Search results

The introduction of the IFRS in the European Union, and many other countries, has not eliminated the need for research concerning the comparability of financial statements. The IFRS still offers many options. Extensive theoretical literature exists concerning the definition of comparable financial statements and the factors that influence this comparability. This paper aims to investigate this issue.

The paper uses a survey of 426 individuals who use European IFRS financial statements.

This study shows that most of the respondents (67 per cent) interpret comparability as uniformity, that is, that all companies using the same accounting methods. Comparability of financial statements over time and of companies operating within the same industry are considered to be the most important types of comparability. Both types are jeopardised because of continuous changes in IFRS and the lack of industry specific guidance. Only 41 per cent of the respondents believe that all IFRS financial statements are comparable. Not only accounting methods used, but also judgements made by preparers and interpretation differences are viewed as important factors influencing the comparability of financial statements.

As surveys are uncommon in accounting literature, often because of sampling problems, the validity of this research should be further improved by additional surveys or other empirical research approaches.

This study contributes to the research by determining which factors influence the comparability of financial statements according to the auditors, analysts and other users and what their view is on the comparability of financial statements.

There are increasing demands on professional accountants in practice to generate water accounts for clients using knowledge from other disciplines within and outside their firms. Whilst many professional service firms have a broad range of in-house and consulting expertise, professional groups within and between these organisations may not be generating and sharing the knowledge required for successful water accounting. The purpose of this paper is to explore how additional disciplinary skills for water volumetric measurement, understanding of licensing and allocations can effectively and efficiently be shared between the disciplines required to be involved.

Two cross-sectional semi-structured surveys developed using a social network lens were disseminated to Australian accountants operating in professional services firms, and the results were descriptively analysed.

The authors find that, whilst accounting and engineering are acknowledged as core disciplines for water accounting, there is a need for more standardised measures and frameworks across diverse scales to fit in with current reporting practices and meet stakeholder needs. These need to be nested in a water accounting regulatory model that includes the accountancy professional bodies as a platform for knowledge generation and sharing.

The paper provides evidence of perceived barriers to and pathways for interdisciplinary knowledge networks for a new type of accounting. It demonstrates how regulatory frameworks can potentially assist rather than impede accountants in their contribution to solving of complex corporate sustainability problems.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate, following the adoption and implementation of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in the European Union (EU), whether accounting choices continue to be significantly influenced by national institutional factors with particular reference to cultural values, legal systems and equity market development.

The focus of the paper is on the measurement options available under IFRS with respect to investment property, and a study of factors influencing the accounting choices by 66 European investment property companies as disclosed in their annual reports over the period 2005-2010 is conducted.

National institutional factors and, most importantly, cultural values remain persistently important in explaining accounting measurement choices relating to investment property following the implementation of IFRS in the EU.

The study is limited to investment property companies in the EU. Future studies could be carried out to compare the explanatory power and causal factors involved in different industry contexts and across more countries. Alternative measures of culture may also provide alternative insights.

The paper demonstrates that a nation’s culture and accounting tradition likely has a continuing and significant impact on firms’ measurement decisions. Thus, institutional factors are clearly important in explaining accounting measurement choices and indicate the persistence of international accounting differences even in the context of a globally standardized accounting regime.

The purpose of this paper is empirically investigate the pro forma disclosure behavior of US-listed foreign firms applying International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).

The annual earnings press releases of US-listed foreign firms on the New York Stock Exchange are analyzed to compare the effect that reporting standard (specifically IFRS) has on pro forma disclosure frequency, disclosure characteristics and benchmarking.

US-listed foreign firms applying IFRS report pro forma disclosures more frequently than firms using the USA’s generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), but less opportunistically.

This paper extends Epping and Wilder’s (2011) study and contributes to the pro forma disclosure literature by providing a cross-country analysis of non-GAAP disclosure based on reporting standard (IFRS or US GAAP). Understanding the non-GAAP disclosure of firms applying IFRS is useful to investors and regulators, as more countries adopt IFRS.