Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine translation in the context of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by taking the example of the English term “impairment” in IAS 36, and following it into 19 translations. The paper then examines the terms used for impairment in English translations of annual reports provided by firms. Consideration is given to the best approach for translating regulations and whether that is also suitable for the translation of annual reports.

The two empirical parts of the paper involve: first, identifying the terms for impairment used in 19 official translations of IAS 36, and second, examining English-language translations of reports provided by 393 listed firms from 11 major countries.

Nearly all the terms used for “impairment” in translations of IAS 36 do not convey the message of damage to assets. In annual reports translated into English, many terms are misleading in that they do not mention impairment, peaking at 39 per cent in German and Italian reports in one year.

Researchers should note that the information related to impairment in international databases is likely to contain errors, and the authors recommend that data should be hand-collected and then carefully checked by experts. The authors make suggestions for further research.

Translators of regulations should aim to convey the messages of the source documents, but translators of annual reports should not look only at the reports but also consult the terminology in the original regulations. The authors also suggest implications for regulators and analysts.

The paper innovates by separately considering regulations and annual reports. The authors examine a key accounting term systematically into a wide range of official translations. The core section of the paper is a new field of research: an empirical study of the translations of firms’ financial statements.

The purpose of this paper is to provide “Comments” on two previous papers in this journal about fair value in Chinese accounting. It extends those papers by considering developments since 2006.

The paper analyses the contents of Chinese Accounting Standards, dividing the references to fair value into several different categories. This analysis is compared to the findings of the two previous papers. This paper then re-assesses the evidence about the alleged pressures from international institutions on Chinese accounting.

The two previous papers greatly overstate the importance of fair value in Chinese accounting, partly through misinterpreting Chinese standards and partly because of a lack of caveat that the instructions about fair value often relate to special circumstances or unusual companies. The theorising about Chinese enthusiasm for fair value is misguided: the present author suggests that China became keen to adopt international standards despite their use of fair value not because of it, and that China removed much of the fair value when it adapted international standards. The extension of the analysis beyond 2006 provides a fuller coverage but does not alter the conclusions.

The earlier of the two papers examined has been extensively cited. Researchers need to be warned that the technical content and the conclusions of both papers are questionable. Authors should define terms clearly and should provide sufficient reference detail to enable readers to check findings.

Multinational companies, auditors and financial analysts should not be misled into thinking that Chinese accounting makes extensive use of fair value accounting.

This paper critically re-assesses two previous papers, starting with detailed technical data and moving through to the influence of international institutions. This paper also newly extends the analysis of Chinese standards beyond 2006.

The purpose of this paper is to chart, analyse and attempt to explain, the changes in the scope of consolidation over the last century in national and transnational regulations. It first concentrates on the four countries which have been the main drivers of change (the USA, the UK, Germany and France) and then on the transnational regulations of the EU and International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). This issue is of great topical importance (e.g. the IASB's standard on consolidation of 2011).

The author synthesises the literature and then analyses the extensive set of accounting requirements over a century from the four countries, the EU and the international standard setters. Three theoretical perspectives (transnational operations, financing and diffusion of ideas) are assessed as explanations for the developments.

Definitions of subsidiary have ranged from the simple to the byzantine, including poor use of such words as “control” and “power”. Over time, there have been many types of exclusion from consolidation (e.g. based on lack of ownership, lack of control, dissimilarity or foreignness), but the scope has gradually widened. In terms of the conventional understanding of international accounting differences, the US concentration on ownership and the German concentration on control are unexpected. However, the theoretical perspectives allow an explanation, largely in terms of financing and diffusion of ideas rather than transnational operations.

Policy implications concern the improvement in the use of such terms as “control” and “power”. Suggestions are made for clarifying the scope of consolidation.

This is the first paper to analyse the scope of consolidation over a century up to the present on a transnational basis, and the first to seek to explain the developments in a theoretical context.

This study aims to examine the quantitative research productivity of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) globally by using the bibliometric approach. The method was applied to articles indexed in the Scopus database to analyze the publication patterns, trends and research productivity of the selected papers.

Bibliometric analysis is applied to analyze research productivity of IFRS from 2003 to 2020. The method was applied to articles indexed in the Scopus database to analyze the publication patterns and research productivity of the selected papers.

This study finds that a good number of articles have been published on IFRS, the top five countries are the USA, UK, Australia, Germany and Canada. This clearly shows that developed markets have the highest number of publications on IFRS. This could be as a result of the early adoption of IFRS by those economies and owing to the interest of researchers in those markets. Most of the studies are quantitative in nature; this study indicates that publication on accounting standards is popular as the number of citations is significant; most of the articles have two or more authors and were published in top-ranking journals.

This study provides up-to-date literature on the global research productivity of IFRS; as a result, it supports the development of policies by the users of this accounting standards. The findings of this study also serve as a reference point for firms and regulators around the world. Given the thoroughness of the methodology of this study, the results make it easier to effectively identify the direction of research on the implementation of IFRS in organizations.

This study provides a more comprehensive bibliometric analysis on the growth of IFRS literature (2003–2020) in the Scopus database; most of the prior studies have covered relatively few areas of focus as well as a fewer number of high impact factor journals. The relevance of this finding is in uncovering different areas of IFRS research productivity globally.

The qualitative characteristics of decision-useful financial information (as set out in the revised March 2018 Conceptual Framework for financial reporting of the International Accounting Standards Board [IASB]) are fundamental for standard setting relied on by companies when making accounting policy changes and choices. However, there has not been an overarching universally agreed conceptual context of the qualitative characteristics. This paper aims to study the completeness of the qualitative characteristics towards suggesting a revision of the Conceptual Framework.

The present study evaluated the completeness of these qualitative characteristics using Foucauldian critical discourse analysis and content analysis paradigms to elucidate the inclusion conundrum. Foucauldian analysis allowed focus on power relationships, governmentality and subjectification in accounting society, as expressed through language and practices of the IASB who ultimately decide on the qualitative characteristics. Content analysis was used to analyse data collected via interviews with preparers and users of banks’ accounts, changes in banks’ accounting policies after the conceptual framework was published and comment letters from banks who wrote to the IASB.

Novel findings from this study revealed the potential significant omissions of the constraints of “materiality”, “transparency” and “regulatory/supervisory framework”. Also, surrounding the qualitative characteristics having been shown to be valid and includable, the adjective “decision-useful” reinstated in the chapter title and the IASB project team technical writers needing to show completeness of attention to all comments.

From these findings, a freshly formulated chapter in the conceptual framework on the qualitative characteristics can now be submitted for consideration by the IASB, with potential for international post-implementation review.

The theme of this issue of Managerial Finance is managing corporate tax. Accompanying contributions address capital budgeting, financing, dividends, and financial reporting.

The purpose of this paper is to conduct an assessment of the research productivity of the accounting and finance community in UK higher education institutions (HEIs) during 1991-2010 using 44 high-quality accounting and finance journals.

The authors follow Chan et al. (2011) to use their 22 finance journals. For accounting journals, the paper includes a set of 24 accounting journals that were used in a global accounting ranking study by Chan et al. (2007). The paper uses the number of coauthors (n) and coaffiliations (M) to derive the weighted articles as the measurement metric.

In general, the research output in terms of weighted articles steadily increases during the 20-year period. The University of Manchester, London School of Economics, and London Business School are the top-three HEIs using 44 accounting and finance journals for the full sample. The authors also find that it is a challenge to publish multiple articles. If an author is able to manage five total appearances, he/she is in the top 16 percent among the 1,447 UK authors. Furthermore, the paper finds that many highly productive authors are able to move to different jobs during the 20-year period.

The assessment of research productivity is, unavoidably, based on a set of selected accounting and finance journals. Hence, no matter what journal screening criteria the paper uses, there is always a subjective element in the process. If other journals or more/less journals were to be included in a similar study, different results may emerge. As a way to extend the value of the research, it would be interesting to obtain broader institutional knowledge, such as the tenure requirements of HEIs in UK, and information on the institutions where faculty members obtained their doctoral degrees, so that the authors can better evaluate the research productivity among accounting and finance community in the UK.

The paper conducts an assessment of the research productivity of accounting and finance community in UK HEIs during 1991-2010 using 44 high-quality accounting and finance journals. The study fills the gap of the extant literature to compliment the assessment of the UK accounting and finance departments in RAEs.

To highlight the pressures that the auditors would face in the era of globalisation and the challenges they should be willing to accept in order to maintain trust and integrity.

A wide range of articles and journals published in international journals as well as local journals has been reviewed. The areas covered include audit fraud, true and fair view interpretation, auditor independence and role of internal auditors. Further, ideas have also been obtained from critical write‐ups in the business magazines on the fall of multinationals.

A wide range of interpretation has been given by various groups of people on their understanding of the phrase “true and fair”. This has created great confusion as to the interpretation of the audit reports. This has been proven by the fall of many multinationals and the audit pioneers, Andersens. This is one of the causes of audit fraud and it is also seen that as the auditors face an enormous challenge as they enter the twenty‐first century, they should be willing to change their attitudes towards their clients. Professionalism should be in the forefront, and an overhaul in the concept of “true and fair” could probably be the solution to harmonisation of the economy.

This paper lacks statistical data on the views of the authors. It is based purely on secondary data.

Provides awareness to the auditors, corporations and general public on the necessity to revamp the existing auditing practices. This can help the auditors not only to be professionals, but also to be seen as professionals.

This paper provides scope for research in this area to identify whether the overhaul concept is acceptable. If yes, what should the new concept be? If no, what is the solution to the existing public outcry?

The paper investigates attitudes towards and perceptions of the adoption of the International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) for small and medium-sized entities (SMEs) in Saudi Arabia, immediately before and during the period of adoption.

The study adopts an interpretive approach, using a new institutional theory framework, drawing on concepts of institutional isomorphism and institutional logics. Research was undertaken using extensive interviews of business owners and managers, accountants, auditors, regulators and others. Interviewees were identified using snowball sampling, and the paper discusses the appropriateness of this method for research in management in MENA countries.

The adoption of IFRS, and in particular IFRS for SMEs, in Saudi Arabia can be understood best as an example of mimetic isomorphism, as many respondents suggested that the country adopted these standards in order to emulate other countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council and the G20 group of countries.

The study examines issues relating to the adoption of IFRS for SMEs in an emerging economy where adoption was not imposed by international financial institutions.

In addition to being the first study of the adoption of IFRS for SMEs in Saudi Arabia, the paper examines snowball sampling as a particularly useful method in MENA countries.

The objective of this study is to examine how formal and informal institutional environment influences managers’ fair value opinion shopping behaviour in the largest International Financial Reporting Standards adopter, China.

To test the hypotheses, I conduct a 2 × 2 between-subject randomised experiment since the inferences about cause and effect are important in this study. The between-subject experimental situations are manipulated on the basis of the financial condition of companies and boards’ oversight.

I find that managers are likely to seek favourable fair value opinions from external valuation professionals when they are under the weak boards’ oversight and high stress to meet the regulation target of the China Securities Regulatory Commission. These results are more pronounced for managers with higher both rent-seeking and favour-seeking guanxi orientations are more likely to engage in fair value opinion shopping.

Consistent with theoretical analysis of Balfoort et al. (2017), this study provides empirical evidence that guanxi influences the neutrality and faithful representation in fair value measurement in China. In addition, the findings extend Salzsieder’s study (2015) and reflect the context-embeddedness nature of accounting.