Skinner's “Interpretation Panel”— A Means to Balance “Power”

The rules versus principles debate and the vital importance of context ‐ the circumstances‐specific nature of judgment ‐ are at the heart of Ross Skinner's suggestion for an “interpretation panel". International considerations and developments involving governance and regulation have created imbalances in power, expertise, and impartiality, increasing the importance of and need for such a panel. This analysis considers the nature of the problem, how professional judgment has been characterized, and why a panel would be appropriate to address, among other concerns, the audit committee's dilemma when accounting disputes arise. Evidence is provided that management turnover is higher in cases involving multiple restatements, governance problems, or regulators' sanctions. Although, intuitively, management turnover is likely to be associated with widely publicized restatements, some patterns suggest that it is a function of entity size, scope of management changes considered, and the manner in which the restatement was identified. Specifically, an identifiable source of discovery, as well as external involvement, is associated with a greater propensity for management change. In contrast, restatements linked to changes in available guidance from regulators are less likely to result in such turnover. One implication is that effective control design and monitoring to facilitate internal discovery of errors can decrease the likelihood of multiple restatements and reduce fault finding that leads to management change. The judgmental nature of restatements suggests that an infrastructure supporting “right‐mindedness” does have merit. An interpretation panel would increase the feasibility of principles‐based standards, facilitating timely resolution of accounting‐associated disputes and thereby enhancing the information environment underlying the allocation of capital.     

The Effects of Monetary Policy “News” and “Surprises”

There is substantial agreement in the monetary policy literature over the effects of exogenous monetary policy shocks. The shocks that are investigated, however, almost exclusively represent unanticipated changes in policy, which surprise the private sector and which are typically found to have a delayed and sluggish effect on output. In this paper, we estimate a New Keynesian model that incorporates news about future policies to try to disentangle the anticipated and unanticipated components of policy shocks. The paper shows that the conventional estimates confound two distinct effects on output: an effect due to unanticipated or “surprise” shocks, which is smaller and more short‐lived than the response usually obtained in the literature, and a large, delayed, and persistent effect due to anticipated policy shocks or “news.” News shocks play a larger role in influencing the business cycle than unanticipated policy shocks, although the overall fraction of economic fluctuations that can be attributed to monetary policy remains limited.     

On the Myth of “Anglo-Saxon” Financial Accounting

The term “Anglo-Saxon accounting” (ASA) is used by a number of academic writers on the subject of International Accounting to refer to an approach to financial accounting and reporting that is supposedly common to the UK and Ireland, the USA and other English-speaking countries including Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. While most of the writers we cite as using this term are continental Europeans, they also include an Englishman, J. Flower. The term is typically used to imply not just similar conceptual and technical approaches, but also a hegemonic alliance in the international politics of accounting regulation.This article seeks to establish that ASA in this sense is a myth. We do this first by critically examining four putative commonalities that are frequently attributed to the UK and USA approaches to financial accounting and that form the basis of the myth, and second by indicating the unfeasibility of such a hegemonic alliance within the IASC. A myth may have some factual foundations, but belief in it rests also on bases that are non-factual. So it is with ASA. In particular, analysis of the terms “true and fair view” (TFV) and “fair presentation (FP) in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)” shows that, far from their possessing a semantic equivalence that constitutes a commonality between UK and US financial reporting, their interpretation indicates a profound difference between the UK and US approaches. What UK and US financial reporting have historically shared is a micro- and capital market orientation that lends itself to international accounting regulation in a context of global capital markets. But with such an orientation now being generally accepted internationally, the differences between UK and US financial reporting are taking on an increased significance that this article seeks to highlight.     

Recruiting new “huddled masses” and “wretched refuse”: a prolegomenon to the human colonization of space

This paper is offered as an introduction to some of the personnel problems we are likely to face when substantial off-Earth colonization becomes feasible. Most of the literature to date on the subject portrays future colonies as similar in population and community structure to contemporary North American or European communities. A consideration of the history of colonization and of human population movements in general indicates the likelihood that future space colonization will also be hard to control and will take unexpected turns not always to the liking of those in supposed charge. Thus, the greatest impetus to move to the new colonies will come, as in the past, most likely from those throughout the world with the most desperate needs. Again, many nations may, as in the past, take the opportunity to use the new colonies as places to jettison unwanted or undesirable subgroups.     

Disclosure “Bunching”

This paper studies managers' preferences among information acquisition and disclosure policies when their firms are required to engage in “real‐time” or “continuous” financial reporting. The paper predicts that for many, but not all, processes describing the distribution of their firms' cash flows, when subject to such reporting requirements, managers will engage in disclosure “bunching,” that is, they will bunch the discretionary component of the information they acquire and disclose into a single point in time rather than spread the acquisition and disclosure of that information over time. We show that managers' preferred bunching period depends on managers' strategy for trading in their firms' shares, managers' risk aversion, the risk premium the capital market attaches to firms' shares, and the size of managers' initial ownership stakes in their firms. We also study and characterize how the equilibrium prices of firms' shares vary over time and also how managers' optimal trading strategies vary with their most preferred “bunching” strategies. Several extensions confirm the robustness of the optimality of disclosure “bunching.”     

From Accounting to “Forecounting”*

Using Ross Skinner's 1995 CA Magazine article, “Judgment in Jeopardy", as a stepping stone, we revisit the meaning of professional judgment in accounting in light of developments in standard setting, financial markets, and business operations that have taken place over the past two decades. We argue that it is time to change the view that accountants' professional judgment is the application of accounting‐based knowledge and experience in the selection of an appropriate accounting method. Accountants now face a standard‐setting context that emphasizes the estimation of future cash flows as well as new business and financial realities. This context implies that, in exercising their professional judgment to choose between forecast alternatives, accountants must rely on knowledge and experience from other disciplines (even though this is not well integrated into accounting). Hence, accounting must evolve from its traditional stewardship role to the new role of “forecount‐ing” (the estimation of future cash flows). The implications as well as the challenges of that evolution are discussed.     

“Lucas” in the Laboratory

We study the Lucas asset pricing model in a controlled setting. Participants trade two long‐lived securities in a continuous open‐book system. The experimental design emulates the stationary, infinite‐horizon setting of the model and incentivizes participants to smooth consumption across periods. Consistent with the model, prices align with consumption betas and comove with aggregate dividends, particularly so when risk premia are higher. Trading significantly increases consumption smoothing compared to autarky. Nevertheless, as in field markets, prices are excessively volatile. The noise corrupts traditional generalized method of moment tests. Choices display substantial heterogeneity, with no subject representative for pricing.     

The accounting of “The Meeting”: Examining calculability within a “Fluid” local space

This study traces events in an empirical setting where a key local space, “The Meeting”, was made calculable. Building on field data from interviews and documentary sources at ABB Industry/Finland, the study theorizes in the interpretive genre, elaborating on the notion of the calculable space. It argues the following: Accounting can be extended into un-formalized and more elusive local spaces – into “fluid” spaces which are not clearly mapped within the organizational hierarchy, and which lie beyond recognized responsibility units or physically distinct cells at the factory floor. By opening visibility into the discretion of these “fluid” local spaces, a tighter alignment between programmatic ideals and real action at the organizational grass-root can be achieved. Self-devised non-financial measurement, mediating local tensions and the interests of “autonomous” actors, becomes the technology of government in this process of normalization – which is, however, not to be acknowledged as being unproblematic.