Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine the relation between managerial ability and fair value inputs (measured as fair value intensity) for nonfinancial firms.

This study uses regression analysis to investigate the impact of managerial ability on the level of fair value inputs.

This study finds significant and positive relations between managerial ability and use of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value inputs. On the other hand, this study finds an insignificant relation between managerial ability and Level 3 inputs.

The findings contribute to two research streams. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is perhaps the first study that directly examines the link between managerial ability and fair value inputs.

The paper aims to investigate the value-relevance of changes in fair values of investment property reported under International Accounting Standards (IAS) 40 and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 13.

Multivariate regression models are used to regress cumulative market-adjusted stock returns of real estate firms on changes in fair values, along with control variables and corporate governance variables, in order to examine the research question.

Using hand-collected data from the Australian Real Estate Industry (AREI), the authors find that changes in fair values of investment property are value-relevant for equity investors. The authors further find that using unobservable inputs in an active market (Level 3 inputs) does not diminish the information content of fair values. The authors document that properties valued exclusively by directors have a significantly reduced value-relevance, whereas property valuations made collectively by both directors and independent valuers have superior value-relevance, possibly owing to the combination of inside knowledge and externally imposed monitoring. Collectively, the findings suggest that in the real estate industry, where unobservable inputs are commonly used to determine fair values of properties, the fair values determined subjectively are perceived to be sufficiently informative and relevant.

The authors' findings have important implications for accounting standard-setters in considering whether an external valuation should be required and whether the extensive measurement-related fair value disclosure requirements are useful.

The study extends previous archival evidence and complements prior commentaries on experimental and analytical work in the Australian regulatory environment.

This study aims to examine the association between fair value accounting and the cost of corporate bonds, proxied by bond yield spread. In addition, this study explores the moderating role of auditor industry expertise at both the national and the city levels.

This study first examines the effect of the use of fair value on yield spread by estimating firm-level regression model, where fair value is the testing variable and yield spread is the dependent variable. To test the differential impact of the three levels of fair value inputs, this paper divides the fair value measures based on the three-level hierarchy, Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3, and replace them as the test variables in the regression model.

This study finds that the application of fair value accounting is generally associated with a higher bond yield spread, primarily driven by Level 3 estimates. The results also show that national-level auditor industry expertise is associated with lower bond yield spreads for Level 1 and Level 3 fair value inputs, whereas the impact of city-level auditor industry expertise on bondholders is mainly on Level 3 fair value inputs.

The paper innovates by exploring the impact of fair value accounting in a setting that extends beyond financial institutions, the traditional area of focus. Moreover, most prior research considers private debt, whereas this study examines public bonds, for which investors are more likely to rely on financial reporting for their information about a firm. Finally, the study differentiates between city- and national-level industry expertise in examining the role of auditors.

This research has several practical implications. First, firms seeking to raise debt capital should consider involving auditors, with either industry expertise or fair value expertise, due to the roles that auditors play in safeguarding the reliability of fair value measures, particularly for Level 3 measurements. Second, from standard-setting and regulatory perspectives, the study’s findings that fair value accounting is associated with higher bond yield spread cast further doubt on the net benefits of applying a full fair value accounting regime. Third, PCAOB may consider enhancing guidance to auditors on Level 2 fair value inputs, to further enhance audit quality. Finally, creditors can be more cautious in interpretating accounting information based on fair value while viewing the employment of auditor experts as a positive signal.

First, the paper extends research on the role of accounting information in public debt contracting. Second, this study adds to the auditing literature about the impact of industry expertise. Finally, and more generally, this study adds to the ongoing controversy on the application of fair value accounting.

This paper aims to examine the information content of changes in fair values of investment property reported under international accounting standards (IAS) 40 and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 13 to debtholders. This study further examines the effect of fair value hierarchy inputs, valuer types and the quality of fair value measurement-related disclosure on the information usefulness of changes in fair value.

This paper performs a panel regression on the cost of debt capital and changes in fair value of investment properties, and fair value measurement features using data covering periods 2007–2015 from Australian real estate companies.

The findings suggest that changes in fair value of investment property are informative about the real estate firm’s future cash flow to debtholders. Also, the findings show that the use of unobservable inputs in an active market (Level 3 inputs) and Level 2 has no different impacts on the cost of debts. Also, this paper documents that employing the directors solely in valuation may lead to a higher cost of debts. Furthermore, this paper reports that an extensive fair value disclosure appears no additional value in the debt decision.

Collectively, the findings indicate that although the use of unobservable inputs is common in the real estate sector, information on the changes of the fair value of investment properties are informative to debtholders. The findings have important implications for accounting standard setters to consider revisiting the IAS 40 and IFRS 13 on whether the independent valuation should be required and whether the extensive disclosure requirement is worthwhile.

The objective of this research is to explore the challenges being encountered when applying and implementing fair value accounting requirements, focusing specifically on the determination of fair value per International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 13: Fair value measurement (IFRS 13) in the South African capital market.

Data are collected from 20 detailed interviews, primarily with preparers and interpretively analysed to identify how individuals internalise the requirements of IFRS 13 and the challenges associated with its application. The researchers focus specifically on South Africa because of its status as a developing economy and, at the same time, its extensive experience in applying IFRS.

South African preparers appear reluctant to change from a conventional cost-based measurement approach to one grounded in fair value. Primary concerns include the perceived usefulness of fair value accounting and its conceptual appropriateness, given its perceived de-emphasis of the traditional stewardship role of financial reporting. Related challenges to the application of IFRS 13 include concerns about the cost of determining fair value; the inherent subjectivity of fair value measures and the practical difficulty of calculating fair values when markets are not efficient or where business environments are complex and dynamic where Level 1 inputs are not widely available for all assets and liabilities. These challenges encourage preparers to choose accounting policies, which minimise the use of fair value or apply the provisions of IFRS 13 legalistically.

Data are collected from a group of respondents from a single developing economy. Additional research on the application of IFRS 13 in other developing markets will be required to conclude on the relevance of economic, cultural and social factors for the understanding and implementation of new accounting standards by practitioners.

Standard setters and regulators cannot assume that new accounting standards will be interpreted and applied as intended. Even when compliance with IFRS is mandatory, preparers have considerable discretion when it comes to operationalising accounting prescriptions. Unless the challenges raised by preparers are addressed, misapplication of IFRS is likely to continue.

The research makes an important empirical and practical contribution by providing primary evidence on the operationalisation of IFRS 13 in a novel setting. It complements earlier research which has focused primarily on the conceptual/theoretical dimension and on American and European perspectives.

This paper investigates the application of the product differentiation and shared efficiency approaches to understand the impact of the auditor industry specialisation (IS) on audit fees in relation to Fair Value Disclosures (FVD).

The study uses 1,470 firm-year observations for the period 2005–2018 and is focused on Jordanian financial firms. Two competing theoretical approaches of IS proxied by audit fee-based measures were employed: firstly, the product differentiation approach measured using Market Share-based (MS) measure and secondly, the shared efficiency approach measured using Portfolio Share-based (PS) measure. The paper employs the Ordinary Least Squares regression to test the association between the proportion of fair-valued assets (using fair value hierarchy inputs) and audit fees.

The results suggest that the association between the proportion of fair-valued assets and audit fees is strengthened (weakened) when the client hires specialist auditors identified by MS (PS). This association varied across the fair value inputs. Level 1 assets were found to be only moderated by both scenarios positively (negatively) for MS (PS) experts. The results are robust after controlling the endogeneity of auditor self-selection.

The results provide valuable insights for policymakers into challenges of auditing FVD. These insights present a valuable input for the development of FVD policies and practices as well as providing guidance for updating auditor prices. Additionally, the results provide a foundation for policymakers and regulators to introduce and update fair value auditing practices. The current findings are generalisable to other countries, including the Middle East and North Africa, and are particularly beneficial for those countries which have adopted the fair value model.

This study contributes to the theory by demonstrating the impact of the auditor industry expertise on post-implementation costs of FVD. The novelty of the study lies in introducing principle-based standards requirements of FVD to test the relationship. This approach is based on the IFRS disclosure requirements using data from the Jordanian financial sector to examine this relationship.

This paper aims to explore whether fair value Levels 1 and 2 measurements are more value relevant than Level 3 fair value measurements in a less-active market. Specifically, this research addresses two objectives. Firstly, it examines the value relevance of fair value measures for each disclosure level of fair value. Secondly, it assesses the impact of corporate governance on the value relevance of less observable fair value disclosures (Levels 2 and 3).

Drawing insights from agency theorising, this research adopts a quantitative approach (regression analysis) that investigates data from a less active financial market (South Africa).

Contrary to agency theory suppositions, the results show that investors in a less active market value management inputs more than market (more transparent) information. The authors also observe that investors pay limited interest to corporate governance structures when pricing fair value measurement, implying that they rely on factors beyond corporate governance mechanisms.

The authors’ findings offer useful evidence to standard setters and preparers of financial information. While the International Accounting Standard Board suggests that investors value transparent financial information, the data shows that investors in less-active markets value management’s inputs more than those of the market.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether commercial banks manage earnings through their use of Level 3 valuation under The Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157 (FAS 157), Fair Value Measurements. To achieve this goal, the authors investigate the association between banks' performance and size with the percentage of Level 3 inputs for valuing assets and liabilities. The FAS 157 requires or permits US listed firms to adopt one of the three levels of inputs to measure and report fair values of their assets and liabilities. Level 1 input is based on quoted prices in the active markets; Level 2 is from the observable markets other than quoted prices; while Level 3 is based on unobservable and firm‐generated inputs.

The authors extract information from all the 10Q‐reports submitted by the US commercial banks (SEC Code 6021) for the first two quarters of 2008. Since Level 3 input is subject to the highest level of managerial discretion, this is expected to be an avenue for earnings management. Multivariate regression was applied to test whether the banks' performance and size are associated with a higher level of Level 3 input.

Out of 329 quarterly bank observations, the authors find large banks and poor performing banks with lower returns on assets, lower cash flows, and higher amounts of provision for loan losses, use more Level 3 inputs on valuing their assets and liabilities.

The results suggest that US commercial banks use FAS157 as an avenue for earnings management. The results have implications for the accounting standard setters, banking sector and policy decision makers.

This is the first paper providing evidence that banks use fair value measurements to manipulate earnings.

This study investigates the association between the estimates of fair value and external auditor's fees.

Based on a sample of 32 Jordanian financial companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange (ASE) over the period 2005–2018. We employ random effect models to test our hypothesis.

We found a positive relationship between audit fees and the proportion of fair value assets, which implies that external auditors are more likely to spend more effort for complex estimates, thereby increasing audit fees. We examined the relationship between audit fees and three levels of fair value inputs and found a positive relationship between the level of effort spent on assessment of higher uncertainty fair value inputs and audit fees. The findings are consistent with the expectation that more audit effort is required in a highly regulated environment due to the possibility of a higher cost of litigation.

The findings of this study could be beneficial for a number of users of financial information, such as investors, regulators, auditors. This group of users might consider the results of this study when they are using a company's financial information, and consequently, better able to make the right decisions.

Although prior studies have researched fair value, no study to date among developing countries has investigated its relationship with audit fees. This study, therefore, provides new empirical evidence that the complexity and risk of fair value estimates significantly influences auditors' motivation to expend additional effort, resulting in higher audit cost.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the interaction between mandatory disclosures and voluntary disclosures of banks and the information content of corporate disclosures on firm performance.

Based on the US-listed banks from 2007 to 2015, this paper examines the interplay among the fair-value measurement, corporate governance disclosure and voluntary social responsibility disclosure. In addition, the paper examines the extent of such disclosure of mandatory items (fair-value measurement) versus voluntary items (corporate governance and social responsibility issues) on banks’ performance in terms of their return on equity and return on asset.

This paper finds that banks with a higher social responsibility disclosure score and stronger corporate governance tend to have lower percentages of Level 3 fair-value assets. Banks with a higher Level 3 fair-value asset disclosure have a lower financial performance.

This paper provides evidence of the interplay of various corporate disclosures by banks and implies that banks use fair-value measurements to disguise their poor performance. The findings provide insights for the policymakers, investors and regulators to assess banks’ disclosure.

This paper extends the study of banks’ fair-value measurements and is the first study to examine the interaction between voluntary and mandatory disclosures. This study sheds lights on the theories of performativity, agency and stakeholder by demonstrating the information contents of corporate disclosures on firm performance.