ارزش صورتهای مالی تلفیقی شرکت
Abstract
۱٫ Introduction
۲٫ Literature review
۳٫ The IASB’s decision to abandon proportionate consolidation
۴٫ The Value-relevance perspective and hypotheses development
۵٫ Data and methodology
۶٫ Regression results and discussion
۷٫ Sensitivity analysis
۸٫ Conclusion
Declaration of Competing Interest
Acknowledgements
References
Abstract
We investigate the effects of the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 11, Joint Arrangements. In so doing, we analyze whether the removal of the proportionate consolidation option and the mandatory use of the equity method in reporting for joint ventures influences the value relevance of co-venturers’ total assets and liabilities. In a reverse situation, i.e. the elimination of the equity method, Richardson, Roubi, and Soonawalla (2012) found a decline in the value relevance of the aforementioned amounts for firms forced to change reporting method, partially offset by the value relevance of joint venture data disclosure. We focus on a continental European setting and analyze a sample of 120 Italian and French nonfinancial listed firms over the period 2008-2015. We find a reduction in the value relevance of co-venturers’ total assets and liabilities for companies obliged to move from proportionate consolidation to the equity method. Conversely, we do not find an increase in the value relevance of joint venture disaggregated data provided in the notes.
Introduction
The provisions of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 11, Joint Arrangements, revived the debate on reporting for investments in joint ventures. Issued by the International Accounting Standard Board (IASB) in 2011, this standard eliminated the free choice between using proportionate consolidation and the equity method to account for joint ventures by requiring use of the equity method. The IASB’s decision is not supported by the extant accounting literature, which has not reached conclusive results on the conceptual supremacy of the equity method. Furthermore, most respondents to the Exposure Draft ED 9 (IASB, 2007) did not agree with the abandonment of proportionate consolidation (Alexander et al., 2012). The two accounting methods ultimately lead to the same total shareholders’ equity and net income, but result in a significantly different qualitative and quantitative representation of the group’s results. Due to these differences, many studies have attempted to demonstrate the supremacy of one method over the other. However, the results are mixed. Research has addressed this issue from a theoretical point of view, identifying the advantages and disadvantages of each method (Dieter & Watt, 1978; Bierman, 1992; Milburn, FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board), & Chant, 1999). Empirical studies have examined the ability of proportionally-consolidated amounts, compared with those using the equity method, to predict the co-venturer’s profitability (Graham, King, & Morrill, 2003a; Leitner-Hanetseder, 2010).