Search results

This study examines how the presence of labor unions affects a firm’s pay disparity between executives and employees and its financial statement comparability.

It uses firm-level labor union data in Korea and applies regression analyses to a sample of 1,776 firm-year observations from 2004 to 2008.

The authors find that unionized firms have a smaller pay disparity between executives and employees than non-unionized firms, suggesting that labor unions place pressure on the pay structure. Unionization also lowers financial statement comparability, which helps managers of unionized firms maintain information asymmetry. Further, this negative relationship between unionization and financial statement comparability is stronger in non-chaebol firms, implying that they are more motivated than chaebol firms to reduce their financial statement comparability in response to the presence of labor unions. In addition, the negative relationship between unionization and financial statement comparability is pronounced in profit-making firms, firms with less analyst following, firms with fewer foreign investors and firms in more competitive product markets.

The finding that firms adjust comparability in response to labor unions interests regulators and policymakers, who emphasize the role of comparability in providing usefulness to information users.

The findings add to the existing literature on the effect of labor unions on firms' pay structures and accounting choices.

This chapter describes three active learning activities developed for use in the introductory financial accounting class: an interview with a financial statement user, an internal control paper, and a financial statement project where students analyze two competing businesses. We gathered student surveys and direct assessment data to see if these activities add value to the introductory accounting course.

The learning activities were originally developed using Fink’s (2003) Taxonomy of Significant Learning, aligning the activities with Fink’s learning dimensions, which also support the higher order learning skills in Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Students completed surveys by comparing how well traditional class activities (i.e., homework and tests) and the new activities support the core competencies of the American Institute for Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). We also asked students open-ended questions on how they felt about these new activities. Researchers then compared pre- and postadoption assessment data to investigate the impact of the new learning activities on class completion rates and grades.

Based on faculty comments and student survey results, the three active learning assignments appear to be more effective in developing many of the AICPA’s core competencies and real world skill sets valued by professionals, providing more value than traditional teaching methods. In addition, the passing rates in the course at the Youngstown State University increased by 12% after adopting the learning innovations.

This paper documents the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) 34 literature, primarily in the areas of (1) accountability and improved reporting, (2) government-wide financial statements and accrual accounting and (3) infrastructure asset capitalization and the modified approach. The paper also evaluates the state of the research, recognizes implications for practice and standard setting, identifies knowledge gaps and proposes avenues for future research.

The authors identified the articles in this narrative review by searching Google Scholar and EBSCO for the years 2000 through 2023, using the keywords GASB 34, government-wide financial statements, government fund statements, infrastructure assets and modified approach.

This review finds that GASB 34 requirements improved accountability and reporting, but GASB can still make improvements. The addition of the MD&A section requirement improved readability but placed a burden on preparers. Analysis of government-wide statement research indicates that the accrual-based Statement of Net Assets provides value in credit decisions, while the accrual-based Statement of Activities does not. The research on infrastructure accounting requirements shows limited adoption of the modified approach and some comparability issues with choices involving capitalization thresholds, baselines and asset management systems (AMSs). Based on this review, the authors also present suggestions to further this line of research.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first article that reviews over 20 years of GASB 34 related literature. The review and suggestions for future research are timely as GASB is in the process of reexamining some of GASB 34's requirements.

The typical unqualified audit report of publicly traded firms in the United States indicates the nature of the audit and an opinion that the firm’s financial statements fairly present the financial position and the results of operations of the audited company. Accordingly, some users of the financial statements, including investors, do not consider the unqualified opinion to be very useful in providing other informational value about the particular audit. In this paper, the authors examined the views of two stakeholders in the US financial reporting system, auditors in large public accounting firms and Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) in the Fortune 1000. The authors elicited their perceptions involving a Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) proposed auditing standard commonly referred to as “the other information standard.” This standard, if adopted, would require the auditor to evaluate information other than the audited financial statements and the related audit report for (1) a material inconsistency, (2) a material misstatement of fact, or (3) both, and if they exist, communicate them in the auditor’s report. The authors developed their research instrument based upon its perceived potential effects on the audit if adopted, some of which were referenced in the exposure draft of the proposed standard (PCAOB, 2013). They found that a majority of each groups believed, among other effects, that the proposed standard would increase audit costs, subject both the auditor and the reporting firm to increased litigation risk, and that its implementation costs by affected firms would exceed any benefits to financial statement users created by the standard.

Purpose – The audit expectation gap has been the subject of research in many countries and in different forms. However, such research of the nature and dimensions of the gap has been limited, if done at all, in the developing countries of West Africa. This study assesses its existence and investigates the factors that have been influencing it.

Design/methodology/approach – Survey responses from questionnaires administered to preparers and users of audited financial statements were analysed.

Findings – Financial statements users have significantly different perceptions about assurances provided by auditors’ reports, whereas the views of company accountants are quite close to those of auditors.

Originality/value – Although the validity of the results of this for international comparison may be limited by the number of financial statements users covered and the socio-cultural characteristics of the Ghanaian business environment, it should be recognised as one of the few to investigate the existence and nature of the expectation gap in the context of a developing country in the West African subregion. It thus adds the literature and points to the need for the adoption of multidisciplinary measures by the accounting profession and financial statements users with the view to eliminating or at the least minimising its persistence and escalation among the various relevant players.

This chapter deals with the patterns of International Financial Reporting Standards’ accounting policy choices that have been analyzed by several authors in a country-specific context. Instead of a country-specific context, this chapter adopts a sector-specific approach in terms of the airline industry in a regional and global context in order to observe the patterns of cosmetic and non-cosmetic policy options. Cosmetic policy options are related to the presentation of financial information which is not expected to impact the comparability of financial information versus non-cosmetic policy options are considered to be policy options that are related to measurement and, therefore, if there is more than one allowable accounting treatment, the comparability of financial information weakens. In the context of the airline industry, this chapter considers the patterns of policy choices related to IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements, IAS 2 Inventory, IAS 7 Statement of Cash Flows, IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment, IAS 38 Intangible Assets, and IAS 40 Investment Property, within the framework of frequently observed policy options as well as taking depreciation methods and expected useful life into consideration in terms of industry-specific policy options in order to observe whether there is uniformity rather than diversity in the airline industry for presentation and measurement.

In 1954, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Committee on Accounting Procedure released an auditing book, which listed under the heading “Material” certain items of which it cautioned “material errors” could occur (AICPA, 1954, p. 1). From this date until the present, the accounting profession has struggled in its endeavors to find both a suitable definition and associated guidance to determine the materiality of information provided to financial statement users. Accordingly, in September 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued two exposure drafts that address the concept and interpretation (our emphasis) of materiality. The releases are Proposed Amendments to Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts, Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting; Chapter 3: Qualitative Characteristics of Useful Financial Information (Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), 2015a) and Proposed Accounting Standards Update, Notes to Financial Statements (Topic 235) Assessing Whether Disclosures Are Material (FASB, 2015b). In this article, the authors focus on the Chapter 3 amendments (FASB, 2015a), which proposes a new definition whose genesis is based on the US Supreme Court definition of the concept. Accordingly, the authors examined the views of two stakeholders in the US financial reporting system, auditors in large public accounting firms, and Chief Financial Officers of the Fortune 1000 companies, regarding their perceptions of the proposed definition. The authors developed the research instrument to evaluate their perceptions of the proposed definition’s potential impact on various aspects of the audit and financial reports. The authors found that both populations have negative perceptions of the materiality definition in the exposure draft and an interpretation of the responses did not indicate an addition of any benefits from its adoption. Subsequent to our solicitation for our subjects’ opinions, the FASB voted unanimously in November 2017 to remove the reference to materiality as a legal concept (FASB, 2017) and in August 2018 (FASB, 2018) amended FASB Concept Statement No. 8 to replace the materiality definition with language similar to the previously superseded FASB Concept Statement No. 2. However, as the authors will explain in this article, the fact that three authoritative definitions exist, which continue to present problems for financial statement preparers and auditors. In this analysis, the authors find evidence that auditors and investors continue to see a significant difference between the terminology of “users” and “reasonable resource provider” within the various materiality definitions.