Search results

This study aims to assess if the voluntary reporting of adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA), a widely used non-generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) measure, has effects on information asymmetry and value relevance and how the adjustments to GAAP earnings made to derive it contribute to these effects. This study focuses on firms from two countries with contrasting institutional settings, Canada and France.

Relying on multivariate analyses and using Heckman’s procedure to address the sample self-selection issue, this study first estimates the likelihood of a firm to report adjusted EBITDA. Then, this study examines if adjusted EBITDA, as well as the adjustments made to GAAP earnings to derive adjusted EBITDA (adjustments), affect a firm’s information asymmetry and its value. These adjustments are essentially GAAP-grounded items that are discarded by management to derive non-GAAP adjusted EBITDA. The dependent variables are share price volatility, as a proxy for information asymmetry, alongside market-to-book and stock market return as indicators of value.

In terms of the used sample, results suggest that Canadian firms are much more likely to report adjusted EBITDA than French firms. Chief executive officer (CEO) attributes (CEO power) appears to increase such likelihood. Moreover, for both Canadian and French firms, adjusted EBITDA is associated with reduced stock market volatility, an indication of lower information asymmetry, as well as higher market-to-book and returns, suggesting value relevance. The results also indicate that investors view the adjustments to GAAP earnings made by management to derive adjusted EBITDA as not value relevant (similar to noise). The GAAP-grounded elements that management discard to derive adjusted EBITDA actually increase information asymmetry.

This study adds to prior research on the interface between a CEO attributes and governance and non-GAAP reporting. This study also provides evidence that, despite very different institutional settings, non-GAAP reporting conveys relevant information to capital markets’ participants in both France and Canada. Hence, a country’s institutional setting may have a differential impact on the disclosure choice but not on the resulting value relevance of such disclosure. Finally, this study extends the non-GAAP literature by examining the value relevance of a widely used yet under-researched measure, adjusted EBITDA.

This study aims to investigate the role of negative media coverage of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues in deterring tax avoidance. Inspired by media agenda-setting theory and legitimacy theory, this study hypothesises that an increase in ESG negative media coverage should cause a reputational drawback, leading companies to reduce tax avoidance to regain their legitimacy. Hence, this study examines a novel channel that links ESG and taxation.

This study uses panel regression analysis to examine the relationship between negative media coverage of ESG issues and tax avoidance among the largest European entities. This study considers different measures of tax avoidance and negative media coverage.

The results show that negative media coverage of ESG issues is negatively associated with tax avoidance, suggesting that media can act as an external monitor for corporate taxation.

The findings have implications for policymakers and regulators, which should consider tax transparency when dealing with ESG disclosure requirements. Tax disclosure should be integrated into ESG reporting.

The study has social implications related to the media, which act as watchdogs for firms’ irresponsible practices. According to this study’s findings, increased media pressure has the power to induce a better alignment between declared ESG policies and tax strategies.

This study contributes to the literature on the mechanisms that discourage tax avoidance and the literature on the relationship between ESG and taxation by shedding light on the role of media coverage.

The purpose of this paper is to open a debate on the interrelationship between categorisation, labelling, disclosure and enforcement. The extant literature on the accounting reporting environment explores the provision of both mandated and voluntary disclosures. Often disclosure is defined in a less than rigorous manner, mislabelled, misclassified and uses a strict dichotomy that limits information fineness.

The authors advance a non-dichotomous continuum of disclosure from voluntary and innovative at one end of the spectrum, to mandatory at the other, that helps reduce mislabelling and miscategorisation.

Firms’ voluntary disclosures cannot be properly interpreted without reviewing their interrelationship with mandatory disclosures and vice versa. Definitions of voluntary disclosure that have been used in empirical studies are examined, including the mislabelling and misclassification of voluntary disclosures and the authors provide examples of truly voluntary and innovative disclosures by companies.

This paper constructs, and provides evidence consistent with, a reporting continuum rather than the dichotomous disclosure measure that dominates decades of prior literature.

The purpose of this study is to delve into the complex interplay between earnings management (EM), the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) implementation and the reporting lag (RL) within the specific context of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region, with a particular emphasis on the Saudi context, offering insights into their influence on financial reporting practices.

Using a panel data set of 135 Saudi companies over an eight-year period, covering four years before and after the mandatory adoption of IFRS in 2017, this study investigates the Saudi financial reporting landscape. It uses interaction moderation analysis to explore variable effects and includes robustness analyses to validate the findings.

The findings reveal three key outcomes. First, they challenge conventional expectations by showing no significant impact of discretionary accruals (DACC) on RL, contrary to established accounting theories. This deviation is attributed to unique market characteristics within the GCC region, including family-owned businesses, government involvement and distinct regulations, with specific insights relevant to Saudi Arabia. Second, an unexpected positive association between IFRS adoption and RL in Saudi Arabia emerged. Several contextual factors contribute, including transition costs, compliance expenses, institutional dynamics and reconciling IFRS with local Shariah principles. Most importantly, IFRS adoption significantly reduced RL, especially for companies with high DACC levels. This highlights IFRS’s transformative role, emphasizes aligning EM with international standards for investor confidence and mitigating nonconformity risks in the GCC region’s business landscape.

The research findings carry significant practical implications for companies operating within the GCC region, accentuating the strategic imperative of timely financial reporting to bolster credibility, align with international standards and fortify investor confidence. Moreover, regulators and policymakers are urged to consider tailoring accounting regulations to accommodate the distinctive GCC context, thereby adeptly addressing the intricacies stemming from the interplay of EM, IFRS adoption and RL dynamics in the region.

This study adds to the current body of literature by highlighting the significant moderating influence of IFRS transition on the nexus between DACC and RL. It underscores the crucial role of this global accounting framework in reshaping financial reporting practices.

Since the withdrawal of IFRIC 3 in 2005, there has been a regulatory freeze in accounting for emission rights that contrasts with the international momentum of climate-related financial disclosures. This paper explores how different narratives and institutional dynamics explain the failure to produce guidance on accounting for emission rights.

This paper mobilises the notion of field-configuring events to examine a sequence of six events between 2003 and 2016, including four public consultations and two dialogues between standard setters. The paper presents a qualitative analysis of documents produced in this space that investigates how different practices and narratives configured the field's positions, agenda, and meaning systems.

Accounting for emission rights was gradually decoupled from climate change and carbon markets, relegated to the research pipeline, and forgotten. The obstacles that the IASB and EFRAG found in presenting themselves as central in the recurring events, the excess of representations, and the increasingly technical and abstract debates eroded the 2003 momentum for regulation, making the different initiatives to revitalise the project vulnerable and open to scrutiny. Lukes (2021) refers to nondecision-making to express that some issues are suffocated before they are expressed.

The regulation of accounting for emission rights, an area that has received scant attention in the literature, provides some insights into the different narrative mechanisms that, materialising in specific times and spaces, draw regulatory attention to particular accounting issues, which are problematised and, eventually, forgotten. This study also illustrates that identifying interests is problematic as actors shift from alternative positions over a long period. The case examined also raises some doubts about the previous effectiveness of international standard setters in dealing with matters of connectivity between the environment and finance, as is the case for accounting for emissions rights.

This study aims to investigate the motivations behind the issuance of financial instruments with characteristics of equity (FICE), economic consequences associated with their issuance and accounting classifications based on a value-relevance approach.

Using a sample of 169 financial and nonfinancial firms from 10 jurisdictions that adopted International Financial Reporting Standards, the authors use a difference-in-differences econometric approach.

The findings reveal that FICE issuers are more leveraged companies with higher costs of equity and, in some cases, lower effective tax rates. This evidence corroborates the hypothesis that issuers of FICEs seek to increase their book values of equity (accounting treatment as equity) and, simultaneously, generate deductible expenses for tax purposes (tax treatment as liability).

This finding suggests that market participants do not treat these instruments as regular equity but rather as quasi-equity. The findings suggest that a binary classification of FICE as debt or equity may not be the accounting treatment that best represents the underlying economic substance of these contracts. Furthermore, this study reinforces the IASB indication regarding to increase the FICE disclosure to allow stakeholders to better understand the economic essence of these bonds.

This study assesses the economic outcomes and market evaluation of a specific type of FICE that has not been previously studied, which is similar to the examples provided by the IASB in their materials on the subject.

This paper aims to investigate materiality judgement providing insights, critiques and future research paths in light of the open debate on the role of materiality in corporate financial disclosure, highlighting potential connections and implications with sustainability and intellectual capital (IC) reporting.

The research presents an overview of the analysis of financial materiality, including new stimuli from recent studies and regulatory requirements for financial and non-financial reporting. Accordingly, this study used a systematic literature review (SLR) based on a combination of content, text and bibliometric analysis of materiality in accounting research studies, collecting data from the Scopus database as one of the most relevant repositories.

The SLR identified four relevant research trends, concerning: (1) the relevance of materiality principles in corporate disclosure; (2) financial reporting practices and materiality; (3) theories and approaches in defining financial materiality and (4) the existence of quantitative and qualitative thresholds in the materiality judgement.

The results provide theoretical and practical implications when comprehending the development of the concept of financial materiality in financial statements and whether they can be appropriate in reporting IC as well. We identified future research paths.

From a practical perspective, this study is useful for companies implementing financial materiality based on stakeholder engagement and improving their transparency in financial and non-financial reporting practices.

The research investigates if the process for assessing materiality is in line with the expectations of all stakeholders involved in financial and non-financial reporting.

This research is the first to investigate the scientific basis and applicability of the concept of financial materiality to sustainability and IC reporting.

We investigate the information content of legal contingency disclosures in corporate filings, specifically their usefulness in predicting settlement amounts and mitigation of market response to litigation resolution news.

Using a hand-collected sample of disclosures for settled US securities class action lawsuits, we analyze the contents of the contingent liabilities disclosure before future settlements and classify them into two categories: “pessimistic” and “optimistic” disclosures. We examine whether the tone of disclosure is associated with litigation outcomes, such as settlement amounts and likelihood of incurring material losses, and its effect on market reaction to settlement announcements.

Disclosures with optimistic views on lawsuits are settled for lower amounts, whereas those with more pessimistic views result in higher settlements. Furthermore, while, on average, investors react negatively to litigation resolutions, the market reaction is attenuated (exacerbated) when a prior legal liability disclosure was pessimistic (optimistic). Additionally, investors value disclosure consistency when a litigation outcome is aligned with its legal contingency disclosure. Finally, disclosure consistency is positively associated with managerial ownership as well as the largest shareholder ownership.

This study highlights that the overall tone in legal contingency disclosures is informative and has valuation implications for capital markets. It also highlights the benefits of consistent disclosure, i.e. litigation disclosure aligned with litigation outcomes, as it is viewed positively by investors.

Analyzing the impact of integrated reporting (IR) on international firms' value relevance, considering diverse information such as income, cash flows, risks, uncertainties and various capitals.

This paper used a sample of 300 international companies between 2010 and 2019. This paper collected the data from the Thomson Reuters Eikon database. Quantitative methods were used to test the hypotheses. Furthermore, the feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) method was performed to test the hypotheses.

The results suggest that IR and value relevance positively correlate, confirming the hypothesis. Moreover, this paper verified these results by conducting robustness tests on the contribution of the framework and guidelines prepared by the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) in 2013.

This study enables users to evaluate company transparency and the relevance of disclosed nonfinancial information, providing valuable insights for report preparers and investors seeking profitable opportunities.

The interest in this research was motivated by the authors’ research field, which is innovative, as few studies have been conducted to explain the relationship between IR and value relevance. Similarly, this paper incorporated into their analysis the importance of the framework created by the IIRC in 2013 in preparing and presenting an integrated report. This paper considered the contribution of this framework to the creation of information content. This design has been overlooked in previous studies. However, this paper mobilized the FGLS method, which has been little used in previous studies.

A gap between research and practice is commonly perceived throughout accounting academia. However, empirical evidence on the magnitude of this detachment remains scarce. The authors provide new evidence to the ongoing debate by introducing a novel topic-based approach to capture the research-practice gap and quantify its extent. They also explore regional differences in the research-practice gap.

The authors apply the unsupervised machine learning approach Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) to compare the topical composition of 2,251 articles from six premier research, practice and bridging journals from the USA and Europe between 2009 and 2019. The authors extend the existing methods of summarizing literature and develop metrics that allow researchers to evaluate the research-practice gap. The authors conduct a plethora of additional analyses to corroborate the findings.

The results substantiate a pronounced topic-related research-practice gap in accounting literature and document its statistical significance. Moreover, the authors uncover that this gap is more pronounced in the USA than in Europe, highlighting the importance of institutional differences between academic communities.

The authors objectify the debate about the extent of a research-practice gap and stimulate further discussions about explanations and consequences.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first paper to deploy a rigorous machine learning approach to measure a topic-based research-practice gap in the accounting literature. Additionally, the authors provide theoretical rationales for the extent and regional differences in the research-practice gap.