Financial disclosure regulation and its critics |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Deakin Business School, Department of Finance, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia;2. Centre for Applied Financial Studies, School of Commerce, University of South Australia, Australia;3. School of Economics, Finance, and Marketing, RMIT University, Australia;1. Finance School, Shandong Technology and Business University, 191 Binhai RD, Laishan Dist., Yantai 264005, China;2. Shandong Provincial University Financial Service Transformation Collaborative Innovation Center, 191 Binhai RD, Laishan Dist., Yantai 264005, China;1. School of Management, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China;2. Department of Banking and Finance, National Chi Nan University, Puli, Taiwan;3. Department of Business Management, National United University, Miaoli, Taiwan;1. Infectious Disease Unit and Microbiology Departments, Hospital Universitario Lucus Augusti, Lugo, Spain;2. Infectious Disease and Microbiology Departments, Hospital Bellvitge, Ciberes, Idibell, University of Barcelona, L''Hospitalet, Barcelona, Spain;3. Infectious Disease Unit, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Ferrol, Ferrol, Spain;4. Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands |
| |
| Abstract: | In February 1985, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House Energy and Commerce Committee began a series of hearings that may lead to a proposal to expand the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC's) disclosure regulations. This article presents a synthesis of a growing body of literature that questions the need for any such regulation. Three types of critiques are discussed: first, studies that have examined the historical process through which the SEC was formed; second, empirical studies that have analyzed the effects of regulated disclosure on the capital markets; and third, theoretical studies that have questioned the fundamental rationale for financial disclosure regulation. Following these critiques, brief consideration is given to the role of security analysts and to the financial disclosure implications of modern portfolio theory. Finally, two alternatives to conventional financial disclosure regulation are presented. The purpose of this article is to stimulate interest in a critical examination of the SEC's existing disclosure program by providing a basis for discussion and analysis of the issues and the evidence and by presenting some alternatives based on the experiences of other countries. It is directed toward intermediate accounting courses, graduate courses in accounting theory and policy and graduate courses in corporate financial reporting. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
