Search results

The current study uses an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, this study aims to explore the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion.

The study uses an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables.

The paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism, the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors’ risk assessments.

The authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or pre- and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006.

The study has major public policy suggestions as it responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks such as climate change.

The study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US SEC, to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the IASB Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards.

This paper aims to assess the factors that may explain the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) convergence, considering Hofstede’s cultural dimensions as the theoretical reference for the cultural approach proposed. Additional factors include countries’ contextual and macroeconomic characteristics.

Logistic and probit regression models were used to identify the factors that may explain the IPSAS (fully or adapted) use by countries, including 166 countries in this assessment (59 for those whose cultural dimensions are available).

The findings consistently indicate collectivism and indebtedness levels as explanatory factors, providing insights into cultural dimensions along with macroeconomic characteristics as a relevant factor of countries’ convergence to IPSAS.

There are different levels of IPSAS convergence by countries that were not considered. This aspect may hide different countries’ characteristics that may explain those options, which could not be distinguished in this paper.

As a result of this paper, the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board may gain insights that can be applied within the IPSAS due process to overcome the main challenges when collaborating with national authorities to achieve a high level of convergence. This analysis may include how to accommodate countries’ cultural differences as well as their contextual and macroeconomic characteristics.

There is a trend of moving toward accrual-based accounting standards by countries. Because the public sector embraces a new culture following the IPSAS path, it is relevant to assess if there are cultural factors, besides contextual and macroeconomic characteristics, that may explain the countries’ convergence to those standards.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first cross-country analysis on the likely influence of cultural dimensions on IPSAS convergence as far as the authors’ knowledge.

This paper aims to examine sites of dissonance or consensus between global investor responses to the draft standards, International Financial Reporting Standards S1 (IFRS) (General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information) and IFRS S2 (Climate-related Disclosures), issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB).

A thematic content analysis was used to capture investor views expressed in their comment letters submitted in the consultation period (March to July 2022) in comparison to the ex ante position (issue of draft standards, March 2022) and ex post summary feedback (ISSB staff papers, September 2022) of the ISSB.

There was investor consensus in support of the ISSB and the development of the draft standards. However, there were sites of dissonance between investors and the ISSB, notably regarding the basis and focus of reporting (double or single/financial materiality and enterprise value); definitional clarity; emissions reporting; and assurance. Incrementally, the research further highlights that investors display heterogeneity of opinion.

The ISSB standards will provide a framework for future sustainability reporting. This research highlights the significance of such reporting to investors through their responses to the draft standards. The findings reveal sites of dissonance in the development and alignment of draft standards to user needs. The views of investors, as primary users, should help inform the development of sustainability-related standards by a global standard-setting body apposite to current policy and future reporting requirements, and their usefulness to users in practice.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper makes an original contribution to the comment letter literature, hitherto focused on financial reporting with a relative lack of investor engagement. Using thematic analysis, sites of dissonance are examined between the views of investors and the ISSB on their development of sustainability reporting standards.

The “metaverse” is the new buzzword. With the phenomenal growth of the metaverse comes accounting, taxation and jurisdictional challenges, which business and governments have yet to fully address. This paper aims to highlight and rationalise the lack of regulatory framework and multiplicity of jurisdictions on metaverse transactions. This paper addresses some of the complications with respect to accounting and taxation in virtual environments.

This study relies on secondary data and emerging literature to understand the multiplicity of jurisdiction and complexity of the accounting transactions. The concept of the metaverse is rapidly evolving, and this study uses extant literature to provide the foundation for understanding the key challenges relating to accounting and taxation.

Concepts of revenue recognition and deferment are challenged by the transactions in the metaverse. There are novel applications, underpinned by emerging technologies and blockchain supporting new crypto assets, such as non-fungible tokens and other decentralised finance (DeFi) tools; however, the caveats of anonymity and jurisdictional issues persist. The paper suggests that the industry must adapt to the unique reporting requirements of these assets and develop new standards for evaluating their value for financial reporting purposes. The paper emphasises the need for a case-based approach in the absence of standardised regulations for the accounting industry in the metaverse.

This paper adds original contributions to extant literature of the metaverse and advances ongoing debates into the accounting and taxation issues pertinent to the metaverse and DeFi.

The digital transformation revolution has brought outstanding changes to business organizations, especially in the digital accounting transformation domain. Consequently, the purpose of this study is to explore the important role of digital accounting transformation in improving business performance in the context of the banking industry.

Data were collected through a questionnaire from the Jordanian bank sector with a sample of 190 respondents. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to analyze the collected data and test the hypotheses.

The results have shown that the adoption of digital accounting, adoption of FinTech innovation and technological competition are the major drivers for improving business performance. All direct paths leading to improving business performance were found to be significant in the hypothesized directions, while technological savvy was found to indirectly affect the relationship between (the adoption of digital accounting and FinTech innovation) and improving business performance.

The current study is differentiated from other studies by developing a theoretical research model to incorporate the adoption of digital accounting, adoption of FinTech innovation, technological competition, technological savvy and business performance in the Jordanian context under the digital transformation revolution. For practitioners, the findings provide policymakers with meaningful insight for organizations looking to adopt these digital technologies for improved business performance.

This paper aims to explore current trends in how companies disclose climate-related risks and opportunities in their financial statements. As part of the authors’ analysis, they examine: whether forward-looking assumptions and judgements are typically considered in reporting climate-related risks/opportunities; whether there are differences in the reporting practices of firms in carbon-intensive industries versus non-carbon-intensive industries; and whether negative media reports have an influence on the levels of disclosure a firm makes.

The authors chose content analysis as their methodology and examined the financial statements published by firms listed on the UK’s FTSE 100 between 2016 and 2020. This analysis is framed by Suchman’s three dimensions of legitimacy, being pragmatic, cognitive and moral.

Climate-related disclosures in the notes and financial accounts of these firms did increase over the period. Yet, overall, the level the disclosures was inadequate and the quality was inconsistent. From this, the authors conclude that pragmatic legitimacy is not a particularly strong driving factor in compelling organisations to disclose climate-related information. The firms in carbon-intensive industries do provide greater levels of disclosure, including both qualitative and quantitative (monetary) content, which is consistent with cognitive legitimacy. However, from a moral legitimacy perspective, this study finds that firms did not adapt responsively to negative media coverage as a way of reflecting their accountability to broader public norms and values. Overall, this analysis suggests that regulatory enforcement and a systematic reporting framework with adequate guidance is going to be critical to developing transparent climate-related reporting in future.

This paper contributes to existing studies on climate-related disclosures, which have mainly examined the ‘front-half’ of annual reports. Conversely, this study aims to shed light on these practices in the “back-half” of these reports, exploring the underlying reasons for reporting climate-related risks and opportunities in financial accounts. The authors’ insights into the current disclosure practices make a theoretical contribution to the literature. Practitioners can also draw on these insights to improve how they report on climate-related risks and opportunities in their financial statements.

This paper aims to examine the Canadian financial sector’s reaction to opportunities and risks created by the green bond market in a low-carbon and climate-resilient (LCR) economy.

The authors used a concurrent mixed methodological approach that undertakes an online survey and semistructured interviews with critical green bond market stakeholders.

The most significant market driver in Canada is the reputational benefit for stakeholders, i.e. its ability to meet the high demand for sustainable finance and the marketing potential of its green credentials. The major market barriers are transactional costs, i.e. additional tracking required for reporting purposes, lack of market liquidity and identification of environmental impact or additionality. Canadian green bonds are also more likely to be evaluated on their green impact than their global market peers.

Limitations of this study include its focus on Canada, which may exclude or not apply to drivers and barriers in other green bond markets.

The paper helps create an accounting-based conceptual framework for key motivations and barriers that affect financial decision-making regarding green bonds.

The authors identify economic and policy-related barriers and drivers for green bonds, addressing the financing gap for the LCR economy.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to identify and compare Canadian green bond market drivers and barriers and to examine relevant stakeholder- and policy-related approaches that can be targeted to scale this market effectively.

The study aims to investigate the impact of indirectly evoked incentives, in the form of supervisor’s preferences, on the decision about accounting policy regarding depreciation method selection and to examine subsequent post-decision distortion by evaluating the depreciation method.

The authors conducted two experiments with control and treatment groups, manipulating the supervisor’s indirectly evoked preferences. In Study 2, the authors also measured the evaluation of both depreciation methods to investigate post-decisional distortion regarding the assessment of the depreciation method chosen in a decision task. Study 1 was conducted among 85 accounting students, while Study 2 consisted of 200 accountants.

Both studies revealed the significant impact of supervisor’s indirectly evoked preferences on accounting policy decisions. Participants who were aware of supervisors’ preferences were more likely to choose the depreciation method that was consistent with those preferences. The authors also found that those participants attached a higher value to the depreciation method, providing evidence that adherence to the supervisor’s preferences results in a distorted assessment of the depreciation methods.

First, this study shows that indirectly evoked supervisors’ preferences may lead to a departure from substantive criteria resulting in low-quality accounting outcomes. Second, the assessment of the depreciation method is inseparable from the situational context, as the evaluation of the depreciation method is interdependent upon the preferences of the choice of a depreciation method and the fulfillment of those preferences.

In a virtual interconnected digital space, the metaverse encompasses various virtual environments where people can interact, including engaging in business activities. Machine learning (ML) is a strategic technology that enables digital transformation to the metaverse, and it is becoming a more prevalent driver of business performance and reporting on performance. However, ML has limitations, and using the technology in business processes, such as accounting, poses a technology governance failure risk. To address this risk, decision makers and those tasked to govern these technologies must understand where the technology fits into the business process and consider its limitations to enable a governed transition to the metaverse. Using selected accounting processes, this study aims to describe the limitations that ML techniques pose to ensure the quality of financial information.

A grounded theory literature review method, consisting of five iterative stages, was used to identify the accounting tasks that ML could perform in the respective accounting processes, describe the ML techniques that could be applied to each accounting task and identify the limitations associated with the individual techniques.

This study finds that limitations such as data availability and training time may impact the quality of the financial information and that ML techniques and their limitations must be clearly understood when developing and implementing technology governance measures.

The study contributes to the growing literature on enterprise information and technology management and governance. In this study, the authors integrated current ML knowledge into an accounting context. As accounting is a pervasive aspect of business, the insights from this study will benefit decision makers and those tasked to govern these technologies to understand how some processes are more likely to be affected by certain limitations and how this may impact the accounting objectives. It will also benefit those users hoping to exploit the advantages of ML in their accounting processes while understanding the specific technology limitations on an accounting task level.

This paper aims to conduct a systematic review of the literature on the quality of integrated reports (IR) and highlight the gaps in the existing research to provide directions and suggestions for future research.

This study was conducted through a systematic literature review using content analysis based on 40 papers from the Scopus, Web of Science and EBSCOhost databases on IR quality. While reading the full-text papers, the authors found six additional papers referenced by the literature being reviewed that were relevant to IR quality. Thus, there were 46 papers in the final review. The analysis begins with the definition and dimension of IR quality and theoretical lenses. Furthermore, this study outlines constructs or variables used in the previous literature.

The authors found that most studies used the quantitative method (41 papers or 89%). Five papers in the literature used qualitative methods (11%). Most researchers (34 papers or 72%) defined IR quality as consistent with the International Integrated Reporting Council framework, specifically the eight content elements. In particular, with the constructs that make up the quality of the IR, variations between researchers were found. Furthermore, there were some gaps that could be the directions for future research.

The literature that provides academic knowledge about IR quality is still limited, and research on IR is still growing. The literature review conducted by this study can provide an overview of the current research positions on the quality of IR and directions for future research in this area.

This study intends to show corporate executives a framework demonstrating the quality of corporate reporting. It can impact not only investors as a specific stakeholder group but also other stakeholder groups.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first literature review to examine the quality of IR, thus providing a map of current research to suggest directions for future research. Most of the previous literature reviews have been focused on integrated reporting (IR) in general and not quality.