I investigate whether a firm’s social capital with investors impacts its non-GAAP reporting decisions. Critics of non-GAAP reporting suggest that non-GAAP earnings are incomplete, inaccurate, and can be misleading (Derby, 2001; Dreman, 2001; Elstein, 2001; Black et al., 2007). Firms might be hesitant to provide non-GAAP information if other means are available to transfer information. Social capital provides an alternate method of informing investors. However, social capital might also play another role in the information environment by building trust between managers and investors (Gabarro, 1978; Gulati, 1995). This trust may reduce investor skepticism of non-GAAP information, enhancing the value of non-GAAP disclosures. Additionally, I examine what impact social capital might have on investors’ investment decisions with respect to non-GAAP reporting. Despite critics’ concerns over non-GAAP reporting, prior literature suggests investors’ reactions are more aligned with the non-GAAP definition of earnings (Bradshaw and Sloan, 2002; Bhattacharya et al., 2003), suggesting other factors might influence investors’ decisions. I investigate whether social capital plays a role in reducing skepticism in non-GAAP information leading to reduced information asymmetry and increased investor reaction to non-GAAP disclosures. I find that non-GAAP reporting is increasing in social capital with investors. However, I find no evidence that investor reactions to non-GAAP earnings information differ based on firms’ social capital with investors. I also find information asymmetry around earnings announcements is higher for non-GAAP reporting firms with greater social capital with investors in comparison to non-GAAP reporters with lower social capital. Taken together, my results suggest social capital impacts the decisions of firms in reporting non-GAAP earnings information, but not the decisions of investors. My results are relevant to the current disclosure environment in that non-GAAP reporting is a current topic of interest for regulators with several updates to non-GAAP guidance having recently occurred. / Includes bibliography. / Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2019. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

On 28 July 2010, the Nigerian Federal Executive Council approved January 1, 2012 as the effective date for the convergence of Nigerian Statement of Accounting Standards (SAS) or Nigerian GAAP (NG-GAAP) with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). By this pronouncement, all publicly listed companies and significant public interest entities in Nigeria were statutorily required to issue IFRS based financial statements for the year ended December, 2012. This study investigates the impact of the adoption of IFRS on the financial statements of Nigerian listed Oil and Gas entities using six years of data which covers three years before and three years after IFRS adoption in Nigeria and other African countries. First, the study evaluates the impact of IFRS adoption on the Exploration and Evaluation (E&E) expenditures of listed Oil and Gas companies. Second, it examines the impact of IFRS adoption on the provision for decommissioning of Oil and Gas installations and environmental rehabilitation expenditures. Third, the study analyses the impact of the adoption of IFRS on the average daily Crude Oil production cost per Barrel. Fourth, it examines the extent to which the adoption and implementation of IFRS affects the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) of listed Oil and Gas companies. The study further explores the impact of IFRS adoption on the contractual relationships between Nigerian Government and Oil and Gas companies in terms of Joint Ventures (JVs) and Production Sharing Contracts (PSCs) as it relates to taxes, royalties, bonuses and Profit Oil Split. A Paired Samples t-test, Wilcoxon Signed Rank test and Gray’s (Gray, 1980) Index of Conservatism analyses were conducted simultaneously where the accounting numbers, financial ratios and industry specific performance measures of GAAP and IFRS were computed and analysed and the significance of the differences of the mean, median and Conservatism Index values were compared before and after IFRS adoption. Questionnaires were then administered to the key stakeholders in the adoption and implementation of IFRS and the responses collated and analysed. The results of the analyses reveal that most of the accounting numbers, financial ratios and industry specific performance measures examined changed significantly as a result of the transition from GAAP to IFRS. The E&E expenditures and the mean cost of Crude Oil production per barrel of Oil and Gas companies increased significantly. The GAAP values of inventories, GPM, ROA, Equity and TA were also significantly different from the IFRS values. However, the differences in the provision for decommissioning expenditures were not statistically significant. Gray’s (Gray, 1980) Conservatism Index shows that Oil and Gas companies were more conservative under GAAP when compared to the IFRS regime. The Questionnaire analyses reveal that IFRS based financial statements are of higher quality, easier to prepare and present to management and easier to compare among competitors across the Oil and Gas sector but slightly more difficult to audit compared to GAAP based financial statements. To my knowledge, this is the first empirical research to investigate the impact of IFRS adoption on the financial statements of listed Oil and Gas companies. The study will therefore make an enormous contribution to academic literature and body of knowledge and void the existing knowledge gap regarding the impact and implications of IFRS adoption on the financial statements of Oil and Gas companies.