Recognition, Disclosures, Oil and Gas industry, Mandatory disclosure

The Value Relevance of Intangibles: The Case of Software Capitalization Author(s): David Aboody and Baruch Lev Source: Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 36, Studies on Enhancing the Financial Reporting Model (1998), pp. 161-191 Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of Accounting Research Center, Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2491312 Accessed: 14/09/2010 16:12

Previous research argues that earnings quality, measured as the unsigned abnormal accruals, proxies for information asymmetries that affect cost of capital. We examine this argument directly in two stages. In the first stage, we estimate firms' exposure to an earnings quality factor in the context of a Fama‐French three‐factor model augmented by the return on a factor‐mimicking portfolio that is long in low earnings quality firms and short in high earnings quality firms. In the second stage, we examine whether the earnings quality factor is priced and whether insider trading is more profitable for firms with higher exposure to that factor. Generally speaking, we find evidence consistent with pricing of the earnings quality factor and insiders trading more profitably in firms with higher exposure to that factor.

An interesting question in assessing value relevance of accounting variables is whether measures of value relevance are materially affected by market inefficiencies. We explore this question in two steps: First, we analytically examine the impact of market inefficiencies on the estimation of coefficients in value relevance regressions and derive a procedure that corrects potential biases caused by such inefficiencies. The procedure adjusts contemporaneous stock prices for future risk adjusted price changes, and yields value relevance coefficient estimates that capture both contemporaneous and delayed market reactions. Second, we apply this procedure to three types of studies that have attracted much attention in the accounting literature: 1) the value relevance of earnings and book values; 2) the value relevance of residual income value estimates; and 3) the value relevance of accruals and cash flows. We compare coefficient estimates obtained from conventional value relevance regressions with those from regressions employing our adjustment procedure, and find statistically significant differences in both level and return regression coefficient estimates. The magnitude of differences in coefficient estimates for return regressions is large enough to affect economic inferences. We find that coefficients of lagged price deflated residual income value estimates move significantly closer toward a predicted value of one implying a meaningful reduction of bias. Last, we find that cash flows now have significantly larger coefficient estimates than accruals consistent with their greater persistence.

We investigate factors associated with firms' decisions in 2002 and early 2003 to recognize stock‐based compensation expense under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123. We find that the likelihood of SFAS 123 expense recognition is significantly related to the extent of the firm's participation in capital markets, the private incentives of top management and members of the board of directors, the level of information asymmetry, and political costs. Although recognizing firms have significantly smaller SFAS 123 expense, we find no significant incremental relation between recognition likelihood and SFAS 123 expense magnitude after controlling for other factors that we expect explain the recognition decision. We also find positive and significant announcement returns for earlier announcing firms, particularly those stating that increased earnings transparency motivates their decision.