<p>On January 1, 2005 a new accounting standard became the valid standard for all listed companies within the EU and among them the property companies. This means that the real estate business now appraise their property holdings at fair value, using the IAS 40 – Investment Property standard.</p><p>The new IAS/IFRS standards opens up for a more subjective judgment, and appraisal at fair value is used to a greater extent. An important problem which should be acknowledged when appraising properties at fair value is the uncertainty that the appraisal is associated with.</p><p>A description whether the property companies use the sales comparison approach or the income approach when appraising their property holdings have been given. And by reading annual reports and sending questionnaires to the listed property companies on the Swedish market a study has been made about how properties are appraised. Another aim was to find out if the standard has led to an increased comparability and a true and fair view.</p><p>In the frame of reference, information taken from annual reports and other literature has been presented, in order to form statements further on. The types of references used are accounting concepts, standards and models of appraisal. A number of definitions as well as the meaning of having an appraisal made internally and externally have been discussed.</p><p>The frame of reference is then followed by the empirical studies, where information derived from the annual reports has been combined with information provided by the respondents to our questionnaires. The respondents are not only represented by 13 companies but also by two auditors and Bo Nordlund, who is doing research within this field.</p><p>The result of the study is first of all that the cash flow model is the one used by all companies, whereas the sales comparison approach is used only to estimate certain components in the cash flow model. Secondly, property appraisal will always be surrounded by a high degree of subjectivity and uncertainty. This is why we question the expression ‘fair value’, will it ever be possible to reach a fair value when appraising?</p>

On January 1, 2005 a new accounting standard became the valid standard for all listed companies within the EU and among them the property companies. This means that the real estate business now appraise their property holdings at fair value, using the IAS 40 – Investment Property standard. The new IAS/IFRS standards opens up for a more subjective judgment, and appraisal at fair value is used to a greater extent. An important problem which should be acknowledged when appraising properties at fair value is the uncertainty that the appraisal is associated with. A description whether the property companies use the sales comparison approach or the income approach when appraising their property holdings have been given. And by reading annual reports and sending questionnaires to the listed property companies on the Swedish market a study has been made about how properties are appraised. Another aim was to find out if the standard has led to an increased comparability and a true and fair view. In the frame of reference, information taken from annual reports and other literature has been presented, in order to form statements further on. The types of references used are accounting concepts, standards and models of appraisal. A number of definitions as well as the meaning of having an appraisal made internally and externally have been discussed. The frame of reference is then followed by the empirical studies, where information derived from the annual reports has been combined with information provided by the respondents to our questionnaires. The respondents are not only represented by 13 companies but also by two auditors and Bo Nordlund, who is doing research within this field. The result of the study is first of all that the cash flow model is the one used by all companies, whereas the sales comparison approach is used only to estimate certain components in the cash flow model. Secondly, property appraisal will always be surrounded by a high degree of subjectivity and uncertainty. This is why we question the expression ‘fair value’, will it ever be possible to reach a fair value when appraising?

<p><strong>Background: </strong>The increased globalization and trade over domestic borders within the European Union (EU) has lead to the implementation of new international accounting standards. This is necessary to create an effective capital market, where comparisons between companies located in different countries can be made, due to a more harmonized accounting. Obstacles to overcome when establish a more harmonized accounting in the EU is for example different accounting backgrounds and valuation methods.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the thesis is to as far possible study whether the establishment of IAS 40 contributes to an increased harmonization and more comparable accounting of investment property for listed companies within the EU.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This thesis involves both a quantitative –and a qualitative research method. We have used primary data in forms of interviews, and secondary data in forms of annual reports, regulations, literature and articles in the thesis. Using both primary –and secondary data results in a higher reliability and validity.</p><p><strong>Frame of reference:</strong> There are two alternative valuations methods according to IAS 40, the cost –and the fair value model. The cost model means a valuation to historical cost minus depreciation. Valuation in compliance to the fair value model on the other hand means that the investment property shall be valuated to market value. When using the cost model a note of the fair value shall be included in the financial statement. A company has according to IAS 40 the possibility to choose between internal –or external valuation when estimating the fair value.</p><p><strong>Empirical results and analysis: </strong>Our empirical result is presented mainly through annual reports from listed investment property companies in Sweden, England and Germany. We found that the fair value model was used by all the analysed companies in Sweden and England in 2005, the year of the implementation of IAS 40 in the EU. By analysing the annul reports from the investment property companies we found indications that the fair value model also tends to become the generally excepted valuation model in Germany. Furthermore, our empirical result shows that a majority of the Swedish investment property companies regularly used internal valuation, but there is a pattern of external valuation as a complement to the internal valuation. In England and Germany all investment property companies used external valuation and there was no use of internal valuation even as a complement to the external valuation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on our empirical results we draw the conclusion that the accounting for listed investment property companies within the EU is more harmonized and comparable today than before the implementation of IAS 40 in 2005. However, IAS 40 gives the companies the possibility to decide weather to use the cost –or the fair value model and the use of external valuation is optional. This can be viewed as obstacles to achieve a total harmonization of the accounting within the EU for listed investment property companies. From our empirical findings we draw the conclusion that the fair value model tends to become the generally excepted valuation model within the EU. Also, we do not perceive the use of the cost model as a barrier to the harmonization process because the fair value still has to be left in a not in the financial statement. However, we believe that in order to achieve a more harmonized and more comparable accounting for listed investment property companies within in the EU a directive about a minimum of external valuation must be included in IAS 40. This in order to avoid companies to use only internal valuation of the properties as this may effect the result. <strong></strong></p><p><strong> </strong></p>

Background: The increased globalization and trade over domestic borders within the European Union (EU) has lead to the implementation of new international accounting standards. This is necessary to create an effective capital market, where comparisons between companies located in different countries can be made, due to a more harmonized accounting. Obstacles to overcome when establish a more harmonized accounting in the EU is for example different accounting backgrounds and valuation methods. Purpose: The purpose of the thesis is to as far possible study whether the establishment of IAS 40 contributes to an increased harmonization and more comparable accounting of investment property for listed companies within the EU. Method: This thesis involves both a quantitative –and a qualitative research method. We have used primary data in forms of interviews, and secondary data in forms of annual reports, regulations, literature and articles in the thesis. Using both primary –and secondary data results in a higher reliability and validity. Frame of reference: There are two alternative valuations methods according to IAS 40, the cost –and the fair value model. The cost model means a valuation to historical cost minus depreciation. Valuation in compliance to the fair value model on the other hand means that the investment property shall be valuated to market value. When using the cost model a note of the fair value shall be included in the financial statement. A company has according to IAS 40 the possibility to choose between internal –or external valuation when estimating the fair value. Empirical results and analysis: Our empirical result is presented mainly through annual reports from listed investment property companies in Sweden, England and Germany. We found that the fair value model was used by all the analysed companies in Sweden and England in 2005, the year of the implementation of IAS 40 in the EU. By analysing the annul reports from the investment property companies we found indications that the fair value model also tends to become the generally excepted valuation model in Germany. Furthermore, our empirical result shows that a majority of the Swedish investment property companies regularly used internal valuation, but there is a pattern of external valuation as a complement to the internal valuation. In England and Germany all investment property companies used external valuation and there was no use of internal valuation even as a complement to the external valuation. Conclusions: Based on our empirical results we draw the conclusion that the accounting for listed investment property companies within the EU is more harmonized and comparable today than before the implementation of IAS 40 in 2005. However, IAS 40 gives the companies the possibility to decide weather to use the cost –or the fair value model and the use of external valuation is optional. This can be viewed as obstacles to achieve a total harmonization of the accounting within the EU for listed investment property companies. From our empirical findings we draw the conclusion that the fair value model tends to become the generally excepted valuation model within the EU. Also, we do not perceive the use of the cost model as a barrier to the harmonization process because the fair value still has to be left in a not in the financial statement. However, we believe that in order to achieve a more harmonized and more comparable accounting for listed investment property companies within in the EU a directive about a minimum of external valuation must be included in IAS 40. This in order to avoid companies to use only internal valuation of the properties as this may effect the result.

<p>Background – From the 1st of January 2005 should companies, within the EU, listed on a stock market implement International Accounting Standards, IAS. This means among other things that assets can be valued with the fair value model which was not an option before according to Swedish regulations. This opportunity implies that companies face different choices.</p><p>Problem discussion – IAS 40, Investment Properties, is a standard that implies choices. The Standard makes it possible to value investment properties with the fair value model or the cost model. Another choice within IAS 40 concerns the question, who shall perform the valuation. There is no demand for independent valuers, it is up to the management to choose between a internal or external valuer. Another choice concerns if fair value should be determined by market price or cash flow analysis.</p><p>Purpose – The purpose of this study is to state which choices, Swedish real estate companies listed on the stock market, make in compliance with IAS 40, and also describe and explain how the management effects and what incentives that lies behind the choices.</p><p>Method – This study have been carried out with a qualitative study of five real estate companies listed on the stock market. The annual reports have been examined and interviews were made with all of the companies. Theories that have been used to explain the incentives behind the choices are positive accounting theory, institutional theory and the interest model.</p><p>Conclusion – Swedish real estate companies listed on the stock market, will choose fair value model. The incentives are mainly, institutionalization within the line of business, meet the interest of the stock market with better information and that the alternative is not adjusted to the real estate business. A solid majority of the companies choose a internal valuer. The incentives are mainly that it is recognized by the line of business, internal knowledge gives a more correct value and that independence is not highly considerated. The companies choose a cash flow analysis to determine the value because the market is not active enough to use market value. And also because of the professional organizations that have made it accepted. The Swedish real estate market is clearly effected by the institutionalization and the professional organizations have strong influence on the decisions.</p> / <p>Bakgrund - Från och med den första januari 2005 skall börsnoterade bolag med säte inom EU skall tillämpa internationella redovisningsstandarder, IAS. Detta innebär bland annat att en rad tillgångar framöver kan tas upp till verkligt värde, vilket inte varit möjligt enligt årsredovisningslagen. Denna möjlighet innebär att företagen ställs inför valmöjligheter.</p><p>Problemdiskussion – IAS 40, Förvaltningsfastigheter, är en standard som innebär valmöjligheter. Regeln gör det möjligt att redovisa förvaltningsfastigheter till verkligt värde alternativt anskaffningsvärde. Ett annat val i IAS 40 är vem som skall göra värderingen. Det finns inget krav oberoende värderingsmän utan det är upp till företagsledningen att välja intern eller extern värderare. Ytterligare ett val är det som berör om verkligt värde skall baseras på markandspriser eller kassaflödesvärdering.</p><p>Syfte - Syftet med studien är att redogöra för vilka val svenska noterade fastighetsbolag gör i enlighet med IAS 40, samt att beskriva och förklara hur ledningen påverkas och vilka motiv som ligger bakom de här valen.</p><p>Metod – Studien har utförts med hjälp av en kvalitativ studie av fem noterade fastighetsbolag. Bolagens årsredovisningar har granskats samt att intervjuer har genomförts med samtliga bolag. Teorier som använts för att förklara motiven bakom valen är po-sitiv redovisningsteori, institutionell teori samt intressentteori.</p><p>Slutsats - Svenska noterade fastighetsbolag kommer att välja redovisningsprincipen verkligt värde. Motiven är främst, institutionalisering i branschen, tillgodose aktiemarknaden med bättre information, samt att alternativet inte är anpassat för fastig-hetsbranschen.</p><p>En klar majoritet av företagen väljer en intern värdering. Motiven är främst, konsensus i branschen, intern kunskap ger mer korrekt värdering samt att liten hänsyn tas till oberoende.</p><p>Samtliga bolag i studien anser att det verkliga värdet bästa kan beräkna genom en kassaflödesvärdering. Motiven är främst, ingen tillräcklig aktiv marknad samt metoden blivit allmänt vedertagen av branschorganisationer och svenska fastighetsbolag.</p><p>Sammanfattningsvis visar studien att redovisning i noterad svenska fastighetsbolag är starkt påverkad av institutionalisering. Branschorganisationerna har starkt inflytande på vilka val som bolagen gör.</p>

Background – From the 1st of January 2005 should companies, within the EU, listed on a stock market implement International Accounting Standards, IAS. This means among other things that assets can be valued with the fair value model which was not an option before according to Swedish regulations. This opportunity implies that companies face different choices. Problem discussion – IAS 40, Investment Properties, is a standard that implies choices. The Standard makes it possible to value investment properties with the fair value model or the cost model. Another choice within IAS 40 concerns the question, who shall perform the valuation. There is no demand for independent valuers, it is up to the management to choose between a internal or external valuer. Another choice concerns if fair value should be determined by market price or cash flow analysis. Purpose – The purpose of this study is to state which choices, Swedish real estate companies listed on the stock market, make in compliance with IAS 40, and also describe and explain how the management effects and what incentives that lies behind the choices. Method – This study have been carried out with a qualitative study of five real estate companies listed on the stock market. The annual reports have been examined and interviews were made with all of the companies. Theories that have been used to explain the incentives behind the choices are positive accounting theory, institutional theory and the interest model. Conclusion – Swedish real estate companies listed on the stock market, will choose fair value model. The incentives are mainly, institutionalization within the line of business, meet the interest of the stock market with better information and that the alternative is not adjusted to the real estate business. A solid majority of the companies choose a internal valuer. The incentives are mainly that it is recognized by the line of business, internal knowledge gives a more correct value and that independence is not highly considerated. The companies choose a cash flow analysis to determine the value because the market is not active enough to use market value. And also because of the professional organizations that have made it accepted. The Swedish real estate market is clearly effected by the institutionalization and the professional organizations have strong influence on the decisions. / Bakgrund - Från och med den första januari 2005 skall börsnoterade bolag med säte inom EU skall tillämpa internationella redovisningsstandarder, IAS. Detta innebär bland annat att en rad tillgångar framöver kan tas upp till verkligt värde, vilket inte varit möjligt enligt årsredovisningslagen. Denna möjlighet innebär att företagen ställs inför valmöjligheter. Problemdiskussion – IAS 40, Förvaltningsfastigheter, är en standard som innebär valmöjligheter. Regeln gör det möjligt att redovisa förvaltningsfastigheter till verkligt värde alternativt anskaffningsvärde. Ett annat val i IAS 40 är vem som skall göra värderingen. Det finns inget krav oberoende värderingsmän utan det är upp till företagsledningen att välja intern eller extern värderare. Ytterligare ett val är det som berör om verkligt värde skall baseras på markandspriser eller kassaflödesvärdering. Syfte - Syftet med studien är att redogöra för vilka val svenska noterade fastighetsbolag gör i enlighet med IAS 40, samt att beskriva och förklara hur ledningen påverkas och vilka motiv som ligger bakom de här valen. Metod – Studien har utförts med hjälp av en kvalitativ studie av fem noterade fastighetsbolag. Bolagens årsredovisningar har granskats samt att intervjuer har genomförts med samtliga bolag. Teorier som använts för att förklara motiven bakom valen är po-sitiv redovisningsteori, institutionell teori samt intressentteori. Slutsats - Svenska noterade fastighetsbolag kommer att välja redovisningsprincipen verkligt värde. Motiven är främst, institutionalisering i branschen, tillgodose aktiemarknaden med bättre information, samt att alternativet inte är anpassat för fastig-hetsbranschen. En klar majoritet av företagen väljer en intern värdering. Motiven är främst, konsensus i branschen, intern kunskap ger mer korrekt värdering samt att liten hänsyn tas till oberoende. Samtliga bolag i studien anser att det verkliga värdet bästa kan beräkna genom en kassaflödesvärdering. Motiven är främst, ingen tillräcklig aktiv marknad samt metoden blivit allmänt vedertagen av branschorganisationer och svenska fastighetsbolag. Sammanfattningsvis visar studien att redovisning i noterad svenska fastighetsbolag är starkt påverkad av institutionalisering. Branschorganisationerna har starkt inflytande på vilka val som bolagen gör.

Värdering till verkligt värde infördes i regelverket 1 januari 2005 i och med införandet av IAS 40. IAS är en förkortning av International Accounting Standards och IAS 40 ger börsnoterade bolag med förvaltningsfastigheter möjlighet att värdera och redovisa dessa fastigheter till historiskt anskaffningsvärde eller verkligt värde. Efter införandet har de flesta börsnoterade bolag valt att redovisa till verkligt värde.För att belysa problematiken med värdering och redovisning till verkligt värde används förvaltningsfastigheter som ett illustrationsexempel. Detta för att se hur kreditinstituten genomför värderingar och hur de påverkas när börsnoterade bolag redovisar till verkligt värde. Syftet med uppsatsen är att utröna om det föreligger några risker när verkligt värde appliceras på förvaltningsfastigheter.Djupintervjuer med tjänstemän på kreditinstitut har genomförts för att bringa klarhet i hur kreditinstituten ser på och hanterar värdering och redovisning till verkligt värde.Kreditinstituten använder sig av värderingsmodeller för att värdera enligt verkligt värde vilket inte är i enlighet med värderingstrappan. Dock anser kreditinstituten att hur bolagen redovisat sina förvaltningsfastigheter är av underordnad betydelse. Kreditinstituten påverkas inte i någon större utsträckning av bolagens val av redovisningsprincip.Genom intervjuerna framkom att kreditinstituten anser sig vara mer försiktiga i värderingssituationer idag än externa värderare. Det framkommer även att kreditinstituten är medvetna om att värdering till verkligt värde är subjektiv och att de accepterar detta trots att subjektivitet kan leda till mer flexibel redovisning. En flexibel redovisning kan leda till manipulation och övervärdering vilket kan ses som en risk med verkligt värde. / Valuation at fair value was introduced in January 1st, 2005, with the introduction of IAS 40. IAS is an abbreviation of International Accounting Standards and IAS 40 provides listed companies with investment properties the ability to value and account for these properties at purchase value or fair value. After the implementation most listed companies have chosen to report at fair value.To illustrate the problems of valuation and accounting at fair value, investment properties is used as an illustration example. This is to determin how credit institutions perform valuations and how they are affected when listed companies reports at fair value. The purpose of this paper is to determine whether there are any risks when fair value is applied to investment properties.In-depth interviews with officials from credit institutions have been conducted to clarify how credit institutions look at and deal with valuation and accounting at fair value.Credit institutions use valuation models to conduct valuation at fair value, which is not in accordance with “värderingstrappan”. However, the credit institutions consider how the companies report their investment properties to be of secondary importance. Credit institutions are not affected to any great extent by the companies' choice of accounting policies.The interviews revealed that credit institutions consider themselves to be more careful in valuation situations today than external valuers. It is also revealed that credit institutions are aware that valuation at fair value is subjective and that they accept this despite the fact that subjectivity can lead to more flexible accounting. A flexible reporting can lead to manipulation and over-valuation which can be seen as a risk with fair value.

År 2005 infördes standarden IAS 40 som ger svenska börsnoterade förvaltningsfastighetsbolag möjligheten att redovisa sina fastigheter till verkligt värde. Verkligt värde har kritiserats på grund av det bygger på subjektiva bedömningar och det kan leda till en missvisande redovisning som kan få negativa konsekvenser för intressenter. 1 januari 2013 infördes den nya standarden IFRS 13 för att ställa ytterligare upplysningskrav gällande värdering av tillgångar till verkligt värde. Denna studie behandlar hur värdering till verkligt värde påverkar intressenters informationsbehov, deras uppfattning av fastighetsvärdering till verkligt värde och resonemang kring införandet av IFRS 13. Syftet med undersökningen var att förklara för hur olika intressenters behov av redovisningsinformation påverkas vid värdering av förvaltningsfastigheter till verkligt värde. För att uppnå studiens syfte har en kvalitativ metod använts där djupgående intervjuer genomförts. Respondenterna valdes ut med utgångspunkt i att de ska erhålla kunskap och erfarenhet av börsnoterade förvaltningsfastighetsbolag. Studiens respondenter är investerare, kreditgivare och finansanalytiker eftersom samtliga påverkas främst av värdering till verkligt värde av förvaltningsfastigheter. Studien har visat att olika intressenter i och med sin yrkesidentitet fokuserar på olika delar av värderingsinformation om verkligt värde. Intressenter drivs av rimlighet snarare än precision och anser därför de att det är viktigare att bolagen redovisar bakomliggande antaganden än det verkliga värdet. Intressenter skapar sig två uppfattningar av fastigheters verkliga värde, en positiv och en negativ. De anser att verkligt värde fungerar bra vid en hög marknadsaktivitet då många fastigheter köps och säljs, tvärtom uppfattar intressenter att finns stora brister med verkligt värde vid låg marknadsaktivitet. Intressenter misstror även att det redovisade verkliga värdet är marknadsvärde eftersom att fastigheter ofta säljs för ett annat pris än det redovisade. Studien visar att införandet av det nya regelverket ger en ökad uppfyllelse av intressenters informationsbehov, men att det blir en avvägning mellan relevans och mängd i värderingsinformationen för att deras behov av ska uppfyllas. / In 2005 the standard IAS 40 was introduced which provides Swedish listed companies with investment properties the opportunity to evaluate their properties at fair value. Fair value has been criticized because it is based on subjective assumptions that can lead to inaccurate financial reports and negative consequences for stakeholders. January 1st 2013 the new standard IFRS 13 was introduced which requires increased disclosures of valuation at fair value. This study examines how fair value affects stakeholders information needs, their perception of property valuation at fair value and reasoning about the implementation of IFRS 13.                                       The aim of the study was to explain how different stakeholders information needs are affected by the valuation of investment properties at fair value. To achieve the purpose of the study a qualitative method was used and in-depth interviews have been conducted. Respondents were selected on the basis that they would obtain the knowledge and experience of listed companies with investment properties. The study's respondents are investors, creditors and financial analysts because they are primarily affected by the valuation measurement at fair value of investment properties. The study has shown that different stakeholders in their professional identity focuses on different aspects of the valuation information about fair value. Stakeholders are driven by plausibility rather than accuracy, therefore they think it is more important that companies report underlying assumptions than the actual fair value. Stakeholders creates two different perceptions of the properties fair value, one positive and one negative. They believe that fair value function well at a high level of market activity when several properties are purchased and sold, on the contrary stakeholders perceive there are large gaps with fair value at low market activity. Stakeholders distrusts the reported fair value is the market value, since the properties often are sold for a different price than the reported. The study shows that the introduction of the new standard provides a greater fulfilment of stakeholders information needs, but it is required that there is a balance between relevance and quantity of information if their needs will be satisfied.

This thesis examines the effect government ownership has on the relationship between fair value accounting and earnings quality when “mark-to-model” techniques are used in fair value estimations. To this end we compare 36 real estate companies controlled by private interests with 32 real estate companies controlled by the state and municipal governments in Sweden. We find that the relationship between fair value accounting exposure and aggregated earnings quality is negatively affected by government ownership when unobservable inputs are used in the fair value estimation. Previous research treats government ownership simply as having a first order relationship with earnings quality. Our results indicate determinants of earnings quality can affect one another, and that these effects should be considered.

Börsnoterade företag inom EU ska sedan år 2005 redovisa enligt den internationella redovisningsstandarden IFRS. Det innebär att börsnoterade fastighetsbolag som huvudregel kan välja att redovisa förvaltningsfastigheter till verkligt värde enligt IAS 40. Standarden ger inga tydliga riktlinjer om hur verkligt värde ska beräknas och av tidigare forskning framgår att det har bidragit till svårigheter vid jämförelser av företags finansiella information. Detta har påverkat jämförbarheten bland europeiska fastighetsbolag genom att företag på grund av brist på generella standarder om hur värderingen ska gå till, har vänt sig till nationella GAAP för vägledning. Ytterligare vägledning har efterfrågats, vilket har resulterat i standarden IFRS 13 Värdering till verkligt värde. IFRS 13 har utvecklats i syfte att tydliggöra och definiera dels begreppet verkligt värde, dels hur värderingen ska gå till. Gemensamma internationella standarder till trots, så baseras redovisningen i olika länder på olika traditioner vilka kan påverka hur redovisningen går till i praktiken. I följande studie ingår därför fastighetsbolag från Sverige, Tyskland och Storbritannien.I denna studie undersöks fastighetsbolag vilka samtliga redovisar sina förvaltningsfastigheter till verkligt värde. Studien syftar till att undersöka värderingsprecisionen under de senaste fem åren och huruvida IFRS 13 har haft effekt på värderingen. Detta undersöks genom att studera huruvida realiserade värdeförändringar uppstår vid försäljning av tillgången. IFRS 13 anger tre olika värderingsnivåer vid beräkning av det verkliga värdet och studien syftar vidare till att undersöka till vilken nivå bedömningen klassificeras att tillhöra.Studien baseras på en kvantitativ forskningsmetod med ett deduktivt angreppssätt. De teoretiska utgångspunkterna utgår från tidigare forskning inom redovisning till verkligt värde, värderingsprinciper och harmonisering av redovisningspraxis. Våra resultat visar att de undersökta fastighetsbolagen i genomsnitt undervärderar förvaltningsfastigheter med 10,99 procent. Vidare finner vi inga signifikanta skillnader i avvikelsens storlek mellan de olika länderna, eller att IFRS 13 har haft effekt på värderingen. Våra resultat kan förklaras av försiktighet och rädsla för att övervärdera tillgångar. Vi kan däremot inte uttala oss om huruvida manipulation av redovisningen är en bidragande orsak till att värderingen ser ut som den gör. Vidare kan den pågående harmoniseringsprocessen av internationella redovisningsstandarder förklara varför vi inte finner några skillnader mellan Sverige, Tyskland och Storbritannien. Vi finner också att en klar majoritet värderar till verkligt värde med hjälp av indata på Nivå 3. Ett fåtal redovisar inte denna information, vilket är anmärkningsvärt eftersom de har en skyldighet att göra det. / Listed companies within the EU are obligated to report in accordance with the international standard IFRS since 2005. This means that listed companies as main principle, can choose fair value when reporting investment properties according to IAS 40. This standard does not give clear guidance of how fair value should be calculated and previous research argues that this has contributed to difficulties when comparing financial reports. This has affected the comparability of European real estate companies, as the absence of a general valuation standard has impelled companies to address national GAAP for guidance. There has been a demand for further guidance, which has resulted in the development of IFRS 13 Fair value measurement. The purpose of IFRS 13 is to clarify and define the meaning of fair value and how the valuation should be carried out. Despite common international standards, financial reporting in different countries is based on certain values and traditions that may affect accounting practice. Hence, the focus of this study will be companies within the real estate sector in Sweden, Germany and United Kingdom.The real estate companies in this study report their investment properties at fair value. The purpose of this study is to investigate the fair value precision over the last five years and whether IFRS 13 has had an effect on the valuation. This is examined by analyzing whether realised gains are reported when the asset is sold. Furthermore, IFRS 13 defines a value hierarchy which includes three different levels for calculating fair value and the aim of this study is to highlight at which level investment properties are reported.This study is based on a quantitative research method with a deductive approach and it is based on previous research of fair value accounting, valuation principles and the harmonization of accounting practice. Our results indicate that the examined real estate companies underestimate their reported investment properties with 10,99 percent at average. Furthermore, we do not find evidence of a significant difference in valuation precision between the examined countries, nor do we find evidence that IFRS 13 has had an effect on the precision. Our results may be explained by prudence and fear of overstating the value of the assets. However, we cannot say that this is the result of manipulation of numbers. Furthermore, the fact that we do not find any differences between Sweden, Germany and United Kingdom may be explained by a continuous harmonization process of international accounting standards. We also find that a clear majority report at fair value Level 3, though there are a few who do not disclose this information. This is remarkable, as they are obligated to do so.This thesis is written in Swedish.