<p>Since the year 2005 listed companies are supposed to use international accounting standards when they set up their group accountancy. One thing that has changed with the new standards is the accounting of goodwill and long-lived intangible assets. Earlier companies were supposed to write of their goodwill during the years they had expected the extra profit to arise. According to the new regulation, an impairment test shall be done annually, as well as when there is an indication of decreased value. According to IAS 36 point 134, the company shall provide information in their accountancy about the impairment test.</p><p>The aim of this study is to find out if some companies may be willing to reveal less information in their accountancy, and if there are any factors that affect this. We will investigate if there is any relation between how much the three largest owners in each company hold both in equity- and vote share and how much information that is provided in the accountancy. We will also investigate if there is any relation between the expectations of returns from the market and how much information that is provided. The first hypothesis is: If companies are expected to get a high future cash flow, which implies a high market value in relation to book value of equity, then the company will reveal less information conveying much knowledge about the market to their competitors. The second hypothesis claim that if the three largest owners together holds a large equity- vote share, where small asymmetric information exists, then the company should want to disclose less information in their accountancy.</p><p>In this research we analyse the accountancy of each company listed at the OMX exchange by 31 Dec 2005. To see how much information that is disclosed in the accountancy, we have chosen to analyse how and if the companies accomplish their accounting according to IAS 36 point 134. To be able to compare how much information the companies provided about this, we have created a score structure. Furthermore we have used SPSS to make a regression analysis, which should show if there are any relations. Our results however show that there is no relation between how much information that is given and how large the market value compared to book value of equity is. Neither did we find any relation between how large the three largest owners where and how much information that was provided. Our results differ from earlier studies. One cause for that might be that we only picked three variables, while their studies could have included a lot more variables. Our study only focuses on a small part of the accountancy; if we had analyzed the entire accountancy we might have arrived to a different result. The year 2005 was furthermore the first year that the companies were obliged to follow the standard, which also could have had a certain impact on the result.</p>

Since the year 2005 listed companies are supposed to use international accounting standards when they set up their group accountancy. One thing that has changed with the new standards is the accounting of goodwill and long-lived intangible assets. Earlier companies were supposed to write of their goodwill during the years they had expected the extra profit to arise. According to the new regulation, an impairment test shall be done annually, as well as when there is an indication of decreased value. According to IAS 36 point 134, the company shall provide information in their accountancy about the impairment test. The aim of this study is to find out if some companies may be willing to reveal less information in their accountancy, and if there are any factors that affect this. We will investigate if there is any relation between how much the three largest owners in each company hold both in equity- and vote share and how much information that is provided in the accountancy. We will also investigate if there is any relation between the expectations of returns from the market and how much information that is provided. The first hypothesis is: If companies are expected to get a high future cash flow, which implies a high market value in relation to book value of equity, then the company will reveal less information conveying much knowledge about the market to their competitors. The second hypothesis claim that if the three largest owners together holds a large equity- vote share, where small asymmetric information exists, then the company should want to disclose less information in their accountancy. In this research we analyse the accountancy of each company listed at the OMX exchange by 31 Dec 2005. To see how much information that is disclosed in the accountancy, we have chosen to analyse how and if the companies accomplish their accounting according to IAS 36 point 134. To be able to compare how much information the companies provided about this, we have created a score structure. Furthermore we have used SPSS to make a regression analysis, which should show if there are any relations. Our results however show that there is no relation between how much information that is given and how large the market value compared to book value of equity is. Neither did we find any relation between how large the three largest owners where and how much information that was provided. Our results differ from earlier studies. One cause for that might be that we only picked three variables, while their studies could have included a lot more variables. Our study only focuses on a small part of the accountancy; if we had analyzed the entire accountancy we might have arrived to a different result. The year 2005 was furthermore the first year that the companies were obliged to follow the standard, which also could have had a certain impact on the result.

This master thesis compares the main differences between CAS and IFRS in the field of long-lived assets. The aim of the thesis is to analyze differences between CAS and IFRS in the field of long-lived assets and apply these differences to the example of the concrete entity. The thesis is divided into two major parts, the first part is a theoretical part and the second part is a practical part . The theoretical part focuses on long-lived tangible and intangible assets according to CAS and IFRS. At the end of the theoretical part there is a comparison and the main differencies between both accounting systems. The practical part describes specific accounting examples, comparing the impacts of individual accounting operations of long-lived assets of CAS and IFRS. These operations concern chosen items of long-lived assets, income statement and balance sheet. It describes the impacts of these accounting operations on the income statement and the balance sheet.