Search results
1 – 2 of 2Franz Eduard Toerien, John H. Hall and Leon Brümmer
This study investigates whether the disclosure of derivatives is value relevant in emerging markets and evaluates the effects of the 2008/2009 global financial crisis on the value…
Abstract
Purpose
This study investigates whether the disclosure of derivatives is value relevant in emerging markets and evaluates the effects of the 2008/2009 global financial crisis on the value relevance of derivative disclosures.
Design/methodology/approach
Panel regression models using sub-samples and a crisis interaction term were applied to a sample of the 200 largest non-financial firms by market capitalization listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) from 2005 to 2017 to assess the consequences of the financial crisis.
Findings
The results suggest that the disclosure of derivatives is value relevant in the hitherto understudied context of emerging markets. The 2008/2009 financial crisis had a significant impact on derivatives use and the value relevance of derivatives disclosure by JSE-listed companies.
Practical implications
Companies should reconsider both how they employ derivatives as part of their risk management practices and how they communicate derivatives use to stakeholders in the financial statements. The findings facilitate a comparative analysis across various market contexts by researchers and assist investors in better decision-making. The findings can influence regulatory practices and can help standard setters to review disclosure requirements.
Originality/value
The benefits of corporate hedging were studied from an emerging market perspective, using an original dataset and approach to investigate the effects of international financial volatility on emerging markets. The authors tested whether companies are valued differently, based on their disclosure of the use of derivatives in the financial statements, and the effect of the financial crisis on the value relevance derivatives disclosures.
Details
Keywords
This paper investigates whether disclosure quality and a history of overpaying for acquisitions are associated with differences in the value-relevance of gains on bargain purchase…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper investigates whether disclosure quality and a history of overpaying for acquisitions are associated with differences in the value-relevance of gains on bargain purchase with high disclosure prominence.
Design/methodology/approach
Findings are from multivariate regression results, using a sample of firms listed in South Africa from 2010 to 2019, where a mandatory earnings reconciliation provides high disclosure prominence for gains on bargain purchase.
Findings
Given high disclosure prominence, disclosure quality is not associated with differences in the pricing of gains on bargain purchase. Instead, most gains on bargain purchase are priced as future losses (unrecognised liabilities). However, when a firm has a history of overpaying for acquisitions, gains on bargain purchase are priced as transitory economic gains.
Research limitations/implications
Further research is required to determine if overpaying for acquisitions similarly communicates the credibility of gains on bargain purchase when disclosure prominence is low.
Practical implications
Disclosure prominence can reduce disclosure processing costs and increase the value-relevance of complex acquisition accounting. High disclosure quality cannot compensate for a weak acquisition track record.
Originality/value
Findings deepen our understanding of the pricing of gains on bargain purchase. This paper presents empirical results that reconcile previously conflicting theoretical views of gains on bargain purchase (as unrecognised assets or as unrecognised liabilities), by shedding light on the role that a record of overpaying for acquisitions plays in the value-relevance of gains on bargain purchase.
Details