Search results

The issue of goodwill has been debated in many countries throughout the world. Despite numerous efforts and the existence of accounting standards and exposure drafts issued by various professional bodies internationally, there is yet to be a universally accepted accounting treatment for goodwill. The opinion on this subject differs and changes frequently. The dichotomy of having to preserve prescribed recognition criteria on the one hand and the need to report useful information on the other has led to the many controversial issues debated on the subject of goodwill. This study centres around the international accounting treatment of goodwill in the past, present and future. This study reviewed some of the issues that surrounded the accounting for goodwill where it was found that goodwill accounting had faced many problems. Besides problems, this project also looks into the prospect of the accounting for goodwill in the cyberspace era and emergence of the knowledge‐based economy. This study confirms that controversy remains internationally with no solution in sight in the foreseeable future internationally.

The purpose of this paper is to outline the link between value creation, performance measurement and goodwill accounting according to the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US‐GAAP). Since economic goodwill is identical to the present value of future residual income, the paper examines how accounting information gathered for impairment testing of goodwill according to International Accounting Standard (IAS) 36 and Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) 142 can be used for internal control purposes.

The paper adopts common assumptions in the literature of residual income‐based valuation and analytically derives a periodic performance measure of both value creation and its realization based on information available from impairment testing.

This paper demonstrates that information required by IFRS and US‐GAAP to evaluate a firm's goodwill can be used to design a performance measurement system which provides information about both value creation and realization of value.

From a practical perspective, the paper shows that appropriate adjustments of data used in impairment testing result in information which ideally fits the requirements of an optimal performance measurement system.

The paper presents a performance measure which provides information about the actual creation of value as well as its realization in a period and is superior to traditional residual income‐based performance measures.

The purpose of this paper is to explore auditors' perceptions of goodwill accounting under international financial reporting standards (IFRS). More specifically, the authors surveyed auditors to see if they believe that IFRS enables earnings management in goodwill accounting. Further the paper explores background factors behind opinions.

The study uses a survey of KHT certified Finnish auditors. The electronic questionnaire was sent to 523 KHT‐auditors. The authors received 123 responses yielding a response rate of 23.5 percent.

The survey indicates that there are two lines of thought regarding goodwill accounting under IFRS. According to the first line of thought, managers of listed Finnish companies behave opportunistically in goodwill write‐off decisions. The other line of thought suggests that there is a favorable attitude towards the IFRS procedures of goodwill accounting. Big Four auditors seem to favor goodwill accounting under IFRS.

This study is conducted in Finland. Larger data collection would enhance the reliability of the results.

This study contributes to the literature by providing the perspective of auditors on fair value and goodwill as very few studies have examined goodwill issues from this viewpoint.

In the process of harmonizing International Accounting Standards (IAS/IFRS), scholars and standard setters still need to overcome unresolved issues related to both goodwill duration and accounting recognition. This paper aims to compare the academic background on goodwill with current IAS. Specifically, the goal is to criticize existing practices and advance a revision of accounting for goodwill.

The paper is based on a review of the relevant literature on notions, theories and accounting approaches on goodwill and on an investigation of IAS/IFRS on accounting for goodwill. By critically integrating literature and practices, the authors provide implications for a revision of IAS.

The findings show the two main internally coherent theoretical approaches and the incoherence in current goodwill accounting standards. The paper contributes to the debate on accounting for goodwill by suggesting new conceptual arguments in relation to the controversies related to its accounting treatment.

The findings offer insights and guidelines that can help standard setters revise current accounting standards. Inter alia, standards setters should revisit issues related to goodwill evaluation and record limitations in future debates to find better solutions.

This study shows the incoherence of current accounting standards. Furthermore, the findings contradict the general opinion that, in current IAS, goodwill can be recognized only if acquired in business combinations and not if internally generated. Thereby, the authors suggest to shift the international accounting standards board focus from the preference between amortization and impairment to the coherence of goodwill accounting approaches.

Advocates of greater intangible asset reporting frequently make the criticism that the published financial statements of companies do not adequately reflect the value of intangible assets and hence provide potentially misleading information to the users of the financial statements. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate whether since the introduction of “fair value accounting,” particularly in respect of the treatment of acquired “goodwill” shown on consolidated balance sheets, these criticisms retain any validity. The paper investigates the extent to which it can be confidently asserted that the recognition of acquired goodwill and the post‐acquisition rules for recognizing any goodwill “impairment” has materially improved the information available to the users of financial statements and/or whether these developments have resulted largely in providing self‐interested managers with greater opportunities to engage in earnings and balance sheet manipulations that are of doubtful value to users.

The paper critically reviews the rules and the intentions of accounting policy makers in relation to fair value acquisition accounting and evaluates the empirical evidence relating to corporate behavior in this area.

Despite the presumed benefits associated with fair value accounting, it is shown that in practice managerial self‐interests and earnings management concerns appear to motivate many goodwill impairment decisions. However, as investors and analysts have always had the option to adjust, or indeed totally ignore, reported accounting numbers it is far less certain whether this reporting behavior actually misleads users or significantly reduces the information content (reliability and relevance) of the financial statements.

The paper provides an overview of the accounting treatment and reporting consequences associated with the introduction of fair value accounting in respect of acquired goodwill.

Prior to the adoption of an IFRS based reporting framework in Malaysia, no binding standard governing goodwill had ever been implemented. After several decades in which a laissez faire approach to the problem represented the dominant paradigm, the highly prescriptive and technical provisions of FRS 136 – Impairment of Assets represent a very substantial variation from past practice. This in turn gives rise to questions about the extent to which Malaysian companies and their auditors have fared during the process of transition to a complex new reporting regime and in consequence to the quality and consistency of reports produced pursuant to that new regime. Thus, FRS 136 presents an opportunity to interrogate the level of compliance and disclosure quality exhibited by first‐time reporting entities – and by extension, yield insights into the implications of and challenges associated with transition to new and complex reporting regimes. Focussing specifically on compliance and disclosure quality relating to the highly detailed requirements set out in FRS 136, this paper finds evidence that the quality of the responses by large listed Malaysian firms has indeed been mixed, with many firms producing financial reports that have failed to meet the mark of the new standard. While the move by MASB to adopt IFRSs is a reflection of Malaysia’s commitment to align with global accounting standards in order to achieve harmonization with international practice, these findings suggest that continued improvement will be required by Malaysian companies and their auditors before Malaysian practice is truly aligned to the international standard.

This paper examines the controversy surrounding the use of the Inverted‐Sum‐Of‐Years‐Digits (ISOYD) method of goodwill amortisation and events leading to its banning by the Australian accounting regulatory bodies. Companies using the method claimed that a prohibition would reduce their share price and international competitiveness. On the other hand, efficient capital market proponents argued that the amortisation method was irrelevant to the economic position of a firm in the absence of any cash flow effects. This paper discusses these conflicting views and investigates possible motives for the choice of goodwill amortisation method through a cross‐company analysis of key characteristics. In addition, sharemarket reaction to key events leading to the change of policy was examined using conventional event‐study methodology. The cross‐company analysis revealed significant differences in the goodwill characteristics between ISOYD companies and non‐ISOYD companies which may have motivated their choice. The result of the event‐study found that no significant abnormal return could be unequivocally attributed to any of the key events or announcements.

When the FASB adopted an impairment test approach in 2001, rather than amortisation, the accounting for goodwill arising from an acquisition took a step in a new direction. The IASB, seeking international convergence and global harmonisation, also implemented this change when it issued IFRS 3 in 2004. Moving away from amortisation towards an impairment test involves a radical change. The research on which this paper is based was undertaken to examine these two very different accounting practices for the treatment of goodwill and to assess the possible impact that a transition from the one to the other may have on financial reporting.

This paper aims to critically examine the change in accounting treatment for goodwill pursuant to international financial reporting standards (IFRSs) by reference to the Australian reporting regime.

The paper discusses and compares the former Australian and the new IFRS treatments for goodwill. This comparison focuses on the advantages and potential complexities of the new method, with the aim of identifying the issues and challenges that preparers, independent auditors and those involved in corporate governance face in complying with the new requirements.

The paper highlights that the identification and valuation of cash‐generating units and goodwill require numerous assumptions to be made in estimating fair value, value in use and recoverable amount. Considerable ambiguity and subjectivity are inherent in the IFRS requirements.

Findings suggest that future research should examine how financial report preparers and corporate governance mechanisms are dealing with the complex change required by the new goodwill accounting treatment and how the many critical issues involved in auditing the resulting figures are being addressed.

The research has practical implications for financial report preparers in identifying the issues that must be addressed in complying with the international goodwill accounting treatment. In turn, the paper highlights conceptual issues of relevance to auditors in their role of providing assurance on the resulting accounting numbers. It also has implications for others involved in corporate governance, such as audit committee members, in emphasising the areas in which they should be providing oversight of the accounting judgments. These issues are of relevance in any reporting regime based on IFRSs.

While much has been written about the mechanics of the new goodwill accounting requirements, there has been a lack of critical research highlighting the many problems and ambiguities that will arise in the application of those rules.

This paper offers insights into the conflicts and tensions within the Malaysian accounting profession and the power struggle therein to dominate the accounting standard setting process, within the context of a rapidly developing country. It shows how interest groups and parochial interests, along with issues of self‐protection, affected the process of standard setting, which was controlled by different interests over the period under study. At one time the profession dominated. But far from being a monolithic body, it was in turn split according to various interests: the Big Six behind the Malaysian Association of Certified Public Accountants (MACPA) and the smaller firms behind the Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA). At other times big business prevailed. These conflicts and power struggles are revealed through an analysis of the case of the Goodwill Accounting Standard.