Search results

Previous studies have demonstrated significant discrepancies in financial results prepared separately under Chinese and international accounting standards. After years of reforms of Chinese accounting practices, there is still doubt as to whether previous discrepancies persist. This study therefore purports to evaluate the current dimensions of differences between the H‐share and the A‐share financial results.

Corresponding figures from H‐share and A‐share reports were obtained in pairs and analyzed through paired sample t‐tests.

Except for the result on operating income, all other t‐tests suggest that there is no significant difference between the paired figures of sales revenue, income before tax, net income, assets, debts and equity.

It can be concluded that the harmonization progress of Chinese accounting standards has advanced remarkably. Although full convergence has not been reached, the existing Chinese accounting standards have incorporated both the traits of international standards and the features of Chinese accounting practices.

Contrary to previous findings, this study did not identify statistically significant differences between H‐share and A‐share financial reports.

This paper presents a comparative study of the financial reporting practices of three Chinese companies listed simultaneously in Mainland China (A‐shares) and Hong Kong (H‐shares). Their financial statements, prepared based on the accounting and disclosure regulations in China and Hong Kong (or International Accounting Standards, IASs) over the period of 1995‐1998 were studied, including an examination of their corporate structures, and vertical and horizontal comparisons of their primary accounting numbers and key financial ratios. This study demonstrates that significant discrepancies exist for financial information disclosed in terms of Chinese GAAP, Hong Kong GAAP or IASs. In addition, there are notable deviations in financial disclosures among the three companies. The study findings confirm the existence of a substantial gap between the Chinese practices of corporate accounting and financial reporting and the internationally accepted norms. It is suggested that there is an urgent need to promote internationalization of Chinese accounting and improve the understandability and comparability of financial statements released by Chinese listed companies in order to enhance their relevance and usefulness for decision‐making by domestic and overseas investors.

The Chinese capital markets are divided into two segments comprising of A-shares (traded by domestic investors) and B-shares (traded by foreign investors). Firms issuing A-shares are required to produce accounting reports under the Chinese Accounting Standards (CAS) and firms issuing B-shares are required to report under the International Accounting Standards (IAS). The purpose of this paper is to investigate the comparative value-relevance of accounting information in the Chinese capital markets, in particular whether the value-relevance associated IAS exceeds that of CAS.

This study undertakes a capital market research approach. Two statistical models are employed to test the value-relevance of competing accounting information on share prices: the Price Model and the Return Model. This study takes advantage of the parallel reporting frameworks governing the A-share and B-share markets buy using the same firms which issue both A-shares and B-shares.

The analysis supporting the study demonstrates that both CAS and IAS information is value relevant to investors in the Chinese capital markets but that IAS provide more useful information. Additionally it is observed that reconciliation variables (representing the discrepancy between IAS- and CAS-based accounting figures) are not significant in explaining market valuation or returns on stock.

This study provides evidence of value-relevance of accounting reports on the Chinese capital markets for the period of 1999-2005. The period under investigation captures the significant development in China's accounting regulations which took place in 1998 and 2001. The recent shift in accounting regulations in China from CAS to IAS is expected to improve the dissemination of financial information by publicly listed Chinese firms.

This study investigates the reporting requirements on the Chinese capital markets during a period in which accounting reporting requirements underwent a significant change as part of the internationalization of accounting standards. Both A- and B-share markets were investigated simultaneously in order to provide an objective analysis and avoid sampling selection bias present in other studies.

The recent shift in accounting regulations in China from CAS to IAS is expected to improve the dissemination of financial information by publicly listed Chinese firms.

This paper extends previous research on value-relevance of accounting reports in the Chinese capital markets by capturing the period in which the reporting requirements had experienced significant change. This paper also takes advantage of the dual reporting framework in order to mitigate potential sampling bias present in previous studies and employs a reconciliation variables not previously used.

For Chinese companies that cross-list in Chinese A share and Hong Kong (H share) markets, the H share price has been consistently lower than the A share price by an average of 85% in recent years. This is puzzling because most institutional differences between the two markets have been eliminated since 2007. The purpose of this study is to explain the puzzle of the price difference of A+H companies.

Using all A and H share Chinese firms in the period 2007–2013 and a simultaneous equations approach, this study identifies three new explanations for the recent price difference.

First, utilizing a unique earning quality measure that is directly related to non-persistent components of fair value accounting under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), this study finds that the lower the earnings quality, the lower the H share price relative to the A share price, and hence the greater the price difference. Second, the higher the myopic investor ownership in A share firms, the larger the A share price relative to the H share price. Third, the short-selling mechanism introduced to the A share market since 2010 helps reduce the price difference.

First, this study identifies three new explanations for the puzzle of the AH price difference which remains substantial even after the institutional and accounting standards differences between the two markets were eliminated. Second, we examine the impact of the implementation of fair value accounting under IFRS in an emerging market on the pricing difference of cross-listed shares and reveal that it can induce an unintended negative consequence on the pricing difference of cross-listed shares. Third, this study contributes to the literature on short sales by providing its mitigating role in pricing differences across two different markets. Finally, this study makes improvements in research design, which utilizes a unique measure of earnings quality that is directly related to the implementation of IFRS and a simultaneous equations approach that minimizes endogeneity concern.

This chapter examines China’s corporate governance and accounting environment that shapes the adoption of internationally acceptable principles and standards. Specifically, it examines international influences, including supranational organizations; foreign investors and international accounting firms; domestic institutional influences, including the political system, economic system, legal system, and cultural system; and accounting infrastructure. China’s convergence is driven by desired efficiency of the corporate sector and legitimacy of participating in the global market. Influenced heavily by international forces in the context of globalization, corporate governance and accounting practices are increasingly becoming in line with internationally acceptable standards and codes. While convergence assists China in obtaining legitimacy, improving efficiency is likely to be adversely affected given that corporate governance and accounting in China operate in an environment that differs considerably from those of Anglo-American countries. An examination of the corporate governance and accounting environment in China suggests heavy government involvement within underdeveloped institutions. While the Chinese government has made impressive progress in developing the corporate governance and accounting environment for the market economy, China’s unique institutional setting is likely to affect how the imported concepts are interpreted and implemented.

Purpose – Investigate the causes and consequences of foreign financial institutions' divestments in China's banking sector which is an example of cross-border transactions by institutional investors.

Methodology – Use a sample of 26 foreign financial institutions' strategic investments in Chinese banks. Ten of those investments are divested after the global financial crisis. We investigate determinants of the divestment, business cooperation after the divestment, and Chinese banks' stock price reactions to the divestment announcement.

Findings – The poor performance of foreign financial institutions, which is attributable to the global financial crisis, and the institutions' regulated low equity ownership are important causes of divestment (or whole divestment). In contrast, Chinese banks' poor performance does not cause foreign divestments. Foreign financial institutions that fully divest their equity stakes usually terminate their cooperative business, which was required by the strategic investment agreement. The Bank of China and the China Construction Bank, which experienced large H-share divestments, experienced large economic declines in A-share values.

Social implications – Foreign financial institutions' strategic investments created substantial shareholder value before the divestment. Banking sector developments that rely on foreign investments are vulnerable to economic downturns in developed countries.

Originality/value of paper – To the best of our knowledge, this is the first trial to analyze the impact of divestments on divested bank performance.

Details how, in a bid to invigorate its state‐owned enterprises, the Chinese government allows some of its large state‐owned enterprises to list on the stock exchanges of Hong Kong and New York. Reports that, although at the beginning the stocks were very well received, the H‐share prices started to experience a free fall when the companies reported poor earning results in the summer of 1995. Looks at several arguments which have been put forward to explain this drastic change, but observes that most of these theories miss one important dimension, namely, the institutional factor. By using this particular point of view, argues that the H‐shares are poorly designed, noting, in particular, that the concerns for agency cost and asymmetric information problems have not been dealt with properly. Analyses the institutional problems of the H‐share companies and, based on this analysis, outlines some preliminary recommendations on how the H‐share companies can be reformed.

The objective of this paper is to examine the incremental effects of overseas listing on earnings conservatism. In particular, it investigates whether mainland Chinese companies listed “overseas” in Hong Kong exhibit a higher degree of earnings conservatism than companies without overseas‐listing.

The paper employs the concept of “conditional conservatism” and adopts Basu’s (1997) conservatism model, examining data for Chinese companies overseas listed on the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong as H‐shares, to test hypothesis concerned with the difference in the speed with which economic gains and losses are captured in accounting earnings.

The empirical findings indicate that both overseas‐listed and China‐only‐listed Chinese companies demonstrate a minimal degree of earnings conservatism in the earlier sample sub‐period. However, companies listed overseas provide a higher degree of earnings conservatism overall. Furthermore, this conservatism becomes statistically significant in the 2006 to 2008 sub‐period.

The evidence in this study shows that differences in earnings conservatism arise from differential information demands and differential regulations. Hence the findings have direct policy implications for the regulatory agencies in China and Vietnam and in the ex‐communist countries further afield such as Russia, the former Soviet Union, and Eastern Europe.

Chinese companies have recently started listing ADRs in North American stock exchanges and thus offered an alternative venue for Western investors whose access to the Chinese market has largely been limited to the illiquid B shares. Are ADRs a good substitute for investing in Chinese B Shares? We examine characteristics of return distributions for indices of Chinese shares and an index of Chinese ADRs. We also compare efficient frontiers for portfolios including Chinese shares and Chinese ADRs and compute possible portfolio allocations. We find that investing in Chinese ADRs does not provide a risk/return tradeoff similar to direct investment in Chinese stock exchanges.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the population of Chinese state‐owned enterprises (SOEs) listing A‐ (Chinese Mainland) and H‐ (Hong Kong) shares with a view to explaining differential pricing across the two stock types.

Despite the fact that both A‐ and H‐shares carry ostensibly the same shareholder benefits, when issued by a given SOE, major pricing differences are apparent. The behaviour of such prices for 20 quarters spanning January 2001 to December 2005 was examined. During this period, a marked contraction in the mean A‐ to H‐price relative occurred, whereby A‐prices generally softened and H‐prices soared.

It was noted that that the principal factors relevant to the contraction in the A‐ to H‐share price relative relate to two issues: first, an enveloping risk premium centring on state‐share disposal fears, and second, the firming of expectations surrounding the likely deployment of a qualified domestic institutional investor (QDII) scheme.

Modelling of changing expectations, especially in relation to uncertain policy deployment, is an invidious task. Measurement of such expectations is obviously strewn with difficulties.

As pertinent factors largely hinge on the deliberations of the PRC state, the analysis herein provides useful input into how policy can either wittingly or unwittingly shape general share price movements. Such insights are especially important given the evolving nature of the Chinese economy.