Procedures for the adoption of the International Financial Reporting Standards for property, plant and equipment in an organisation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/1yn4hb34Keywords:
Financial Statements, Financial Reporting, International AccountingAbstract
Across the business world, private limited and public listed companies were required to strategically adopt international accounting standards for corporate property, plant, and equipment in standards and interpretations as of January 1, 2005. The transition to these standards offers companies several accounting options and maintains a large number of interpretations. These options and estimates were made either for the purposes of the transition (restatement or not of prior acquisitions, measurement of fixed assets at fair value, treatment of actuarial gains and losses, financial instruments, and cumulative translation differences) or for subsequent years (valuation of fixed assets, classification of leases, capitalization of development costs). As the outcomes of previous reports are usually mixed as to the economic concerns of the strategic adoption of IFRS on organizational property, plant, and equipment, our overall analysis makes a general assumption that there are no simultaneous economic benefits to the preparers and major users of financial data. To this end, we compare different measures of the economic benefits to accountants and users of financial data to analyse the statistical significance of the differences thus calculated. In a second approach, we analyse the factors that explain the presumed profits suggested by the IASB's new theoretical framework, namely the lower cost of capital for companies, ease of analysis and interpretation of financial statements for investors, and improved credit ratings for creditors. This analysis covers 250 companies in Arab countries, but especially in Jordan, from 2013 to 2018.
Downloads
References
1. Aboody, D. et B. Lev. 2000. «Information Asymmetry, R&D, and Insider Gains». The Journal of Finance, vol. 55, no. 6, p. 2747-2766.
2. Aggrawal, R. et N.A. Kyaw. 2009. International Variations in Transparency and Capital Structure: Evidence from European Firms. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 1–34.
3. Aharony, J., R. Barniv, et H. Falk. 2010. The Impact of Mandatory IFRS Adoption on Equity Valuation of Accounting Numbers for Security Investors in the EU. European Accounting Review, vol. 19, no. 3, p. 535-578.
4. Ali, A. et L-S. Hwang. 2000. Country-Specific Factors Related to Financial Reporting and Value Relevance of Accounting Data. Journal of Accounting Research, vol. 38, no. 1, p. 1–21.
5. Ali A., C. Tai-Yuan et R. Suresh. 2007. Corporate Disclosures by Family Firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics, vol. 44, no. 1-2, p. 238-286.
6. Ali, M.J., K. Ahmed et D. Henry. 2004. Disclosure Compliance with National Accounting Standards by Listed Companies in South Asia. Accounting and Business Research, vol. 34, no. 3, p. 183-1997.
7. Ali, M.J. 2005. A Synthesis of Empirical Research on International Accounting Harmonization and Compliance with IFRS. Journal of Accounting Literature, vol. 24, p. 1–52.
8. Anderson, R.C. et D.M. Reeb. 2003. Founding-Family Ownership and Firm Performance: Evidence From the S&P500. The Journal of Finance, vol. 58, no. 3, p. 1301-1328.
9. Ben Othman Hakim and Zéghal Daniel. A study of earnings-management motives in the AngloAmerican and Euro-Continental accounting models: The Canadian and French cases. The International Journal of Accounting, 2006, vol. 41, p. 406-435
10. Creditors». The Journal of Political Economy, vol. 104, no. 1, p. 1–25. Botosan, C.A. 1997. «Disclosure Level and the Cost of Equity Capital». The Accounting Review, vol. 72, no. 3, p. 323-349.
11. Botosan, C.A. et M.A. Plumlee. 2002. A Re-examination of Disclosure Level and the Expected Cost of Equity Capital. Journal of Accounting Research, vol. 40, no. 1, p. 21-40.
12. Botosan, C.A., M.A. Plumlee et H. Wen. 2011. The Relation between Expected Returns, Realized Returns, and Firm Risk Characteristics. Contemporary Accounting Research, vol. 24, no. 4, p. 1085-1122.
13. Brown, A.M. 2006. The Financial Milieu of the IASB and AASB. Australian Accounting Review, vol. 16, no. 38, p. 85-95.
14. Brown, S., S.A. Hillegeist et K. Lo. 2009. The Effect of Earnings Surprises on Information Asymmetry. Journal of Accounting and Economics, vol. 47, no. 3, p. 208-225.
15. Brüggemann, H. DDDDaskCC.HHomburget, FF. Pope 2011.How DoIndividual IInvestorstReact toGlobal IIFRSA Adoption? Working Paper, pp. 1–52
16. Burgstahler, D. et M. Eames. 2006. Management of Earnings and Analysts Forecast to Achieve Zero and Small Positive Earnings Surprises. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, vol. 33, no. 5 et 6, p. 633-652.
17. Bushman, R.M. et J.D. Piotroski. 2004. What Determines Corporate Transparency? Our Accounting Research, vol. 42, no. 2, p. 207-252.
18. Cahan, S.F., G. Liu et J. Sun. 2008. Investor Protection, Income Smoothing, and Earnings Informativeness. Journal of International Accounting Research, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 1–24.
19. Capkun, V., A. Cazavan-Jeny, T. Jeanjean et L.A. Weiss. 2011. Earnings Management and Value Relevance during the Mandatory Transition from Local GAAPs to IFRS in Europe. Working Paper, p. 1–63.
20. Cuijpers Rick and Buijink Willem. «Voluntary adoption of non-local GAAP in the European Union: a study of determinants and consequences. European Accounting Review, 2005, vol. 14 (3), p. 487-524.
21. Dumontier Pascal and Raffournier Bernard. Why firms comply voluntarily with IAS: An empirical analysis with Swiss data. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 1998, vol. 9 (3), p. 216-245.
22. El-Gazzar Samir, Finn Philip, and Jacob Rudy. «An empirical investigation of multinational firms’ compliance with International Accounting Standards. The International Journal of Accounting, 1999, vol. 34 (2), p. 239-48.
23. Firth MMichael. "Effect of ssizesstockamarketvholdings and auditors voluntary disclosureincorporates annual reports." cAccounting andBusiness Research 1979, vol. 9 (36), p. 273-280.
24. Hosmer, D. W., JJr., & LLemeshow, . (2000). Applied logistic rregression (22ndeed). York: Wiley.
25. Inchausti GGGiner, «TTheir influencecompany characteristics aandraccountingoregulation on informationdisclosed by Spanish firms». European Accounting Review, 1997, vol. 6 (1), p. 45-68.
26. Peng, C. Y., So, T. S., Stage, F. K., & St. John, E. P. (2002). The use aandointerpretationrof logisticregression in hhigher educationjournals ((1988–1999)ResearchHin Higher Education 43, 259–293.
27. Schipper, K. 2010. How Can We Measure the Costs and Benefits of Changes in Financial Reporting Standards? Accounting and Business Research, vol. 40, no. 3, p. 309-327.
28. Sciascia, S. et P. Mazzola. 2008. Family Involvement in Ownership and Management: Exploring Nonlinear Effects on Performance. Family Business Review, vol. 21, no. 4, p. 331-345.
29. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2008. Roadmap for the Potential Use of Financial Statements Prepared in Accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards by U.S. Issuers. Release no. 33-8982, p. 1-165.
30. Alrawashedh, N. H., Abdelrahim Kadomi, D., & Almatarneh, Z. External Auditors' Responsibility to the Detection of Inaccuracy and Fraud in Financial Statements: An Empirical Study.
31. Semenov, R. 2006. Financial Systems, Financing Constraints, and Investment: Empirical Analysis of OECD Countries. Applied Economics, vol. 38, no. 17, p. 1963–1974.
32. Shima, K.M. et E.A. Gordon. 2011. IFRS and the Regulatory Environment: The Case of U.S. Investor Allocation Choice. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, vol. 30, no. 5, p. 481–500.
33. Shleifer, A. et R.W. Vishny. 1997. A Survey of Corporate Governance. Journal of Finance, vol. 2, no. 2, p. 737-783.
34. Smith, C.W. et J.B. Warner. 1979. On Financial Contracting: An Analysis of Bond Convenants. Journal of Financial Economics, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 117-161.
35. Sterling, R.S. 1990. «Positive Accounting Theory: An Assessment». ABACUS, vol. 26, no. 2, p. 97-135.
36. Street Donna and Bryant Stephanie. «Disclosure level and compliance with IASs: A comparison of companies with and without U.S. listings and filings». The International Journal of Accounting, 2000, vol. 35 (3), p. 305-329.
37. Stoll, H. 1978. «The Pricing of Security Dealer Services: An Empirical Study of NASDAQ Stocks». The Journal of Finance, vol. 33, no. 4, p. 1153-1172.
38. Sufi, A. 2007. Information Asymmetry and Financing Arrangements: Evidence from Syndicated Loans. The Journal of Finance, vol. 62, no. 2, p. 629-668.
39. Zéghal Daniel and Mhedhbi Karim. «An analysis of the factors affecting the adoption of international accounting standards by developing countries». The International Journal of Accounting, 2006, vol. 41, p. 373-386.
40. Nahed, Habis. 2020, “Management of earnings and shareholding structure: evidence from Jordan.” Test Engineering and Management, ISSN: 0193-4120.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 AUTHOR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
