Search results

The paper aims to examine earnings quality during the post‐acquisition period.

The paper defines earnings quality as an earnings stream more closely associated with future cash flows from operations. It uses the stock market's reaction at the acquisition announcement to infer merger motives and hypothesize that synergy‐motivated acquisitions will produce higher quality earnings than agency‐motivated acquisitions.

The paper finds that synergy‐motivated acquisitions produce higher quality earnings than agency‐motivated acquisitions.

The findings are consistent with this prediction and support the view that managers who pursue synergy or agency‐motivated acquisitions do not face the same economic environment and incentive schemes. The results are also consistent with the notion that incentives for earnings management are greater following agency‐motivated acquisitions when compared to those of synergy‐motivated acquisitions. The authors conjecture that these differences originate from those accounting‐based contracts that are likely impacted by reported post‐acquisition balance sheet and income statement amounts.

The findings of the paper show that the motive for the acquisition has lasting effect, several years post acquisition on the quality of earnings produced by the merged entity; thus furnishing additional importance to identifying the motive for the acquisition.

The paper uses the corporate acquisition setting to examine earnings quality during the post‐acquisition period. This paper should be relevant for researchers studying either the quality of earnings or corporate acquisitions.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of firms using derivatives applying Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 133. It aims to measure the magnitude of cumulative effects of changes in accounting principle from the income statement in the year of adoption, market reaction to earnings announcements, and key financial ratios effects.

Search of the Compustat Industrial database for firms reporting a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle in their annual income statements for fiscal years ending after 15 June, 2000. We then examine the impact of firms using derivatives applying SFAS No. 133.

The sampled firms reported an absolute cumulative effect on income of $6.8 billion, 65 per cent of which was negative. Significant negative unexpected returns were observed around earnings announcement dates. Abnormal returns correlated with the cumulative effect, rather than with change in earnings per share from operations, showing that the surprise related to the accounting change. Ratio analyzes and regressions results show sampled firms with material unrealized gains and losses related to hedging with derivative instruments. Earnings‐related ratios, return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE) and measures of other comprehensive income decreased significantly from 2000 to 2001 after experiencing prior period significant increases.

The results presented in the paper should lead to further research on the effect on new authoritative standards on the financial reporting process.

Rather than judge SFAS No. 133's relative merits and shortcomings, the Standard's actual (rather than predicted) effects were analyzed. Focus was on the magnitude of the impact of SFAS No. 133 and the effect on key financial ratios. The impact of adopting the Standard was analyzed and it was found that it violated a basic tenet of financial accounting pronouncements: a “value neutral” basis was examined.

The paper aims to examine the relation between fees paid to auditors and audit quality during the period of 2000‐2003.

The paper constructs a measure of auditor profitability that is used as a proxy for auditor independence. The methodology is grounded in the notion that auditor independence is influenced by effort and risk‐adjusted fees, rather than the level of fees received from clients. Since, risk and effort are unobservable, the paper uses proxies based on client size, complexity and risk to estimate abnormal fees. Abnormal fees are derived using a fee estimation model drawn from prior literature. The paper employs two metrics to assess audit quality – the standard deviation of residuals from regressions relating current accruals to cash flows and the absolute value of performance‐adjusted discretionary accruals.

The paper documents a statistically significant negative association between total fees and both audit quality proxies over all years. These findings are robust to a variety of additional tests and several alternative design specifications. The results (pre‐ and post‐SOX) are consistent with economic bonding being a determinant of auditor behavior rather than auditor reputational concerns.

The possibility that the empirical tests do not completely capture the impact of unobserved risk cannot be ruled out, though the paper attempts to do so by employing alternative specifications and sensitivity tests.

Policy makers should note that current restrictions on the provision of non‐audit services may not sufficiently resolve the issue of economic bonding and its impact on auditor independence.

In contrast to previous studies whose results are ambiguous, the paper finds a statistically significant positive association between several measures of total fees (it uses size‐adjusted and abnormal fees) and two metrics of accruals quality in all years (2000‐2003), consistent with economic bonding being a determinant of auditor behavior rather then auditor reputation concerns.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether investor reactions to accounting narratives are uniform across cultures or if there are predictable systematic culture-based differences, particularly for investors from interdependent cultures, such as in Asia.

This research paper builds on the experiment conducted in Riley et al. (2014) by collecting data from investors from interdependent cultures and comparing their investment judgments to the “baseline” judgments of the investors from Riley et al. (2014).

In comparing independent and interdependent culture investors, a culture by construal interaction is observed. Whereas the independent culture investors in Riley et al. (2014) made less favorable investment judgments of a company with a concretely (vs abstractly) written negative narrative, this effect is attenuated for interdependent culture investors.

This study extends the literature on accounting narratives by providing evidence that investors’ culture and linguistic characteristics of accounting narratives “interact,” suggesting that future studies in this area should account for culture as a variable. As for limitations, the independent and interdependent participant data were predominantly collected from different universities, so the differences observed may be due to institutional, not cultural differences. However, the populations are matched on key demographic measures.

The results have practical implications for investor relations professionals and international standard-setting bodies.

This study is believed to be the first to examine how investors’ culture may affect their reactions to the features of accounting narratives.