is one hundred years old. For about fifteen years from the late 1960s, many papers on the subject were published. One feature of several of the classifications was the dichotomous split of countries into Anglo and continental European. This has been extensively debated. This paper prepares a classification based on the accounting policy choices made by the largest listed companies of eight countries in 2008/9. All the companies were using the same reporting rules, International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). This classification by IFRS practices shows the same two groups as a classification of national practices drawn up in 1980, despite 30 years of harmonization. None of the classifications above or the more recent ones was based on the actual accounting practices of companies in annual reports. This has several disadvantages, as the paper investigates. This paper's classification is the first to be based on accounting practices, as well as being the first in the IFRS era. The paper also investigates the implications of the persistent differences in practices for assessing the success of the IASB's whole project on improving comparability of financial statements.     

Mandatory IFRS adoption and the cost of debt in Italy and UK

This paper analyses the effect of the mandatory adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) within the EU on the cost of corporate debt. In order to avoid the imprecision involved in a large-scale cross-country study, we examine the impact of IFRS in two very clearly different institutional settings, the UK and Italy. The UK is a common-law country characterised by strong enforcement and national generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) which are equivalent to IFRS. Italy is a typical European code-law country, characterised by a weak outside investor protection system, and national GAAP significantly different from the IFRS model. No IFRS effect is observed in the UK, consistent with it having standards which are close to IFRS. During the post-IFRS period, in Italy more weight is placed on the accounting numbers to assess the cost of debt. We also find that accruals quality improves in Italy, thus suggesting that public financial reporting data are enhanced relative to privately held information about borrowers' credit ratings.     

Shareholder Behaviour in the New Issue Market-A Preliminary Report

The compulsory use of IFRS for the consolidated statements of listed companies in the EU and elsewhere, and the convergence of IFRS with US GAAP, might imply the end of ‘international accounting’ as an important field of study. However, there are motives and opportunities for international differences of practice to exist within IFRS usage. Some of the original motives for international accounting differences may still be effective in an IFRS context, though in different ways. The opportunities for different IFRS practices are divided into eight types. Hypotheses relating to each of these are proposed, and some ways of testing them are suggested. Some implications of the existence of different national versions of IFRS are noted.     

Mandatory Adoption of IASB Standards: Value Relevance and Country-Specific Factors

The objective of this study is to investigate if the value relevance of European-listed companies increased after the mandatory application of International Accounting Standards (IAS)/International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and how the value relevance of accounting information prepared under IAS/IFRS is shaped by the specific factors of the country in which companies are domiciled. Results show that the value relevance of financial information during the period companies applied mandatory IAS/IFRS is higher than for the period during which they applied local accounting standards. We also found that countries where accounting and tax are clearly separated show more relevant accounting information. Finally, we found that companies from countries with more legal and public enforcement mechanisms disclose less relevant accounting information under IAS/IFRS.     

The role of the Securities and Exchange Commission in a developing economy: Implications for IFRS

Due to the widespread adoption of IFRSs throughout the world and little research on IFRS implementation in developing countries, this study investigates the role of the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding IFRS implementation in a developing country. Adopting a mixed methodology (39 interviews and 1647 enforcement documents); the findings have raised concerns as to the adequacy of enforcement mechanisms in implementing IFRSs in Bangladesh. More specifically, only 2.6% of enforcement actions were issued over the period of 1998 to 2010. Political connectedness is the major contributing factor for uneven enforcement activities in Bangladesh. The study also finds that inconsistencies with accounting regulatory framework (Companies Act, BSEC ordinances and IFRSs), multiple regulators, and donor agencies' influence impede the effective implementation of IFRSs. The study also provides policy implications for local and national policy makers namely, IASB, the World Bank and the IMF to rethink about the regulation of IFRSs in developing countries.     

Convergence with IFRS in an expanding Europe: progress and obstacles identified by large accounting firms’ survey

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) acquired greater legitimacy and stature when the European Union (EU) decided to require all listed companies to prepare consolidated accounts based on International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) beginning in 2005. This study examines the progress and perceived impediments to convergence in 17 European countries directly affected by the EU's decision. These include: (1) the 10 new EU member countries, (2) EU candidate countries, (3) European Economic Area (EEA) countries, and (4) Switzerland. We utilize data collected by the six largest international accounting firms during their 2002 convergence survey. Additionally, we analyze subsequent events and studies.While all surveyed countries will either require or effectively allow listed companies to prepare consolidated financial statements in accordance with IFRS by 2005, few are expected to require IFRS for non-listed companies. This suggests the development of a “two-standard” system. The two most significant impediments to convergence identified by the survey appear to be the complicated nature of particular IFRS (including financial instruments) and the tax-orientation of many national accounting systems. Other barriers to convergence include underdeveloped national capital markets, insufficient guidance on first-time application of IFRS, and limited experience with certain types of transactions (e.g. pensions).