MEASURING THE PROFITABILITY OF UK PROPRIETARY LIFE INSURERS

This paper compares and evaluates various legal and economic methods to measure and report UK life insurance company profitability in terms of their (i) treatment and recognition of profits emerging from life insurance business over time; and (ii) compliance with «true and fair view» requirements of the Companies Act and the concepts set out in the Accounting Standards Board («ASB») proposedStatement of Principles. A simple life insurance policy model is used to demonstrate the differential impact of each method on the pattern of profit recognition over time. Legal methods of reporting «profit» used by the UK industry to comply with conservative UK solvency regulations fail to provide inventors with insight into the value of the business. Economic methods provide a more «realistic» basis for reporting to shareholders by incorporating discounted future profits into the value of life insurance business, but these do not accord with the European Union Insurance Accounts Directive («IAD»). A legal «earned profits» method, although not endorsed by the industry, is the only one that appears to provide a «true and fair view» as envisaged by the Companies Act and meet the objectives of the ASB. Various outstanding issues between the industry-endorsed economic methods and the ASB's requirements are discussed.     

The temporal nature of legitimation: the case of IFRS8

Legitimation can operate on an episodic or continual basis [Suchman, M.C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610]. We examine the temporal legitimation of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)’s actions during the adoption and review of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 8 ‘Operating Segments’. We conceptualise the controversy surrounding IFRS8 as an episode when the IASB sought segmental reporting convergence with the US standard, Statement of Financial Accounting Standard 131. Interpreting evidence from 15 (20) semi-structured interviews undertaken in 2009 (2011), before (after) entities reported under IFRS8, reveals its adoption precipitated an episodic legitimacy threat from selected audiences to the actions of the IASB. We discuss the IASB's attempt to influence legitimation for this episode through commitment to a post-implementation review [IFRS Foundation. (2011). Post implementation reviews: Plan for developing the framework for conducting post-implementation reviews. IASB Board meeting February 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2011, from http://www.ifrs.org/NR/rdonlyres/3E1502E4-F1E8-4907-838B-FFB20C7268ED/0/PIR02111st2ndb04obs.pdf] of IFRS8. Interpreting legitimacy concerns across diverse audiences about specific actions of the IASB (the introduction of IFRS8) enables us to draw conclusions about the resilience of the IASB as a standard setting organisation, in itself.     

The Relationship between Fair Value,Market Value,and Efficient Markets*

This paper proposes that an assumption of reasonable market efficiency is at the essence of the relevance of fair value for financial reporting purposes. The paper's examination of this proposal begins with a review of recent academic literature on market efficiency, and on evidence of inefficiencies and their implications for the ability of the efficient market hypothesis to explain what market prices represent. It concludes that there is wide acceptance in this literature that a reasonable level of efficiency can generally be presumed to exist in active, well‐regulated capital markets. The paper examines the essential attributes of a reasonably efficient market for fair value measurement purposes, and some basic implications for its reliable estimation. This is done in comparison with the provisions of the fair value measurement standard of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) (Statement of Financial Accounting Standards [SFAS] No. 157). It is concluded that the concept of reasonable market efficiency could provide a sound conceptual framework for defining fair value that is founded in real, observable market prices. It is demonstrated that, in contrast, SFAS No. 157 does not provide a clear, unequivocal concept of fair value, and that it permits estimates of fair value that have no demonstrable basis in real, observable market prices. Nevertheless, it appears that arguments typically put forward by the International Accounting Standards Board and the FASB for the relevance of fair value for financial reporting purposes do imply a presumption of reasonably efficient markets.     

Putting the squeeze on a market for lemons: Government-sponsored mortgage securitization

Lenders either sell or obtain insurance for many of the mortgages they originate to reduce credit risk and enhance liquidity. An overwhelming majority of the mortgages sold are purchased by government-sponsored enterprises. The prevailing view is that government-sponsorship of mortgage securitization causes mortgage rates to be lower than they would otherwise be. Using a model that incorporates asymmetric information and adverse selection, we provide an example in which government-sponsored mortgage securitization raises the mortgage rate.The analysis and conclusions set forth are our own and do not indicate concurrence by members of the Federal Reserve Research stafls, by the Board of Governors, or by the Federal Reserve Banks. We wish to thank Mark Fisher for his Mathematica expertise. All errors are ours exclusively.     

The Nature and Rationale of a Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting by Islamic Banks

Islamic banks have to abide by the revealed doctrines in Islam in conducting their business and financial transactions. They employ in-house religious advisers—often referred to as Shari'a Supervisory Board (SSB)—who issue a special report to inform users of financial statements whether or not the bank has adhered to the Islamic principles. Recently, a private standard-setting body—the Financial Accounting Organization for Islamic Banks and Financial Institutions (FAOIBFI)—has been set up to externally regulate the financial reporting by Islamic banks. The FAOIBFI has published two statements on the objectives and concepts of financial reporting to act as a framework in setting accounting standards for Islamic banks. This paper examines the FAOIBFI's approach for developing objectives and concepts of financial accounting and investigates its need for such a theoretical framework. It is argued that the FAOIBFI's objectives and concepts would not be useful in mandating accounting standards on issues that are affected by religious ruling. This does not necessarily mean that such a framework may not be useful in legitimating the FAOIBFI's role and in setting accounting standards for issues that are not governed by revealed moral doctrines although it will be subject to similar limitations to those found by other standard-setting bodies in utilising and applying their framework. However, it implies that the more the FAOIBFI sets accounting standards that incorporate religious ruling, the less it would tend to find its own objectives and concepts useful. The ambiguities that may arise from different interpretations of the religious rules will require resolutions primarily by reference to religious rather than accounting authority.     

Stock Market Reactions to SFAS No. 96: Evidence from Early Bank Adopters

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 96, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) in December 1987 changed accounting for income tax recognition and accrual. The original deadline for implementation of SFAS No. 96 was December 15, 1988, and earlier adoption was encouraged. This study examines empirically the stock price impact of four pertinent announcement dates regarding SFAS No. 96 for 19 banks that adopted the statement in late 1987 and early 1988. Our results suggest that these early bank adopters have different characteristics from other banks that cause them to benefit from the changes in accounting for deferred taxes and explain their voluntary adoption of the standard.     

The Rationality and Price Effects of U.S. Department of Agriculture Forecasts of Oranges

This article examines the effect of public information on the orange juice market. We investigate the rationality, information content, and price effects of U.S. Department of Agriculture forecasts of the production of oranges. U.S. Department of Agriculture forecasts are found to be unbiased and efficient. The first forecast contains the most new information, and subsequent reports become valuable only when freezes occur. Significant price movements occur in response to announced production in both Florida and California. However, the majority of price variations cannot be explained by these movements in supply.

1 Statement of citrus farmer Mrs. Beulah Hooks Hanna of Lakeland, Florida to a Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry (1948) p. 64.

Citing Literature

Volume 49 , Issue 2 June 1994

Pages 681-695     

History repeats itself: The acquisition method and nonrecurring charges

The Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement No. 141 (R) that replaces Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 141, Business Combinations. The new standard mandates use of the acquisition method, which requires expense treatment for acquisition-related transaction costs. Expense treatment is a departure from purchase accounting procedures, but is consistent with past guidance of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 16 for the pooling-of-interests method. Restoration of historical and controversial accounting procedures resurrects past outcomes. This study utilizes econometric techniques to predict outcomes of the acquisition method. Evidence indicates that expensing acquisition-related costs may improve transparent reporting. The results, based on 638 business combinations from 1994 through 1998, support the expectation that expense treatment for acquisition-related costs increases the likelihood that these costs appear more frequently and are greater in magnitude.     

Financial Analyst Characteristics and Herding Behavior in Forecasting

This study classifies analysts' earnings forecasts as herding or bold and finds that (1) boldness likelihood increases with the analyst's prior accuracy, brokerage size, and experience and declines with the number of industries the analyst follows, consistent with theory linking boldness with career concerns and ability; (2) bold forecasts are more accurate than herding forecasts; and (3) herding forecast revisions are more strongly associated with analysts' earnings forecast errors (actual earnings—forecast) than are bold forecast revisions. Thus, bold forecasts incorporate analysts' private information more completely and provide more relevant information to investors than herding forecasts.     

Climate‐related Risk and Financial Statements: Implications for Regulators,Preparers, Auditors and Users

Interest among investors in understanding climate‐related risk from companies’ management has increased in recent years. Despite this, climate‐related risks are currently predominantly discussed outside the financial statements, if at all. However, as set out in the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB)/International Accounting Standards Board's (IASB) Practice Statement 2 Making Materiality Judgements (APS/PS 2), qualitative external factors such as the industry in which the entity operates and investor expectations may make such risks ‘material’ and warrant disclosures when preparing financial statements, regardless of their numerical impact. The AASB and the AUASB expect that directors, preparers and auditors will be considering APS/PS 2 when preparing and auditing financial statements. This paper provides an outline of the guidance and motivation behind the issuance of the bulletin on climate‐related risk disclosures, key takeaways and recommendations, and the AASB's and AUASB's suggestions on the type of evidence that would be useful for standard setters.     

IFRS in the United States: If,When and How

This paper provides an overview of the convergence efforts of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board. It begins with their 2002 Memorandum of Understanding and traces developments up to the December 2011 announcement by the IASB Chair that convergence has come to a close, and it is now time to incorporate IFRS into the US financial reporting system. The paper then assesses approaches being considered by the SEC for incorporating IFRS into the US financial reporting model. The conclusion calls on the SEC to ‘make a decision’ and set a date for US adoption of IFRS. Otherwise, the SEC effectively will have abandoned its goal of a single set of high quality global accounting standards.     

ACCOUNTING FOR DERIVATES: BACK TO BASICS

Public accountants have had a hard time deciding how to account for derivatives that are used to hedge risks, which in turn has given derivatives users and others a hard time. For about six years, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has struggled with several, often diametrically opposed procedures, ranging from showing all derivatives at “fair” values to deferring realized losses or gains on derivatives until related gains or losses on the hedged transactions have been realized (a practice known as “hedge accounting”). What is behind the FASB's inability to come up with a decisive and authoritative ruling? Although the politics of self-interest has fueled much of the debate, there is more to the problem than politics. The author argues that the underlying cause of the FASB's inability to reach a satisfactory and acceptable solution is not politics, but rather a flawed basic concept of how financial accounting should be done. In this article, the author recommends a procedure for derivatives accounting that was endorsed by the Financial Economists Roundtable in its 1995 “Statement on Accounting Disclosure about Financial Derivative Instruments.” The proposal, in brief, is this: Provided a company can satisfy its auditors that it is using derivatives primarily to hedge an offsetting price exposure, the firm should be given the option to use hedge accounting for that part of its derivatives position that is functioning as a hedge. All other investment or speculative uses of derivatives should be treated like other financial instruments and marked to market or fair value. Such a procedure, the author argues, is far more consistent than the FASB's recent proposals with fundamental principles of accounting that have been developed by accounting practitioners and scholars over several centuries.     

The Differential Impact of the Force of Law Australian Auditing Standards

This qualitative study explores whether the impact of the introduction of the legally enforceable Australian Auditing Standards (ASAs) differs between audit firms based on their size. It complements and extends the Australian Government's pre‐implementation April 2006 Regulation Impact Statement ( AUASB 2006 ) and Hecimovic et al.'s (2009) study exploring the perceptions of key stakeholders. The results of the current study, based on data from extensive interviews with auditors from small, medium and large audit firms, suggest that compliance with the legally enforceable ASAs does not appear to increase perceived audit quality or public confidence. The study also finds that the costs/benefits to small audit firms and their clients differ to those of medium and large firms, raising questions about the viability of smaller firms remaining in the audit market.     

A Framework for Identifying (and Avoiding) Fraudulent Financial Reporting*

This commentary analyzes the relationship of fraud risk assessments to other risk assessments by auditors. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board notes that this is a problem area of current practice. Effective detection of fraudulent financial reporting requires an integrative accounting/auditing conceptual framework. As a result, this paper is as much about accounting theory as it is about auditing. To simplify the development of such an integrated framework, this paper uses an expanded risk model. This effectively results in a risk perspective on fraudulent financial reporting. There are many potential implications but the major findings are as follows. First, the study identifies the crucial role of benchmarks based on acceptable levels of risk to help differentiate between intentional and unintentional misstatements. Such differentiation is critical to successfully implementing the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants' Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 99 and international standards ISA Nos. 240, 540, and 700. Second, the paper shows the importance of not allowing the major categories of risks identified here from getting too high. This paper explains the need to set acceptable levels of these risks, either by standard‐setters as a matter of broad policy, or by individual practitioners as part of the terms of specific engagements. I propose that a major factor in the concept of “present fairly” be the acceptable levels of accounting risks that are defined here, especially the risks due to intentional forecast errors. Third, this paper clarifies how the fraud risk of SAS No. 99, and similar international standards, relates to the current audit risk model framework.     

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.     

Sorting and comparing: Standard-setting and “ethical” categories

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) describes its public interest function as “…developing standards that result in accounting for similar transactions and circumstances in a like manner and different transactions and circumstances…in a different manner (Facts about FASB).” This statement implies that rule-makers possess an expertise that makes analogizing transactions or circumstances to other transactions or circumstances unproblematic. In this paper we utilize two instances of standard-setting, SFAS 123R and SFAS 143, to demonstrate from FASB's analogic reasoning in these cases that similarity and dissimilarity are not so easily ascertained. A judgment about similarity invariably involves ignoring some perspectives of similarity that would lead to substantially different conclusions about the appropriate accounting. We also illustrate via the two examples the inherent value judgments that underlie the conclusions reached by FASB and how these value judgments raise questions about the ethics of the current standard-setting process.     

LDC Debt: Forgiveness,Indexation, and Investment Incentives

We compare different indexation schemes in terms of their ability to facilitate forgiveness and reduce the investment disincentives associated with the large LDC debt overhang. Indexing to an endogenous variable (e.g., a country's output) has a negative moral hazard effect on investment. This problem does not arise when payments are linked to an exogenous variable such as commodity prices. Nonetheless, indexing payments to output may be useful when debtors know more about their willingness to invest than lenders. We also reach new conclusions about the desirability of default penalties under asymmetric information.     

Control over accounting standards within the European Union: The political controversy surrounding the adoption of IFRS 8

This paper presents an analysis of the struggle for power within the international accounting arena by examining a highly politicised debate surrounding the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 8, Operating Segments, which saw the European Union (EU) attempting to contest the authority of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). Informed by a broadly institutional approach, the paper reports the results of interviews with preparers, legislators, regulators, auditors and users about the introduction of IFRS 8 and focuses on how the European Parliament (EP) required the European Commission (EC) to initiate its own consultation procedures as part of a new endorsement process. Findings from this study highlight how the debate over the adoption of IFRS 8 led to the EU implementing a structure that is arguably more aligned to the European tradition of State involvement in the regulatory process. In this sense, while the EU's position vis-à-vis the IASB remains relatively weak, they have, however, initiated a forum whereby the pronouncements of the IASB can be contested.     

Individual Investors and Local Bias

The paper tests whether individuals have value‐relevant information about local stocks (where “local” is defined as being headquartered near where an investor lives). Our methodology uses two types of calendar‐time portfolios—one based on holdings and one based on transactions. Portfolios of local holdings do not generate abnormal performance (alphas are zero). When studying transactions, purchases of local stocks significantly underperform sales of local stocks. The underperformance remains when focusing on stocks with potentially high levels of information asymmetries. We conclude that individuals do not help incorporate information into stock prices. Our conclusions directly contradict existing studies.     

An evaluation of SFAS No. 130 comprehensive income disclosures

In this study, we provide evidence on the pricing of other comprehensive income (OCI) that differs from most evidence in prior research. Prior archival research has largely concluded that OCI is not priced by investors. In contrast, we provide evidence in the post-SFAS 130 period that OCI is priced on a dollar-for-dollar basis as is predicted by economic theory for transitory income items. We attribute this finding to our use of post-SFAS 130 as-reported measures of OCI rather than pre-SFAS 130 as-if estimates of OCI measures. Furthermore, we document that two components of OCI, foreign currency translation adjustment and unrealized gains/losses on available-for-sale securities, are priced by investors. In the post-SFAS 130 period, we also find that the type of financial statement in which firms report OCI and its components affects pricing, consistent with the conclusions of prior experimental research. However, our evidence suggests that investors pay greater attention to OCI information reported in the statement of changes in equity, rather than in a statement of financial performance. This could be attributed to investors becoming more familiar in the post-SFAS 130 period with the predominant reporting of OCI and its components in the statement of changes in equity. These findings may be relevant to both the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the International Accounting Standards Board, which jointly are undertaking a new project that, in part, is addressing financial statement presentation of OCI items.