Dionysia Dionysiou

Value Relevance of IFRS Mandatory Disclosure Requirements

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to address recent calls for research regarding the valuation implications of mandatory disclosure requirements (cf. Hassan Design/methodology/approach - – The paper measures compliance with all International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) mandatory disclosure requirements for a sample of firms. The paper subsequently explores whether the compliance scores (i.e. the mandatory disclosure levels) are value relevant and whether the value relevance of accounting numbers differs across high- and low-compliance/disclosure companies. Findings - – The paper finds that the levels of mandatory disclosures are value relevant. Additionally, not only the relative value relevance (i.e. Research limitations/implications - – This paper is an indicative single country case study that focuses on the IFRS adoption year (2005) in the EU. It forms a new avenue for research regarding the valuation implications of mandatory disclosure requirements. It remains to future research to examine whether the findings also hold in other countries and periods. Practical implications - – These findings are expected to be particularly relevant to standard setters and regulatory bodies that are concerned about the implications of mandatory disclosure requirements (Schipper, 2007). Originality/value - – To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper that examines the value relevance implications of IFRS mandatory disclosure requirements, focusing on European country after 2005. The authors indicate that IFRS mandatory disclosures do lead to more transparent financial statements (cf. Pownall and Schipper, 1999), mitigating concerns about companies’ fundamentals (cf. Anctil

Compliance with Goodwill Related Mandatory Disclosure Requirements and the Cost of Equity Capital

Theory suggests that increased levels of corporate disclosure lead to a decrease in cost of equity via the reduction of estimation risk. We examine compliance levels with International Financial Reporting Standard 3 Business Combinations and International Accounting Standard 36 Impairments of Assets mandated goodwill-related disclosure and their association with firms’ implied cost of equity capital (ICC). Using a sample of European firms for the period 2008–2011, we find a median compliance level of about 83% and significant differences in compliance levels across firms and time. Non-compliance relates mostly to proprietary information and information that reveals managers’ judgement and expectations. Overall, we find a statistically significant negative relationship between the ICC and compliance with mandated goodwill-related disclosure. Further, we split the sample between firms meeting (or not) market expectations about the recognition of a goodwill impairment loss in a given year to study whether variation in compliance levels mainly plays a confirmatory or a mediatory role. We find the latter: higher compliance levels matter only for the sub-sample of firms that do not meet market expectations regarding goodwill impairment. Finally, our results hold only in countries where enforcement is strong.

Are the Discounts in Seasoned Equity Offers Due to Inelastic Demand

This paper investigates the large and diverse discounts in UK open offers and placings. Large discounts are a substantial cost to shareholders who do not buy new shares. The existing literature mainly examines US firm-commitment offers and private placements. The institutional setting differs in the UK, in ways that make the theory of inelastic demand for shares more important as an explanation for discounts than in the US. The paper finds that inelastic demand, or illiquidity of the issuers shares, and financial distress, are key determinants of the discount. We expect these results to apply to other stock markets.

Timing, earnings management and over-reaction around pure placings

This paper provides new evidence about firms conducting pure placings in the UK. It examines their abnormal performance (stock and operating), earnings management (accrual and real activities) and abnormal growth prospects for up to three years surrounding the event. It questions whether (i) timing, (ii) earnings management and/or (iii) over-reaction hypotheses can explain these performance, earnings quality and growth paths. The results document that pure placing firms have high earnings quality and abnormally high growth opportunities at the announcement. For this reason, the market is overenthusiastic. It expects more than what is eventually fulfilled, in line with the over-reaction hypothesis. Weak evidence that placing firms may exploit market timing is noted, whilst there is no supportive evidence of earnings management. These findings distinguish the earnings quality and growth opportunities of pure placing firms from that of firms conducting open offers, firm commitment offers and other seasoned equity offerings (SEO) that are not private placements, for which prior evidence reports mainly timing and/or earnings management prior to the event. This paper facilitates a better understanding of UK SEO.

Choosing Among Alternative Long-Run Event-Study Techniques

This paper reviews the long-run event-study debate by outlining the strengths and weakness of the most commonly used alternative techniques. The fist part of the discussion highlights that prior literature has failed to provide a single risk-adjusted model of long-run abnormal returns with no biases. Subsequently, the paper provides guidance on how one can choose among pertinent alternative techniques. As a conclusion, researchers ought to choose among alternative techniques after considering issues such as (i) the nature of dataset and market of interest, (ii) the event type (regulatory or corporate), (iii) returns’ time-interval, (iv) association of the event with accounting data, (v) sample characteristics and prior evidence regarding similar events, as well as (vi) risk changes following the event. Robustness tests are essential, while the road for further research regarding the appropriate technique(s) is open.

Mandated Disclosures Under IAS 36 Impairment of Assets and IAS 38 Intangible Assets: Value Relevance and Impact on Analysts’ Forecasts

ABSTRACT Drawing on a large sample of European firms, we examine whether variant compliance levels with mandated disclosures under IAS 36 Impairment of Assets and IAS 38 Intangible Assets are value relevant and affect analysts’ forecasts. Our results indicate a mean (median) compliance level of about 84% (86%) but high variation among firms and disclosure levels regarding IAS 36 being much lower than those regarding IAS 38. In depth, analysis reveals that non-compliance relates mostly to proprietary information and information that reveals managers’ judgment and expectations. Furthermore, we find a positive (negative) relationship between average disclosure levels and market values (analysts’ forecast dispersion). Results, however, hold more specifically for disclosures related to IAS 36, and these also improve analysts’ forecast accuracy. Our findings add knowledge regarding the economic consequences of mandatory disclosures, have an appeal to regulators and financial statement preparers and reflect on the IASB’s concerns to increase the guidance and principles on presentation and disclosure.