Suchergebnisse

This book is a timely addition to the fast-growing international debate on Integrated Reporting, which offers a holistic view of the evolution and practice of Integrated Reporting. The book covers the determinants and consequences of Integrated Reporting, as well as examining some of the most relevant issues (particularly in the context of the United States) in the debate about Integrated Reporting. The authors address key topics relating to Integrated Reporting such as: the extent to which consistency between integrated and other company reporting can be achieved, and the fundamental role of integrated thinking within a company setting. More specifically, the book provides a detailed discussion about the role of institutional investors, corporate governance systems and cultural variables in the practice of Integrated Reporting. The book contextualises Integrated Reporting as a practice within the broader realm of international accounting standards, with insight into its impact upon global markets

This book is a timely addition to the fast-growing international debate on Integrated Reporting, which offers a holistic view of the evolution and practice of Integrated Reporting. The book covers the determinants and consequences of Integrated Reporting, as well as examining some of the most relevant issues (particularly in the context of the United States) in the debate about Integrated Reporting. The authors address key topics relating to Integrated Reporting such as: the extent to which consistency between integrated and other company reporting can be achieved, and the fundamental role of integrated thinking within a company setting. More specifically, the book provides a detailed discussion about the role of institutional investors, corporate governance systems and cultural variables in the practice of Integrated Reporting. The book contextualises Integrated Reporting as a practice within the broader realm of international accounting standards, with insight into its impact upon global markets.

The Malaysian Accounting Standard Board 'MASB' issued FRS 119 'Employee Benefits' which became effective for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2010. This standard is further superseded by MFRS 119 (i.e. as amended by IASB in June 2011) with effect from 1 January 2013. Hence, the present study provides evidence on the practice of pension accounting disclosures after the implementation of FRS 119 'Employee Benefits' and their stock market reactions 'cumulative market adjusted return'. The study reveals that seventy (70) companies have adopted Defined Benefit (DB) pension schemes based on the annual reports for the year 2009. Among these companies, seven (7) companies have pension assets disclosures while another 63 companies pension liabilities disclosures. The pension accounting disclosures related to actuarial gains and losses are only provided by 29 Malaysian companies. In addition, multivariate analysis provides interesting results that indicate pension liabilities disclosures are significant variables in relation to CMAR. These findings may suggest that DB pension schemes with high disclosures of pension liabilities are less likely contributing to high value of CMAR. In this context, the users of corporate financial statements could be expected (1) to value the amount of pension liabilities more than amount of pension assets among DB pension schemes adopters; and (2) higher amount of pension liabilities may result in lower CMAR among DB pension schemes adopters in Malaysia. On the other hand, pension assets disclosures which are positively and significantly associated to CMAR indicate that the higher of pension assets disclosed in by DB pension adopters in the financial statements, the higher of CMAR will be offered by Malaysian listed companies. These disclosures of pension asset could help the aging population in planning the retirement needs in the future. In addition, users of financial statements may be worth to be attentive and wacthful in relation to the amount of pension assets which are disclosed in the annual reports in order to make decision on buying and selling of company securities.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the extent and quality of voluntary intellectual capital disclosures (ICD) by professional accounting firms (PAFs) in the UK.Design/methodology/approachThe research method adopted for this study is content analysis considering the ICD in firms' annual reports, corporate social responsibility reports, websites and recruitment materials. The sample for this research is based on 20 PAFs ranked by fee income. The paper employs institutional theory as its theoretical lens.FindingsThe findings of this paper show that ICDs vary across different forms of reports. The most frequently reported disclosure category is human capital, while the least reported category is internal capital. Monetary disclosures are most likely to relate to internal capital, while pictorial disclosures are most likely to relate to human capital.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample size of the study is relatively small reflecting the extreme market concentration of accounting services in the UK and internationally. Future research can conduct a longitudinal study to capture the trend of reporting practices and consider narrative and discursive approaches to ICD.Originality/valueNo previous studies of intellectual capital (IC) disclosure have considered ICDs in professional service firms that are in themselves rich sources of human capital. Furthermore, the investigation uses a wide range of communications and assesses monetary, non-monetary, narrative and pictorial disclosures. This research extends both the IC disclosure and PAFs' literatures.

The current study examines the voluntary disclosures (provided in the U.S.) by U.S.-listed Asian companies. Our findings indicate that significantly fewer (greater) voluntary disclosures are provided by U.S.-listed Asian companies from countries which have a strict (less strict) mandatory disclosure regime in their home country. This finding is contrary to the model developed in Einhorn 2005. In addition, this study documents that over 80 percent of U.S.-listed Asian companies are voluntarily using "international" standards for their financial statements and thus contributing towards international accounting convergence. However, their choice to use "international" standards is not affected by their proportion of foreign sales or size. An important contribution of this study is the development of a measure for strictness of mandatory disclosure regimes of Asian countries by using expert rankings.

Muhasebe sisteminin ürettiği bilgiler ve veriler, ekonomide ve sektörde yaşanan değişimlerin yanı sıra, işletme içinde alınan kararların şirket yapısı ve faaliyet sonuçları üzerine etkilerini de yansıtmaktadır. Şirketlerin piyasada karşılaştıkları riskler finansal bilgi kullanıcıları için önem arz etmektedir. Bu konuda uluslararası muhasebe uygulamasına yönelik oluşturulan standartlar da, kamuoyuna açıklanacak bilgilerde şirketlerin maruz kaldıkları riskleri içermesi gerektiğini belirtmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye'de finansal tablolarını uluslararası muhasebe standartlarına göre düzenleyen şirketlerin risk açıklamalarını analiz etmek ve muhasebe verileri ile risk arasındaki ilişkiye ışık tutmaktır. Bu kapsamda BİST İmalat sektöründe yer alan şirketlerin 2020 yılına ilişkin risk açıklamaları, içerik yönünden analize tabi tutulmuştur. Analiz soncunda, TFRS 9 da yer alan türev ürünler ile riskten korunma muhasebesinin finansal tablolardaki durumu ile TFRS 7'de yer alan finansal araçlardan kaynaklanan risk çeşitleri ile ilgili veriler ortaya konulmuştur. Buna göre, şirketlerin %32'sinin türev araç kullandığı, %20'sinin riskten korunma muhasebesi uyguladığı belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca şirketlerin, 2020 yılına ilişkin kredi, likidite, piyasa ve diğer risk açıklamalarına ilişkin, nitel ve nicel açıklama verileri de analiz edilmiştir. Dipnotlarda finansal araçlardan kaynaklanan riskler bölümünde, en çok verinin yabancı para riski ile ilgili olduğu saptanmıştır. Kredi riski açıklamaları yapan şirketlerin %50'sinin vade analizi yapmadığı görülmüştür. Son olarak faiz oranı riski, diğer fiyat riski ve sermaye riskine yönelik açıklamalar da, içerik yönünden analiz edilmiştir.