Abstract This paper uses stock market data to investigate the popular claim that investors are misled by the “pro forma” earnings numbers conspicuously featured in the press releases of some U.S. firms. We first document the frequency and magnitude of pro forma earnings in press releases issued during June through August 2000, and describe the 433 firms that engaged in this financial disclosure strategy. Our test period predates public expressions of concern by trade associations and regulators that pro forma earnings may mislead investors and the subsequent issuance of guidelines and rules on the disclosure of pro forma earnings numbers. We use two complementary approaches to determine whether the share prices that investors assign to pro forma firms are systematically higher than the prices assigned to other firms. Our market‐multiples tests for differences in price levels find some evidence suggesting that pro forma firms may be priced higher than firms that do not use the disclosure strategy. This apparent overpricing is not, however, related to the pro forma earnings numbers themselves. Our narrow‐window stock returns tests reveal no evidence of a stock return premium for pro forma firms at the quarterly earnings announcement date. Collectively, the results cast doubt on the notion that investors are, on average, misled by pro forma earnings disclosures despite the widespread concern expressed in the financial press and by regulators.

Abstract In this study, we incorporate taxpayers' threat /opportunity perceptions into our analysis of taxpayer behavior in order to refine and extend our understanding of the internal cognitive forces that shape taxpayer behavior. Decision‐making frames (that is, the gain and loss domains from the prospect theory value function) and individual perceptions (that is, perceptions of decision alternatives as being threats or opportunities) are both likely to influence behavior, yet prior research has generally ignored the behavioral effects of individual perceptions. The results of our experiment reveal that taxpayers who are due a tax refund (owe additional taxes) prior to considering a judgemental tax deduction tend to perceive the conservative (aggressive) tax deduction to be more of an opportunity/less of a threat. In turn, we find that taxpayer frames have a direct effect on taxpayer behavior and an indirect effect on behavior through their effect on taxpayers' threat/opportunity perceptions. Perhaps the most important message of this study is that researchers can advance our understanding of the internal cognitive processes that shape taxpayer behavior by incorporating taxpayer perceptions into their research designs.