Inventory accounting method, Inventory accounting changes, Dynamic model, LIFO

We consider an economy with pure factors of production, private ownership of endowments and constant returns to scale in production. Typically in such an economy, the weak axiom of revealed preference for market demand does not hold. The main reason for this is that the income distribution in such a private ownership economy depends too sensitively on the price system.

Heuristic decision making, Product-Costing systems, Production decisions, Accounting systems

Abstract. The purpose of this paper is to describe certain aspects of specialized knowledge communication in auditing. The paper discusses the possible organizational responses an audit firm could make when competitive markets require efficient knowledge sharing among auditors and when economies of scale opportunities through division of responsibilities exist. Experienced auditors were surveyed about their consultation with others in their firms for specific types of clients and for different phases of audit engagements. In general, the results suggest limits to expertise‐related economies of scale in the audit setting studied. The required specialized knowledge seems to be close at hand and accessible in most engagements with little need to consult with nonlocal specialists. When consulted, however, the nonlocal specialists are believed to convey important information. Résumé. Les auteurs ont pour but de décrire certains aspects de la communication de connaissances spécialisées en vérification. Ils traitent des différentes réponses organisation‐nelles que peut donner un cabinet de vérification aux exigences des marchés concurrentiels relatives au partage efficient des connaissances chez les vérificateurs et à la possibilité de réaliser des économies d'échelle grâce au partage des responsabilités. Les auteurs ont interrogé des vérificateurs expérimentés dans le but de déterminer s'ils consultaient d'autres vérificateurs de leur cabinet au sujet de certains types précis de clients et pour différentes phases des missions de vérification. De façon générale, les résultats obtenus donnent à penser que les économies d'échelle reliées à l'expertise dans les contextes de vérification étudiés sont limitées. Dans la plupart des missions, il semble que les connaissances spécialisées requises soient à portée de la main et facilement accessibles, sans qu'il soit nécessaire de consulter des spécialistes de l'extérieur. On croit cependant que les spécialistes de l'extérieur livrent de l'information importante lorsqu'ils sont consultés.

Abstract. This paper examines the empirical validity of hypothesized relationships between the initial value of unseasoned common shares and information revealed to outside investors. In addition to the direct accounting disclosures contained in the offering prospectus, the entrepreneur is believed to signal the firm's true value through the proportion of ownership retained in the firm and the selection of prestigious underwriting services. The underwriter, in turn, intermediates in the disclosure of information to investors and applies a fee schedule which provides outsiders with further indications of project quality. Résumé. Les auteurs examinent la validité empirique des relations dont ils posent l'hypothèse entre la valeur des actions ordinaires lors d'une émission initiale et l'information livrée aux investisseurs extérieurs. En plus de l'information comptable directe contenue dans le prospectus d'émission, l'entrepreneur s'attend à ce que le pourcentage de la participation qu'il conserve dans l'entreprise et la sélection de services de prise ferme prestigieux soient des indicateurs de la valeur véritable de l'entreprise. Le preneur ferme, à son tour, joue le rôle d'intermédiaire dans la communication d'information aux investisseurs et applique un barème de frais qui véhicule, aux yeux des investisseurs extérieurs, d'autres indications au sujet de la qualité de l'émission.

Stock pride change associated with a given unexpected earnings change (the earnings response coefficient) exhibits cross-sectional and temporal variation. We predict and document evidence that the earnings response coefficient is a function of riskless interest rates and the riskiness, growth and/or persistence of earnings. The earnings response coefficient also varies cross-sectionally with the holding period return interval. Collectively, our results explain the previously reported differential earnings response coefficient with respect to size. Moreover, by including the factors noted above, the empirical specification of the earnings/returns relation is significantly improved.

[This study examines the choice of a regulatory accounting principle (RAP) in contrast to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) with respect to loan loss recognition in the savings and loan industry. RAP was permitted by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board for Savings and Loans (S&Ls) in the early 1980s. Many S&Ls selected this alternative to GAAP. We examine four factors, conditioned by accounting regulations in the S&L industry setting, hypothesized to explain the accounting choice. All of the factors are significant in logistic regression tests in which the choice of RAP or GAAP was the dependent variable. The results are consistent with the conclusion that S&Ls chose to violate GAAP when regulatory constraints induced a conflict between GAAP requirements and the economic welfare of the firm.]

This paper is concerned with the use of power properties of tests in econometric applications. Inverse power functions are defined. These functions are designed to yield summary measures of power that facilitate the interpretation of test results in practice. Simple approximations are introduced for the inverse power functions of Wald, likelihood ratio, Lagrange multiplier, and Hausman tests. These approximations readily convey the general qualitative features of the power of a test. Examples are provided to illustrate their usefulness in interpreting test results. A COMMON PROBLEM faced in applied econometrics is that of interpreting the results of a hypothesis test when the test fails to reject the null hypothesis. Most practitioners realize that just because a test fails to reject a hypothesis one cannot claim to accept it. Nevertheless, it is common for this to be ignored, since the practitioner is often in a position where he would like the outcome of the test to provide useful inferences whether or not the test rejects. The purpose of this paper is to introduce inverse power (IP) summary measures that enable the practitioner to avoid such errors and make valid inferences when a test fails to reject the null hypothesis. These summary measures are widely applicable, easy to use (especially in the common case of a test concerning a single restriction), and simple to compute. When a test rejects the null hypothesis, the implication is that the data are inconsistent with each parameter point in the null in the sense that the probabil- ity of type I error for each point is small, viz., a or less. Correspondingly, when a test fails to reject the null hypothesis an analogous statement is needed regarding the error probabilities for points in the alternative hypothesis. It is not the case that all points in the alternative are inconsistent with the data in the sense that their probability of type II error is small (a or less). It is possible, however, to determine the region S in the alternative parameter space that is inconsistent with the data in this sense. The IP function introduced below evaluated at

A number of analytical contributions have given sufficient conditions under which Leontief multiplier estimates are biased. This paper uses empirical data and a Monte Carlo framework to evaluate the problem of bias and obtains the opposite conclusions. For practical purposes, it appears that linear multiplier estimates are unbiased. The variance properties of these estimates are also evaluated. Copyright 1989 by MIT Press.

W. V. Harlow, Ramesh K. S. Rao, Asset Pricing in a Generalized Mean-Lower Partial Moment Framework: Theory and Evidence, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 24, No. 3 (Sep., 1989), pp. 285-311