Geographic segment disclosures: Theories, findings, and implications

This article discusses both the relevant theories and the research findings on geographic segment disclosures under SFAS 14 and relates implications of these findings to the FASB/AcSB's exposure draft. Research studies on geographic segment disclosures are divided into three broad categories: predictive ability, security pricing, and risk assessment. For each category, we provide a theoretical analysis of the importance of geographic segment information and the related empirical findings. Finally, we relate potential implications for the usefulness of geographic segment disclosures to the FASB/AcSB's exposure draft, discussing both weaknesses and improvements.     

Competitive harm and geographic area disclosure under SFAS 131

Prior research documents considerable diversity in the amount of detail provided by companies in complying with the foreign country disclosure requirements of SFAS 131. We posit that the potential competitive harm associated with country specific disclosures provides an incentive for management to avoid making these disclosures. Specifically, we hypothesize that firms with higher potential competitive harm costs will provide less detailed geographic area disclosures. Our results show that, as expected, firms exposed to greater competitive harm costs provide less detailed country specific revenue disclosures. This study helps to explain the diversity in practice with respect to the level of detail provided by companies in their geographic area disclosures under SFAS 131. In addition, it adds to the literature examining the impact of potential competitive harm on disclosures made by U.S. firms, by extending the line of research to geographic area disclosures.     

Geographic area disclosures under SFAS 131: materiality and fineness

This paper describes and evaluates certain aspects of the enterprise-wide geographic area disclosures provided by Fortune 500 companies in the implementation of SFAS 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information.” The first objective of this study is to determine how companies are complying with the materiality criterion of SFAS 131 for determining when an individual country is reportable. The second objective is to evaluate whether foreign operation disclosures provided by companies in accordance with SFAS 131 result in a finer set of information than was provided under SFAS 14. The results suggest that there is considerable diversity among companies in the way that materiality is defined, with a majority of companies that provide country-level disclosures using quantitative thresholds less than 10%. For a large percentage of companies, the information provided under SFAS 131 appears to be finer than the information provided under SFAS 14. However, a significant minority of companies has taken a step backward in this regard.     

The usefulness of current-cost measures of debt in assessing systematic risk: extending the provisions of SFAS no. 33

Current-cost disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 33, Financial Reporting and Changing Prices (Financial Accounting Standards Board [FASB] 1979), as amended by a recent exposure draft, Financial Reporting and Changing Prices: Current Cost Information (FASB 1984), focus on the asset side of the balance sheet. Both pronouncements exclude liabilities and preferred stock from their requirements for current-cost disclosure. Evidence presented here suggests that the usefulness of current-cost disclosures in assessing systematic risk is enhanced significantly by expanding these disclosure requirements to include liabilities and preferred stock. Decision usefulness is emphasized by accounting regulators as an important financial reporting objective. Considering the results presented here, the addition of current-cost measures of liabilities and preferred stock to the disclosure requirements of the exposure draft appears to be consistent with that objective. Further, the costs involved are anticipated to be minimal. The implication is that society can benefit from these additional disclosures through a more effective allocation of resources at minimal incremental cost.     

Fair value disclosures and crash risk

In response to the public criticism of the inadequate disclosures mandated by SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements, the FASB issued ASU (Accounting Standards Update) 2010–06, Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements, and ASU 2011–04, Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements, in an effort to increase the reporting transparency. We examine whether the increased fair value disclosures required by these two updates effectively decrease crash risk, defined as the frequency of extreme negative stock returns. In support of the hypothesis, we find that increased transparency from these updates reduces crash risk among U.S. banking firms and that the reduction is greater in banks that have a higher level of Level 3 financial assets.     

The materiality of country-specific geographic segment disclosures

SFAS 131 (1997) substantially changed geographic segment reporting in the United States by requiring disclosures to be made by individual foreign country when operations in an individual country are material. Although SFAS 14 (1976) provided a quantitative threshold for determining separately reportable segments, SFAS 131 provides no guidance for determining when operations in an individual country are material. In SAB 99 (1999), the SEC reminds firms that exclusive reliance on quantitative benchmarks to assess materiality is inappropriate; qualitative factors also should be considered.Using financial analysts as subjects, we conduct an experiment to examine two possible benchmarks for determining the materiality of operations in an individual foreign country: (1) the percent of total operations located in an individual country (a quantitative benchmark) and (2) the level of risk associated with the country in which the operations are located (a qualitative benchmark). The results indicate that across two regions both the magnitude of operations and the level of country risk significantly affect financial analysts’ judgments about firm risk. However, the effect that the magnitude of specific country operations has on risk assessment does not apply to countries of relatively high and relatively low risk. These results suggest that, although materiality is often evaluated in quantitative terms, the qualitative criterion of country risk may dominate in importance.     

An analysis of the impact of adopting IFRS 8 on the segment disclosures of European blue chip companies

Amidst the IASB's post-implementation review of IFRS 8, we examine how the standard's adoption changed the reporting of segments by European blue chips (i.e. companies comprising the top tier index of 14 European stock exchanges). We focus on anticipated benefits articulated in the IASB's Basis for Conclusions and concerns expressed by IFRS 8 opponents.In addition to convergence with U.S. GAAP, IFRS 8 results in the reporting of significantly more operating segments on average. However, most companies report the same number or fewer segments. Refuting claims regarding the loss of geographic data at the entity-wide level, we identify an improvement in the fineness of disclosures and a significant increase in the disclosure of geographic groupings. We do not identify an improvement in consistency of segment disclosures with other sections of the annual report, which is due to the consistency already achieved under IAS 14R.IFRS 8 results in a significant decline in the number of reportable segment information items (notably liabilities) and a significant decline in the reporting of capital expenditures at the entity-wide level. Furthermore, adoption of the standard produces a lack of comparability in segment profitability measures and extensive reporting of non-IFRS measures. However, almost all companies report a measure of segment profitability tied to a number on the consolidated income statement or reconciled to the income statement.     

The impact of GAAP guidance on asset retirement obligations

In this study, we assess issues faced by accountants in implementing Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations (AROs) and Financial Interpretation Number (FIN) 47, which was issued to clarify accounting for conditional AROs. The assessments were made by accountants of companies belonging to the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) since the EEI originally initiated the Financial Accounting Standards Boards’ (FASB’s) ARO agenda item. The findings suggest that SFAS 143 and FIN 47 have provided accountants with increased clarity for ARO identification and have resulted in more meaningful recognition. In addition, more liabilities are reported even though it can be argued that ceteris paribus management will choose the method that minimizes the amount of the liability. Overall, the findings suggest that the FASB’s guidance on asset retirement obligations improved the reporting model and their implementation guidance improved companies’ application of the rules.     

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.     

Security Market Effects Associated with SFAS No. 131: Reported Business Segments

In this study we examine the economic impact of the expected shift from the FASB's segment reporting requirements found in SFAS No. 14 to those found in SFAS No. 131. SFAS No. 131 was the joint effort of the United States' FASB and Canada's Accounting Standards Board (AcSB). It requires firms to report segments based on the firm's internal reporting and management arrangements (the management method) rather than on SFAS No. 14's line-of-business method. One alleged deficiency with the line-of-business method is its flexibility that allowed companies to combine segments. Analysts complained that companies abused this flexibility to conceal information. The management method allegedly is less flexible because companies must report segments externally the same way that they manage them internally. We examine the economic impact of the reporting standard shift by first developing company variables related to the alleged concealment of information under SFAS No. 14. These variables help us to explore why companies combine business segments under the line-of-business method and what costs companies are expected to incur when they are forced to implement the management method. Next we identify a series of dates that chronicle when the market received information about the content of SFAS No. 131. Results of the stock return tests suggest that SFAS No. 131 had a significant impact on firms that previously had the greatest incentives to conceal segment information, consistent with the conjecture that the standard imposed unanticipated costs on affected firms.     

Geographic earnings disclosure and trading volume

Beginning with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 131 (SFAS 131), Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information, most US multinational firms no longer disclose geographic earnings in their annual reports. Given the recent growth in foreign operations of US firms and the varying operating environments around the world, information (or lack thereof) related to geographical performance can affect investors’ information set. Using empirical tests that closely follow the [Kim, O., Verrecchia, R., 1997. Pre-announcement and event-period private information. Journal of Accounting and Economics 24, 395–419] model, we find results consistent with their predictions. Specifically, using a sample of firms with substantial foreign operations, we find evidence of a decrease in event period private information following adoption of SFAS 131 for firms that no longer disclose geographic earnings. These results suggest that decreased public information (i.e., non-disclosure of geographic earnings) reduces the ability of investors to utilize or generate private information in conjunction with the public announcement of quarterly earnings, which dampens trading. We also find evidence of a decrease in pre-announcement private information following adoption of SFAS 131. This is consistent with an overall improvement in public disclosures that has the effect of reducing differences in the precision of private information across investors in the period prior to the earnings announcement. However, such an effect is observed for both firms which no longer disclose geographic earnings and for firms that continue to disclose geographic earnings.     

The Impact of SFAS No. 131 on Information and Monitoring

We investigate the effect of the Financial Accounting Standards Board's (FASB) new segment reporting standard on the information and monitoring environment. We compare hand‐collected, restated SFAS 131 segment data for the final SFAS 14 fiscal year with the historical SFAS 14 data. We find that SFAS 131 increased the number of reported segments and provided more disaggregated information. Analysts and the market had access to a portion of the new segment information before it was made public, but analyst and market expectations were still altered by the mandated release of the new data. By increasing information disaggregation, the new standard induced firms to reveal previously “hidden” information about their diversification strategies. The newly revealed information affected market valuations and lead to changes in firm behavior consistent with improved monitoring following adoption of SFAS 131.     

The Valuation of MNC International Operations During the 1990s

We investigate how international operations affected firm value during the early 1990s. We also investigate whether the disclosures of foreign operations in specific geographic regions under SFAS No. 14 provide investors with useful information beyond disclosure of aggregate foreign operations. We find that in the early 1990s, investors do not value international operations as highly as domestic operations, and that geographic region disclosures are not useful for conveying information about the specific location and magnitude of the firm's operations. This latter finding supports the recent FASB decision that eliminated the requirement that firms break out foreign operating statistics by geographic region.     

The influence of disclosure policy on analyst behavior: The case of segment data

More transparent disclosure reduces the effort required to process reported information. The adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information, increased the transparency of segment information reported by diversified firms. Using a long sample window (1988–2007) and a difference-in-difference design, this paper examines the association between corporate diversification and analysts' efforts—as reflected in analysts' idiosyncratic information precision and analyst consensus—across the old SFAS No. 14 and the new SFAS No. 131 segment reporting regime. Results indicate that SFAS No. 131 has improved segment reporting such that analysts need to invest relatively less effort generating idiosyncratic information when issuing forecasts for diversified firms. Given that analysts' information gathering efforts are costly, these findings are of interest to policy makers when assessing whether the intended reporting objectives of SFAS No. 131 are being met in a cost effective manner.     

A Critical Look at SFAS 34: Capitalization of Interest Cost

In 1974, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) noted that an increasing number of companies were capitalizing interest costs, and that this practice was not being adequately disclosed (FASB, 1979, par. 26). In light of the alternative practices concerning the accounting for interest and lack of adequate disclosure by companies that were already capitalizing interest, the SEC recommended that the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) consider the issue of accounting for interest cost. As a result of the SEC's initiative, in 1979 the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards [SFAS] No. 34, Capitalization of Interest Cost, which mandated uniform interest capitalization rules in accounting for interest costs associated with the acquisition of qualifying non-current assets. The purpose of this article is to examine SFAS 34 in terms of its financial statement impact, the congruence of its assumptions with economic behaviour, its effect on subsequent standards related to interest capitalization, and its implications on financial accounting standard setting. To explore these issues we first illustrate the extent to which interest capitalization affects financial statements. We then empirically analyse the measure employed in SFAS 34 for the capitalization of interest cost in cases where debt is not directly linked with the acquisition of qualifying non-current assets. In addition, we critically examine the treatment accorded interest cost in subsequent FASB standards. Our research suggests that SFAS 34′s rationale for interest capitalization is incompatible with firm behaviour, and that the rules for interest capitalization as reflected in various accounting standards are inconsistent. These findings suggest that in the case of interest capitalization the benefits of comparability in financial reporting are not realized. A policy recommendation is then offered to alleviate some of these difficulties. The recommendation is to disallow the capitalization of interest cost in the absence of a direct link between the debt and the acquisition of qualifying assets.     

The effect of SFAS 142 on the ability of goodwill to predict future cash flows

This study examines the effect of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142 (SFAS 142) on the ability of goodwill to predict future cash flows. SFAS 142 allows substantial managerial discretion and leads to a significant magnitude of economic impact on financial statements, resulting in critical debates over the consequence of its adoption. I find that the ability of goodwill to predict future cash flows has improved since the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) adopted SFAS 142. Furthermore, sub-sample analyses fail to reveal compelling evidence that reporting discretion induced by SFAS 142 is used opportunistically or informatively, contrasting with the pervasive view based on the opportunistic reporting hypothesis. Overall, contrary to the position of critics of SFAS 142, the results support the view taken by the FASB and proponents of SFAS 142: eliminating systematic amortization and adopting fair value estimates improve representational faithfulness of goodwill reporting.     

On the value relevance of SFAS No. 158

After considerable discussion and some controversy, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158 entitled, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans” was implemented in 2006. An important goal of these standards was to enhance financial reporting transparency for defined benefit pension plans (FASB, 2006). This study evaluates how well SFAS No. 158 achieved its objective. In particular, we compare the respective pre and post-SFAS 158 incremental value relevance of the balance sheet and income statement for firms with defined benefit pension plans (DBPP). Results suggest that the value relevance of book value (net income) increased (decreased) for DBPP firms after the implementation of SFAS No. 158.     

The value relevance of inflation-adjusted and historical-cost earnings during hyperinflation

In Israel, publicly traded companies have been required to present financial statements based on the real purchasing power of the Israeli currency since 1985. Supplementary historical-cost data are provided in detailed notes to the financial statements including the balance sheet and the income statement. In the U.S., the FASB (1986) made the requirement to disclose the effect of price changes on earnings optional (SFAS 89). Consequently, publicly traded companies began suppressing inflation-adjusted earnings (IAE) disclosures. Most studies conclude that current cost earnings and constant dollar earnings provided marginal or even no information content in the U.S. This study examines the value relevance of unexpected IAEs and historical-cost earnings (HCE) in the Israeli hyperinflationary environment. A sample of 106 publicly traded manufacturing firms is used. The sample comprises over 97 percent of the publicly traded manufacturers in Israel during the mid-1980s. Cross-sectional annual and pooled regression models are estimated across the triple-digit annual inflation rates from 1984 through 1985 and the double-digit rates from 1986 through 1988. The results show that unexpected IAEs are value-relevant beyond unexpected HCEs, which are not value-relevant to investors in the hyperinflationary Israeli economy. The findings tend to be statistically significant when unanticipated inflation rates are notably high.     

Disclosure of contingent legal liabilities

There has long been user dissatisfaction with firm’s disclosure of contingent legal liabilities, and the FASB, IASB, and SEC have all considered compliance issues and standard amendments on this topic in recent years. This study uses a sample of employment discrimination cases to provide evidence on the extent to which current contingent legal liability disclosures provide useful contingency evaluations. Consistent with legal concerns influencing reporting decisions, I find that current disclosure practices provide limited quantitative detail regarding the magnitude of the expected loss. However, the text of the disclosures does provide qualitative indicators of the probability of loss. I find evidence that statements about the inestimable nature of the loss and statements about the firm’s willingness to consider a settlement are related to higher probabilities of loss and higher loss amounts. I also find evidence that statements regarding an existing accrual for losses and warnings about materiality reflect a higher likelihood of a nontrivial loss. These results emphasize firms’ strong resistance to quantitative disclosures of legal contingencies but suggest that existing SFAS 5 disclosures do contain qualitative information useful for evaluating the loss contingency.     

Using the standard-setting process to demystify the concepts statements: The case of SFAS 76

To illustrate the accounting standard-setting process and how conceptual consistency is lost during the negotiations involved in that process, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) 76 Extinguishment of Debt is used as a case study. Excerpts from actual “Comment Letters” sent to the FASB are used to highlight issues and stimulate discussion. Classroom results, wherein SFAS 76 was used, are summarized. While SFAS 76 as a case study was found to be an excellent vehicle for illustrating the problems faced by standard-setters and the role of the Conceptual Framework, any pronouncement could be used. The SFAS 76 case takes 20 or more minutes to use. However, the case can be substituted for some of the lecture on standard-setting so it does not have to expand the time needed to cover the topic.