Search results

Accountants have long sought methods by which the concept of risk can be communicated through financial statements. Traditionally, certain financial ratios such as the current ratio and leverage ratios have been used for this purpose. Other information cues such as the variability of accounting earnings and asset size have also been employed as proxies for an entity's riskiness. Research suggests that these accounting numbers have an implicit, if not explicit, impact upon the risk expectations of financial analysts and securities markets (see, for example, Beaver, Kettler and Scholes [1970]; Eskew [1979]; Elgers [1980]; Farrelly, Ferris and Reichenstein [1985]).

The purpose of this study is to analyze the perception of accountants in relation to the complexity of accounting for financial instruments and in relation to the disclosure of financial instruments in annual reports. Both aspects are relevant for the external users, and for the firms’ internal management.

The database comprises questionnaires answered by accountants from Brazil and Chile. Data were analyzed based on reliability statistics and multivariate regression analysis.

The main results indicate that accountants perceive the accounting for derivatives, hedge accounting, fair value measurement of financial instruments and the respective disclosure of these operations as a complex issue. These findings are interesting considering that there are detailed accounting standards relating to financial instruments.

The results indicate that education and gender affect the perception of complexity about accounting of derivatives.

Findings from this research show that accountants do perceive derivatives as complex items for accounting, particularly accounting for hedges.

The results can motivate some initiatives for training activities and for teaching academic content about financial instruments in undergraduate courses.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that tests some personal characteristics of accountants (namely, professional experience, education and gender), in contrast to their perceptions about complexity of accounting for derivatives.

We assess the impact of NZ IAS 32 on the financial reporting of convertible financial instruments by retrospective application of the standard to a sample of New Zealand companies over the period 1988 ‐ 2003. NZ IAS 32 has a broader definition of liabilities than does the corresponding current standard (FRS‐31) and it does not permit convertibles to be reported under headings that are intermediate to debt and equity. The results of the study indicate that in comparison with the reported financial position and performance, the reporting of convertibles in accordance with NZ IAS 32 would result in higher amounts for liabilities and higher interest. Thus, analysts using financial statement information to assess risk of financial distress will need to revise the critical values of commonly used measures of risk and performance when companies report under NZ IAS

This is an edited text of the response submitted by the Financial Instruments Task Force of the Association for Investment Management and Research to the International Accounting Standards Board in response to the Joint Working Group Draft Standard and Basic Conclusions dated 22 December 2000. It provides a summation of all the great issues involved in the debate over accounting for financial instruments.

Standard financial risk management practices proved unable to provide an adequate understanding and a timely warning of the financial crisis. In particular, the theoretical foundations of risk management and the statistical calibration of risk models are called into question. Policy makers and practitioners respond by looking for new analytical approaches and tools to identify and address new sources of financial risk. Financial markets satisfy reasonable criteria of being considered complex adaptive systems, characterized by complex financial instruments and complex interactions among market actors. Policy makers and practitioners need to take both a micro and macro view of financial risk, identify proper transparency requirements on complex instruments, develop dynamic models of information generation that best approximate observed financial outcomes, and identify and address the causes and consequences of systemic risk. Complexity analysis can make a useful contribution. However, the methodological suitability of complexity theory for financial systems and by extension for risk management is still debatable. Alternative models drawn from the natural sciences and evolutionary theory are proposed.

This study investigates Asia Pacific banks' annual report disclosures on derivatives using the Basel Committee and IOSCO joint recommendations as the derivative and risk management disclosure benchmark. Based on our constructed disclosure index, the mean score is 35%, suggesting that many of the disclosure recommendations are not being adopted by the banks in our sample. Cross‐country and regional variation exists in the disclosure practices, with the variation associated with the extent to which accounting regulations for derivative instruments are operational. Hong Kong banks have the highest mean disclosure scores while the Philippines banks have the lowest mean disclosure scores. Australasian banks generally provide more disclosures than East Asian and South East Asian banks, and banks in developed countries generally have a higher level of disclosure relative to developing countries. The transparency of derivative activities by the banks is expected to improve as Asia Pacific countries promulgate accounting regulations congruent with international accounting standards.

It is well known that once regulatory bodies adopt a financial reporting paradigm, it becomes the guiding principle for accounting regulation. This paradigm itself in the field of accounting represents the starting point of the research. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the specific case of the Czech Republic and Romania, namely on aspects concerning regulations in the field of financial instruments.

The authors have approached an a priori economic analysis of national regulations in correlation with international standards inferences. In doing so, they have identified several key issues, which need to be discussed when thoroughly analyzing accounting regulations for financial instruments. Furthermore, the authors have used statistical indicators in order to determine the degree of similarities and dissimilarities between the two national accounting systems and also in correspondence with the international referential.

The results of the performed analysis show a high level of similarities between the two national set of GAAPs and IFRS/IAS, and also among the two of them, still both of them being closer to the international referential than to each other. Research limitations/implications – The paper only approaches formal harmonization in the area of reporting for financial instruments. Moreover, those issues analyzed through the regulations' perspective need to be closely quantified in matters of their actual implementation, pertinent conclusions and correlations being then made regarding the status of each country within the global capital market.

The paper represents a first step within the intended scientific démarche, a priori research having the attribute of generating feedback on hypothetical reporting alternatives prior to implementation.

This parallel analysis performed on the two national accounting systems from the financial instruments' point of view finds results, which are explained through the bonding theory.

The purpose of this paper is to explain changes to Chapter 5 of the UK Disclosure and Transparency Rules (DTR 5), introducing new disclosure requirements relating to holdings of financial instruments that have a similar economic effect to shares, such as CfDs, that took effect on June 1, 2009.

The paper explains the principles behind the extended disclosure regime and summarizes questions and answers from the FSA to assist market participants' understanding of that regime, covering issues such as domicile of the issuer, instruments covered, how a disclosable holding is calculated, the inclusion of financial instruments relating to unissued shares, treatment of holdings acquired before June 1, 2009, potential double counting, how the regime applies to intra‐group movements of holdings and delta‐adjusted reporting, and exemptions for client‐serving intermediaries, market timing, trading books, and investment management.

Qualifiying financial instruments give a legal right to acquire (on the holder's own initiative) shares already in issue and with voting rights attached. The policy behind the new regime is to require the disclosure of financial instruments with similar economic effect to qualifying financial instruments which are used to build stakes in companies.

The paper presents practical guidance from experienced financial institution and securities lawyers.

The past twenty years have seen a significant increase in the use of derivative financial instruments by companies throughout the world (Berkman and Bradbury 1996; Berkman, Bradbury and Magan, 1997a; Berkman, Bradbury, Hancock and Innes, 1997b; Bodnar, Hayt, Marston and Smithson, 1995; Bodnar, Hayt and Marston, 1996; 1998; Collier and Davis, 1985). This paper examines the impact of Financial Reporting Standard 13: Derivatives and Other Financial Instruments, Implementation and Disclosures, on treasury department activities. In particular, the researchers conducted interviews with UK treasury department staff to assess their general attitudes to, and the perceived impact of, FRS 13. In general, the treasurers responded favourably to the standard, and considered the narrative disclosures to be particularly useful. The numerical disclosures were considered to be very detailed and specialised; interviewees thought that users might have difficulty in understanding them. However, the implementation of IAS 39, that becomes mandatory for all EC countries from 2005, was causing treasurers far more concern.