Search results

For years, interim financial reports in South Africa were regulated by the South African Companies Act No. 61 of 1973 (as amended) (i.e. statutory requirements) and by the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) Listing Requirements (i.e. regulatory requirements) only. However, on the international front, major progress was being made in respect of improving the quality of interim financial reporting. South Africa soon followed suit and issued its own accounting statement, AC 127, which is based on the international standard (IAS 34). The School of Accountancy at the University of Pretoria commenced a research project on interim financial reporting in 1997 to investigate compliance with related reporting requirements. This paper is a product of the project. The purpose of the study reported in this paper was to: [a] Compare the requirements stated in IAS 34 and AC 127 with the local regulatory and statutory requirements, to determine whether these requirements are duplicated and to establish in which respect the accounting standards require additional disclosure requirements. [b] Provide an overview of the extent to which companies listed on the JSE adhered to IAS 34 and AC 127 and complied with regulatory and statutory requirements in their interim financial reports in the period 1997 to 1999. [c] Make recommendations regarding the improvement of local statutory and regulatory disclosure requirements.

The purpose of this paper was twofold. First, to explore the currently performed board roles. Second, to investigate the relationship between board role performance and compliance with international financial reporting standard (IFRS) disclosure requirements among microfinance institutions (MFIs) in Uganda.

This study used a mixed methods research design. The relationship between board role performance and compliance with IFRSs requirements was tested using Partial Least Squares. Confirmatory Factory Analysis and interviews were conducted to establish the performed board roles.

The findings suggest that among the known board roles of strategic, service and control, the control role is mostly performed. Results further suggest that board role performance is a significant predictor of compliance with IFRS disclosure requirements. In terms of control variables, MFI size and membership to the Association of Microfinance Institutions of Uganda were significant. Other control variables (liquidity, leverage and profitability) are not significantly associated with compliance with IFRS disclosure requirements.

Compliance with IFRS disclosure requirements was based on one financial year owing to a lack of data for many years.

The results are important for governing boards regarding improving compliance with IFRS disclosure requirements. The results specifically suggest that MFIs’ boards must focus on performing the control role if compliance with IFRS disclosures requirements is to improve.

This paper is original because it uses perceptions to measure board role performance, unlike previous studies that used proxies such as board size and proportion of non-executive directors to infer board role performance. The study also reveals that it is only the control role that is important in enhancing compliance with IFRS disclosure requirements. Such evidence does not currently exist.

This article examines rule amendments issued by the US Securities and Exchange Commission in November 2020, as part of the SEC’s ongoing “disclosure effectiveness initiative”, that revise in significant respects the requirements for financial disclosures presented in SEC filings as Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

This article provides an in-depth analysis of the rule amendments in the context of contrasting perspectives expressed by the SEC, individual SEC Commissioners who dissented from adoption of the amendments, and market participants regarding the merits of the SEC’s movement away from prescriptive disclosure requirements towards a more principles-based approach to disclosure.

Although the SEC’s rules have long reflected a mix of principles-based and prescriptive disclosure elements, the principles-based emphasis in this latest stage of the SEC’s disclosure modernization project accords the managements of filing companies greater latitude to determine whether financial information is material to investors and how such information should be presented.

This article provides expert guidance on a major new SEC disclosure development from an experienced securities lawyer.

This study aims to examine how new regulation changes for the auditor’s report, so-called key audit matters (KAMs), influence tax avoidance.

This study uses data from firms listed on the Omani capital market over the period 2012–2019 and analyzes these data using pooled panel data regression with a robust standard error. It uses two common proxies for tax avoidance and two measures for the KAMs disclosure requirement.

This study finds a sharp decrease in the effective tax rate following the introduction of KAMs disclosure and the issuance of more KAMs in audit reports. This result is supported by several robustness checks. In an additional analysis, the authors observe interesting results, indicating that real earnings management mediates this association, while the audit committee plays a moderating role. The authors do not find a moderating effect of Big4 on this association, but find discrepancies within the Big4 firms in relation to this moderating effect.

The results of this study indicate that although the introduction of the KAMs disclosure requirement may have positive consequences, it may also lead to unintended negative consequences. This conclusion has not been comprehensively reported in literature.

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

The purpose of this paper is to address recent calls for research regarding the valuation implications of mandatory disclosure requirements (cf. Hassan et al., 2009; Leuz and Wysocki, 2008; Schipper, 2007).

The paper measures compliance with all International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) mandatory disclosure requirements for a sample of firms. The paper subsequently explores whether the compliance scores (i.e. the mandatory disclosure levels) are value relevant and whether the value relevance of accounting numbers differs across high- and low-compliance/disclosure companies.

The paper finds that the levels of mandatory disclosures are value relevant. Additionally, not only the relative value relevance (i.e. R2) but also the valuation coefficient of net income of high-compliance companies is significantly higher than that of low-compliance companies.

This paper is an indicative single country case study that focuses on the IFRS adoption year (2005) in the EU. It forms a new avenue for research regarding the valuation implications of mandatory disclosure requirements. It remains to future research to examine whether the findings also hold in other countries and periods.

These findings are expected to be particularly relevant to standard setters and regulatory bodies that are concerned about the implications of mandatory disclosure requirements (Schipper, 2007).

To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper that examines the value relevance implications of IFRS mandatory disclosure requirements, focusing on European country after 2005. The authors indicate that IFRS mandatory disclosures do lead to more transparent financial statements (cf. Pownall and Schipper, 1999), mitigating concerns about companies’ fundamentals (cf. Anctil et al., 2004).

The purpose of this research is to highlight the differences, and implications of any differences, between two approaches to measuring compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) mandatory disclosure requirements: the commonly used “dichotomous” approach; and the alternative, but rarely used, partial compliance unweighted approach. The former gives equal weight to the individual items required to be disclosed by all standards. The latter assumes that each standard is of equal importance and consequently gives equal weight to each standard.

The paper employs both methods on a sample of companies. We then compare the results deriving from the application of the two methods and statistically test their differences.

It is found that the two methods produce significantly different overall and relative (i.e. ranking order) compliance scores.

This paper should alert researchers to the implications of using either method. Additionally, it highlights the need for academics and/or practitioners to be cautious when interpreting the findings of prior studies on compliance with IFRS mandatory disclosure requirements. Since the two methods produce significantly different compliance scores, findings regarding the variables associated with compliance may differ, depending on the disclosure index method followed. The paper suggests that simultaneous application of both methods would result in more robust findings in future research.

This is the first study to compare the results produced by applying both methods and statistically test their differences. The research methods explored are in particular relevant for policy‐oriented, international accounting research.

To explain regulatory developments and changes to compliance obligations for asset managers registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) as commodity pool operators of registered investment companies.

Provides a general overview of new CFTC rules (Harmonization Rules) that afford relief to commodity pool operators of commodity pools that are registered as investment companies under the Investment Company Act of 1940; describes the specific CFTC disclosure, reporting and recordkeeping requirements that remain applicable to commodity pool operators that are also subject to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulation by virtue of operating commodity pools that are registered investment companies; discusses reliance on substituted compliance with applicable SEC requirements; outlines the method for claiming relief under the Harmonization Rules; provides guidance for CPOs of RICs that use controlled foreign corporations (CFCs).

CPOs of RICs benefit from “substituted compliance” under the CFTC Harmonization Rules.

Explains to investment advisers that have registered as CPOs of RICs the disclosure, reporting and recordkeeping obligations that apply to them, how to take advantage of compliance with SEC requirements in lieu of CFTC requirements, and how to claim relief with respect to certain CFTC compliance obligations.

Practical explanation by experienced derivatives and securities lawyers.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the environmental disclosure (ED) quality of public-listed companies (PLCs) in environmentally sensitive industries (ESI) in Malaysia in 2005 and 2009 (two years before and two years after the mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) requirement of Bursa Malaysia (BM)). BM (The Stock Exchange of Malaysia) has made CSR, including ED in annual reports mandatory since 2007. This study compares environmental reporting (ER) before and after the 2007 mandatory reporting requirement to determine if this command and control mechanism has had any effect on the quality of ED.

The quality of ED was measured using a disclosure quality index adapted from various prior studies. The index consists of a total of 46 disclosure items grouped into 9 categories. Content analysis was utilized to extract data from the annual reports of 164 PLCs in ESI.

Overall, the quality of ED improved in 2009 from that of 2005. More importantly, companies disclosed more quantitative environmental information in 2009 than in 2005. However, the average quality of ED was still low in 2009 compared to the overall potential score. Results provide some support for legitimacy as well as institutional theories.

The sample of the study consisted of listed companies in ESI only; the results cannot be generalized to other companies in non-environmentally sensitive sectors.

Prior studies that used data before the mandatory CSR requirement by BM found ED in annual reports mainly declarative in nature, generally low on quality and with little quantifiable data. The results of the present study provide evidence of the positive impact of mandatory environmental reporting on ED quality.

The use of a multi-theoretical perspective may offer a more meaningful explanation of ER behavior in Malaysia. The results of the study would provide the impetus for regulatory agencies in developing countries to perhaps consider legislating ER. The findings provide some evidence to support the influence of legitimacy and institutional factors behind improved ED of Malaysian PLCs. This outcome exhibits a positive influence on the government efforts in promoting sustainability. Finally, the study contributes to present a more up-to-date account of environmental commitment undertaken by Malaysian corporations through their environmental reporting, after the CSR mandatory listing requirement took effect in 2007.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the value‐relevance of regulatory financial reporting requirements for jurisdictional public utilities, natural gas companies and oil pipelines in the USA.

An event study methodology is used to examine the stock market's response to regulatory accounting and reporting requirements. Also, the explanatory power of regulatory disclosures pertaining to fair values of on‐balance sheet derivatives is tested.

The empirical findings suggest the market responded favorably to the regulatory requirements, and the accounting and reporting changes are perceived as useful to investors in equity valuation.

This study extends the prior research by addressing the value relevance of disaggregated disclosures for on‐balance sheet derivatives. The results are generalizable to other standard setting environments, particularly in foreign markets that have experienced rapid growth in derivatives markets in recent years.