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

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

Practice versus Prescription in the Disclosure and Recognition of Derivatives

The contentious issue of the recognition and measurement of derivative instruments is again high on the Australian standard-setting agenda, following pronouncements by the International Accounting Standards Committee (USC) and Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). This study investigates firms' disclosure of derivative accounting policies and measurement practices pursuant to the introduction of AASB 1033. A lack of clarity and completeness in the disclosures suggests that supplementary requirements are necessary. A preference for using hedge accounting is also apparent. Should an Australian standard disallow or impose conditions on hedge accounting, fims will need to alter their current accounting practices and risk management strategies and they will probably reassess their use of derivatives.     

GAAP,GFS and AASB 1049: perceptions of public sector stakeholders

Efforts by Australian standard‐setters to harmonise public sector financial reporting resulted in AASB 1049, which sought to bridge the divide between generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)‐based and government finance statistics (GFS)‐based financial statements. However, whether AASB 1049 has resulted in information that is considered appropriate for the public sector has not been examined. We explore this issue by comparing the requirements of AASB 1049 with the responses from a survey of public sector stakeholders on the appropriate accounting treatment and presentation of selected financial items. The analysis suggests consensus with AASB 1049 on presentation issues but less consensus on accounting treatments.     

The Saga of a Disallowed Accounting Standard

In 2000, the Australian Senate disallowed two paragraphs of the accounting standard AASB 1015 Acquisition of Assets, an unprecedented action that sent shockwaves through the business community. As a consequence, a legal dispute erupted between ASIC and MYOB Limited in relation to the application of the disallowed paragraphs, culminating in a recent decision in the Victorian Supreme Court. This paper describes the circumstances surrounding the Senate's decision and the ensuing legal action taken by ASIC against MYOB. It discusses the implications for accounting standard-setting in Australia, and the process by which an accounting standard is made by the AASB and may be disallowed in whole or in part by parliament.     

Valuation of SGARAs IN THE Wine Industry: Time for Sober Reflection

The application of AASB 1037 Self Generating and Regenerating Assets provides little guidance to the commercial performance of winemakers. The valuation of grapevines essentially requires the valuation of a segment of a business (vineyards), from which is deducted the value of associated infrastructure. Grapevines are reported at a fictional "net market value" even though they cannot be bought or sold. The combination of recognising revaluation increments as distributable profits through the valuation of grapevines at "net market value", and the subsequent "amortisation" of those revaluation increments over the useful lives of the grapevines, creates a reporting maze which is more likely to confuse than inform.     

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

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

Do principles‐based accounting standards lead to biased financial reporting? An Australian experiment

International accounting standards are deliberately designed to be principles‐based (i.e. ‘substance over form’). With Australia's recent adoption of international accounting standards, a relevant question is, do principles‐based accounting standards lead to biased financial reporting? The present paper describes a study that analysed the consolidation judgements of senior accounting officials from Australian listed companies. Participants made consolidation judgements based on AASB 1024 Consolidated Accounts. Although AASB 1024 is not identical to IAS 27 Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements, there are many similarities and both follow a principles‐based approach. In aggregate, the present study finds that principles‐based accounting standards do not necessarily lead to biased financial reporting.     

AASB 1028 And Choice Of Discount Rate: Gross Or Net Of Taxation Effects?

This paper discusses the issues arising from the choice of discount rate to be included in the present-value calculation required for the measurement of liabilities relating to employee entitlements in company accounts. We look at the implications of AASB 1028, as it concerns the choice of a discount rate before or after an allowance for taxation. AASB 1028 relates to most employee entitlements including long-service leave, accumulated annual leave and workers' compensation, where the accounting entity self-insures.     

The Impact of AASB 8 Operating Segments on Analysts’ Earnings Forecasts: Australian Evidence

This paper evaluates the impact of firms’ adoption of AASB 8 segment disclosure rules on analysts’ earnings forecasts. It examines whether providing more disaggregated segment information following the adoption of AASB 8 is associated with an increase in analysts’ ability to forecast earnings. We find that analysts’ earnings forecasts have not improved significantly after adopting AASB 8 in Australia, regardless of whether firms disclosed more disaggregated segment information. Our use of control firms provides assurance that the results are due to AASB 8 and not to some other events concurrent with the adoption of AASB 8. Overall, our results imply that the benefits associated with the management approach as experienced by financial analysts in the United States have not been realised by financial analysts in Australia. This suggests that the successful adoption of an accounting standard in one country should not be the justification for recommending adoption in other countries. Further, our results raise questions about whether the enhanced disclosures required in the new standard are more for the other users of financial statements, such as investors, rather than analysts.     

Measurement of formal harmonization progress:: The IASC experience

As a result of globalization, the accounting profession has become increasingly aware of the need to establish a single set of accounting standards that would be valid in the international arena. Recent events highlight the timeliness of this study, which provides an empirical measurement of International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) progress throughout its harmonization history. The purpose of this article is twofold: first, a new measure of the advances achieved through formal harmonization and second, to use this methodology to evaluate the IASC achievements all through its standard-setting activity. Our results prove that the IASC has made great progress in regard to the level of harmony achieved through the accounting standards it has issued or revised. Nevertheless, we conclude that the IASC needs to continue working towards greater formal harmonization. Our study also indicates research directions that could advance the study of formal harmonization. This specific area of research has generally been disregarded in the existing literature, a trend we would like to see reversed, considering that its application can provide valuable insight for standard-setting processes, especially now that the accounting community is so conscious of the need to advance the harmonization process.     

Did the goodwill accounting standard impose material economic consequences on Australian acquirers?

This research explores the empirical association between takeover bid premium and acquired (purchased) goodwill, and tests whether the strength of the association changes after the passage of approved accounting standard AASB 1013 in Australia in 1988. AASB 1013 mandated capitalization and amortization of acquired goodwill to the income statement over a maximum period of 20 years. We use regressions to assess how the association between bid premium and acquired goodwill varies in the pre‐AASB and post‐AASB 1013 periods after controlling for confounding factors. Our results show that reducing the variety of accounting policy options available to bidder management after an acquisition results in a systematic reduction in the strength of the association between premium and goodwill.     

Accounting for Identifiable Intangibles — An Unfinished Standard-Setting Task

Years of debate have failed to produce an Australian consensus on accounting for identifiable intangible assets. The AASB in 1999 re-affirmed its view that assets such as brand names, mastheads, licences and trademarks have depreciable amounts that are required to be depreciated. Meanwhile, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission has increased the pressure on companies to amortise such assets. Following a submission from the Group of 100 and others in May 2000, the AASB resolved to place the topic back on its work program. Current proposals by the FASB to accept non-amortisation of goodwill and other intangibles with indefinite lives has "turned up the heat" for further AASB action.     

Direct and substitution effects of regulations impacting the scope for classification shifting

We exploit two historic changes to Australian accounting standards to examine the direct and substitution effects of regulations impacting the scope for classification shifting. First, we consider whether reforms to the standard prescribing the format of the income statement (AASB 1018) introduced during 2001/02 reduced the extent to which core expenses were opportunistically misclassified as ‘abnormal’ in an attempt to boost ‘core earnings’ (the ‘direct effect’), and whether any reduction in classification shifting behavior induced greater use of accrual-based earnings management (the ‘substitution effect’). We then examine the impact of the introduction of AASB 101 in 2005, which effectively reversed the constraints on classification shifting introduced in 2001/02. We find that classification shifting using abnormal items was significantly reduced following the 2001/02 reform. However, this reform also appears to have induced an increased use of accruals management to manipulate core earnings, thus potentially impairing earnings quality. We find some weak evidence of an increase in classification shifting behavior following the adoption of AASB 101, but no evidence of any substitution effects involving accrual-based earnings management.     

Segment Reporting Practices in Australia: Has IFRS 8 Made a Difference?

This study examines changes in segment reporting in Australia following the adoption of the international accounting standard, IFRS 8 Operating Segments. We analyse segment disclosures of the top 200 companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange in their pre‐ and post‐adoption of AASB 8, the equivalent Australian standard to IFRS 8. Our findings indicate that the number of reportable segments and the extent of disclosure have increased post‐adoption of AASB 8. Contrary to expectations, however, there is very little change in the identification of reportable segments. Companies, in general, have managed to retain their segment reporting formats and disclosures from the pre‐AASB 8 period.     

Changes in Segment Reporting in the Australian Banking Industry

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

IFRS adoption and analysts’ earnings forecasts: Australian evidence

We study 145 large listed Australian firms to explore the impact of international financial reporting standards (IFRS) adoption on the properties of analysts’ forecasts and the role of firm disclosure about IFRS impact. We find that analyst forecast accuracy improves, and there is no significant change in dispersion in the adoption year, suggesting that analysts coped effectively with transition to IFRS. However, we do not observe the expected relationship between firms’ IFRS impact disclosures in their financial statements issued at the end of the transition year with forecast error and dispersion in the adoption year. The results question the timeliness and usefulness of financial statement disclosure, even in a setting where disclosure was mandated by accounting standards (AASB 1047 and AASB 1) and firms had strong incentives to provide information to analysts.     

Establishing the Fair Value of Consideration Given In an Acquisition

The impact of accounting standards on acquisitions has significant implications for the purchaser's reported financial position, reported profits and ability to pay dividends
reported profits and ability to pay dividends. Two major problems arise with respect to the bases used in assessing the fair value of offer consideration – the size of the control premium and the notional placement discount. These problems are exacerbated by the little-noticed, but significant, change in measurement date (from offer date to acquisition date) in AASB 1015. Hence, further differences arise if the share price moves significantly between the offer date and the acquisition date. Current international accounting standards are being harmonised. However, they are inconsistent in their requirements as to whether takeover consideration should be assessed at acquisition date rather than offer date.     

Superannuation in Society: What are the Accountability Relationships and is there a Role for (Group) Accounting?

Superannuation fund reporting is a topical issue: it is in a state of flux and currently on the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) work program for 2012, with the release of ED 223 Superannuation Entities in December 2011. Issues under debate include uncertainty regarding the users of superannuation financial reports, and the application of the principle of ‘transaction neutrality’ to accounting for corporate groups by superannuation entities. Accountability reporting by superannuation funds has remained largely unchanged since the introduction of compulsory superannuation 20 years ago. This paper describes the changing nature of superannuation from a managerial gratuity to a type of deferred pay, and how accounting for superannuation is likely to increase in significance as it responds to the shifting economic nature of superannuation, especially since the global financial crisis. This paper uses basic content analysis to analyse member submissions to the Australian Government's Review into Governance, Efficiency, Structure and Operation of Australia's Superannuation System 2009, and submissions to the AASB's consultation paper on consolidation accounting for superannuation entities in 2007. Limited characterisations of members as being not interested in financial reporting are out of step with the underlying nature of superannuation, and will likely change as the economic significance of superannuation increases in the future.     

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

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