Thesis (MAcc (Accountancy))--University of Stellenbosch, 2005. / The fact that investors increasingly invest in companies from another country than the investor himself and the consequential globalisation of capital markets, resulted in the European Parliament and Council (EP) accepting Regulation No. 1606/2002 during 2002. The consequence of the regulation was that uniform accounting standards had to be implemented throughout the European Union (EU). The accounting standards that were accepted, are the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) (previously known as International Accounting Standards (IAS)). The regulation further determined that the effective date of this required compliance with IFRS was 1 January 2005. At the time when the regulation was accepted, most companies that were listed on the JSE Securities Exchange of South Africa (JSE) still prepared their financial statements in accordance with South African Statements of Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (South African SGAAP). The implication of the acceptance of the regulation by the EP was that in the event that a company was not only listed on the JSE but also on a stock exchange in the EU, the financial statements of that company would have to be prepared in accordance with IFRS. In this study two groups of companies were selected for evaluation. The one group consists of companies with a primary listing on the JSE and a secondary listing in the EU (first group) and the other group has a primary listing in the United Kingdom (UK) and thus the EU, with a secondary listing on the JSE (second group). The purpose of the study is to identify the implications of the acceptance of abovementioned regulation on the financial reporting of the selected companies. Firstly, a study was made of the differences between the Generally Accepted Accounting Practice of the United Kingdom (UK GAAP) and IFRS. The reason for this largely relates to the fact that there are still substantial differences between these two sets of accounting standards. No such study was conducted in respect of differences between South African SGAAP and IFRS as South African SGAAP was completely replaced by IFRS during 2004 and hence no differences exist any more. The only exception relates to the 500 series of standards that are unique to South Africa. There are, however, only two issued standards in this series and hence no further attention was paid to that. Hereafter the 2002 financial statements of all the selected companies were evaluated by measuring it against an IFRS disclosure checklist for 2002. The purpose was to identify the extent to which the selected companies comply with IFRS by focusing on the areas with regards to which they do not comply with IFRS. It was found that the companies of the first group largely fail to comply with IFRS in respect of matters of disclosure, whilst the second group of companies sometimes also, in their application of recognition requirements and measurement guidelines, used different practices to those suggested by IFRS. This was largely attributable to the fact that there are substantial differences between UK GAAP and IFRS, whilst South African SGAAP and IFRS already were very similar until recently. Consequently, questionnaires were sent to interested selected companies in which they could give feedback on their level of awareness and perceptions of the required transition to IFRS by 2005 as well as the procedures that they have followed or will follow in their process of transition to IFRS. Fourthly the 2003 financial reports of the selected companies were evaluated for compliance with IFRS by measuring it against the IFRS disclosure checklist that would be applicable on their 2004 financial periods. This was done in order to determine whether the selected companies showed any progress in their level of compliance with IFRS. This process also identified which IFRS, which were issued during 2003/2004, will be applicable on the 2004 or later financial periods of the selected companies, as these are further areas that will demand the attention of the selected companies in their process of becoming IFRS compliant. It was found that all selected companies showed rather little progress in their level of IFRS compliance. It is however concerning that even though South African SGAAP were previously very narrowly aligned with IFRS, the companies of the first group still fail to comply with fairly simple disclosure requirements. It would thus appear that they do not take the process of transition to IFRS serious enough. The fact that the second group of companies also did not make much progress can still be justified by the fact that UK GAAP were not aligned closer to IFRS during 2003 and most of the selected companies were still busy with the planning process for the transition to IFRS. It is expected that the financial statements of these companies will display substantial progress in their 2004 financial periods. Finally the compliance mechanisms were studied in order to determine which processes are in place to ensure that companies will indeed comply with IFRS. This study was done in respect of the EU, the UK and South Africa. All three these regions either already have or will have bodies in the near future that will have the task of evaluating the financial statements of listed companies for IFRS compliance. The conclusion is however that as a result of the negative consequences of noncompliance with IFRS sufficient factors do exist that will motivate companies to fully comply with IFRS. In addition, the listing requirements of the JSE has changed and financial reporting in accordance with IFRS is now a requirement.

pt. 1. The mandatory adopton of IFRS and Big4 audits on earnings quality -- pt. 2. The cross-border spillover effect of financial reporting on investment efficiency: evidence from mandatory IFRS adoption -- pt. 3. Discretionary fair value earnings and CEO cash compensation: evidence from continental Europe. / Chen, Chen. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2011. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 148-157). / Electronic reproduction. Hong Kong : Chinese University of Hong Kong, [2012] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Abstract also in Chinese.

A research report submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree of Masters of Commerce in Accounting 2016. / This paper explores the logics of resistance to fair value accounting, which entails the motivations to resist, as well as the mechanisms of resistance. It applies an interpretive approach to investigate this, using data collected from interviews with a sample of South African accounting professionals. The study demonstrates that while fair value accounting is being applied in the financial statements of organisations from a legalistic perspective, the application is superficial and ceremonious due to an established culture of compliance, and the need for funding, which engenders a ‘tick the box’ approach. The superficiality of application is complimented with a range of motivations to resist IFRS 13, which stem from practical concerns as well as theoretical, to create for a resistant attitude to fair value accounting. This resistance has been evidenced in this study, to manifest in various mechanisms that can be employed to avoid fair value accounting. These mechanisms are indicative of decoupling since they involve gaps being created between the purpose of financial statements, and the financial statements prepared, without blatant disregard of fair value accounting principles. These findings have been used to formulate recommendations which may be useful for preparers of financial statements, auditors and standard setters alike. While the aim of the study is not to identify deficiencies of fair value accounting principles, the consequence of exploring logics of resistance to fair value accounting is that it highlights areas that require further assessment in order to achieve the objectives of standards. / MT2017

This paper studies the impact of financial reporting scrutiny on (private) debt contracting in the presence of two capital market frictions: a cash-diversion problem and an asset-substitution problem. When cash flow realizations are not verifiable, firms have an incentive to divert cash by manipulating their accounting reports. When firms' project choices are not verifiable, post financing, they may have an incentive to choose riskier projects than desired by their financiers. While earlier work has mostly examined these two frictions independently, they are intricately linked: to address the cash-diversion problem, an optimal contract resembles a debt contract, which in turn causes the asset-substitution problem. Holding the scrutiny of financial reporting fixed, I show that the emergence of the asset-substitution problem, instead of compounding the existing inefficiencies from the cash-diversion problem, may lead to improved investment efficiency and more socially efficient risk-taking. On the other hand, increased reporting scrutiny may undermine investment efficiency (i.e., decrease banks' lending) and adversely affect firms' risk shifting from a social welfare perspective.

The purpose of this study was to determine the informational value of FASB Statement No. 33 current cost disclosures using the analytical technique of industry-wide decomposition analysis. The industry-wide decomposition model was used to measure the informational content of both the historical cost balance sheets (reported in the firm's annual reports) and the current cost balance sheets (prepared from the current cost disclosures) of firms in the Electric Services and Retailers industries. The two measures were then compared to determine the informational value of FASB Statement No. 33 current cost disclosures.

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are required or permitted for use in over 100 countries across the world. IFRS are developed by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). The IASB, with no formal or legal mandate, is performing a task normally reserved for national standard-setters. This study sought to establish the legitimacy of IFRS by assessing the due process of the IASB. The study established that countries have different motivations for choosing IFRS which raises legitimacy concerns. The global financial crisis compounded the legitimacy challenges of IFRS by exposing due process vulnerabilities. The study established that the IFRS governance structures are dominated by powerful stakeholders especially members of the G-20. Although the due process procedures provide opportunities for participation, actual participation is still dominated by constituents from Europe. Africa and South America still account for very low proportions of governance seats and participants in standard-setting projects. / Financial Accounting / M. Com. (Accounting)

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are required or permitted for use in over 100 countries across the world. IFRS are developed by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). The IASB, with no formal or legal mandate, is performing a task normally reserved for national standard-setters. This study sought to establish the legitimacy of IFRS by assessing the due process of the IASB. The study established that countries have different motivations for choosing IFRS which raises legitimacy concerns. The global financial crisis compounded the legitimacy challenges of IFRS by exposing due process vulnerabilities. The study established that the IFRS governance structures are dominated by powerful stakeholders especially members of the G-20. Although the due process procedures provide opportunities for participation, actual participation is still dominated by constituents from Europe. Africa and South America still account for very low proportions of governance seats and participants in standard-setting projects. / Financial Accounting / M. Com. (Accounting)