Eva Heidhues

Chapter 1 Globalization and Accounting Convergence – Overview

This research monograph critically examines convergence with the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Germany by taking into account the influence of political, legal, economic, social, cultural, and historical factors on accounting principles and practices. This study makes a contribution by examining issues in the convergence process that may create constraints in achieving global comparability and, importantly, may challenge the International Accounting Standards Boards (IASB) main objective: “to develop, in the public interest, a single set of high-quality, understandable, enforceable and globally accepted financial reporting standards based on clearly articulated principles” (IFRS Foundation, 2011a, Preface to IFRS).1 Specifically, this research monograph examines convergence in Germany by analyzing the development of German accounting and examining issues and attitudes concerning the application of professional judgment, which has increasingly been recognized as an important and controversial topic in international accounting (Barth, Landsman, & Rendleman, 2000; Chand & White, 2006; Dechow, Myers, & Shakespeare, 2010; Patel, 2006; Theile, 2003).

Chapter 5 The Influence of Uncertainty Avoidance on Accountants’ Materiality Judgments: A Cross-Cultural Study of German and Italian Accountants

Over the last decade, international accounting harmonization and convergence with the increasing adoption of IFRS as national accounting standards have become dominant topics in international accounting research (Ashbaugh & Pincus, 2001; Chand & Patel, 2008; Christensen et al., 2007; Daske & Gebhardt, 2006; Daske et al., 2008; Ding et al., 2007; Hellmann et al., 2010; Lantto & Sahlstrom, 2008; Larson & Kenny, 2011; Peng & van der Laan Smith, 2010; Rezaee et al., 2010; Tyrrall et al., 2007). Given that the primary goal of international convergence is enhancing comparability of financial statements across countries, the influence of accountants’ professional judgment in the interpretation and application of accounting standards has increasingly been recognized as an important and controversial topic. Indeed, a growing number of studies have analyzed the influence of culture on standard setting (Bloom & Naciri, 1989; Ding et al., 2005; Schultz & Lopez, 2001), auditor independence (Agacer & Doupnik, 1991; Hwang et al., 2008; Patel & Psaros, 2000), and accountants’ values and judgments (Doupnik & Riccio, 2006; Doupnik & Richter, 2003, 2004; Patel, 2003). Although prior research has provided evidence that culture influences accountants’ exercise of professional judgments, these studies have largely focused on demonstrating differences between accountants from very distinct cultures or accounting systems. For example, Chand (2008) as well as Doupnik and Richter (2004) examined differences in the judgment of professional accountants with regard to the interpretation and application of uncertainty expressions by comparing Australian and Fijian and German and American accountants, respectively. Moreover, recent research on professional accountants’ judgments (Chand, 2008; Doupnik & Riccio, 2006; Doupnik & Richter, 2003) has largely focused on providing evidence that accountants from different accounting clusters significantly differ in their exercise of professional judgment. Indeed, researchers have often based their country selections on theoretical models of accounting clusters such as Grays (1988) framework of accounting values or Nobes’ (1983) international accounting classification, predominantly to show differences between the Anglo-American accounting model and the Continental European accounting model.

Chapter 4 The Influence of Power and Legitimacy on German Attitudes Toward the IASB and the Promotion of Professional Judgments

Over the last decade, international accounting harmonization and convergence and the increasing adoption of IFRS as national standards have become dominant topics in international accounting research (Alp & Ustundag, 2009; Ashbaugh & Pincus, 2001; Cairns, Massoudi, Taplin, & Tarca, 2011; Christensen et al., 2007; Daske, 2006; Daske & Gebhardt, 2006; Daske et al., 2008; Ding et al., 2007; Gaston, Garcia, Jarne, & Lainez Gadea, 2010; Haverals, 2007; Hellmann, Perera, & Patel, 2010; Lantto & Sahlstrom, 2008; Othman & Zeghal, 2006; Peng & van der Laan Smith, 2010; Schleicher, Tahoun, & Walker, 2010; Tyrrall et al., 2007). In this move toward convergence, the politics associated with IAS setting by the IASB has become an important and controversial topic in international accounting research. Although previous studies have aimed to examine political issues and stakeholders perception toward the standard-setting process of the IASB (Alali & Cao, 2010; Chiapello & Medjad, 2009; de Lange & Howieson, 2006), no study has critically examined the complexity of factors influencing attitudes and public opinion toward this standard-setting process. Given that attitudes are likely to guide behavior and lead stakeholders to either advance the work of the IASB or create obstacles, it is timely and relevant to analyze attitudes toward this issue. A recent study has provided evidence that stakeholders’ acceptance of IFRS and preparers’ overall perception of IFRS may influence compliance and the quality of financial reports (Navarro-Garcia & Bastida, 2010). As such, it is the objective of this chapter to provide insights into determinants of attitudes toward the IASBs standard setting and critically examine the influence of power structures and perceived legitimacy on individual attitudes and public opinion.1 Specifically, this study examines German attitudes toward the promotion of professional judgment by the IASB since the adoption of IFRS in the EU in 2005.

Chapter 2 A Critique of Gray's Framework on Accounting Values Using Germany as a Case Study

International harmonization of accounting standards and the move toward convergence have revived an increasing interest in the influence of culture in accounting and auditing. The growing number of countries adopting IFRS and the increasing acceptance of International Standards on Auditing (ISA) has further raised researchers’ attention. For example, more than 100 countries require or permit the use of IFRS, with more countries, such as Canada, India, and Korea, planning to adopt IFRS by 2011 (Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, 2007; IASB, 2007a, 2007b). This move toward convergence is driven largely on assumptions and assertions based on enhancing international comparability of accounting and auditing information.