It is well recognized that stock prices provide relevant feedback that can guide future firm decisions. This paper develops a model to examine how accounting disclosures affect the decision-usefulness of such stock market reactions. We demonstrate that information in accounting reports can prove useful because it helps observers better interpret and isolate the decision-relevant information embedded in the ensuing stock price reaction. This leads to natural synergies between accounting reports and stock prices in directing firm strategies—the more forward-looking information that can potentially be gleaned from stock prices, the more the firm will invest in improving precision of accounting disclosures even when such disclosures pertain to unrelated current activities

Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Citation Patrick J. Harvey; Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike. The Accounting Review 1 July 2017; 92 (4): 269–272. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-10538 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe Accounting Review Search Advanced Search

Despite the increased frequency of analyst forecasts during earnings announcements, empirical evidence on the interaction between the information in the earnings announcement and these forecasts is limited. We examine the implications of reinforcing and contradicting analyst forecast revisions issued during earnings announcements (days 0 and +1) on the market response to unexpected earnings. We classify forecast revisions as reinforcing (contradicting) when the sign of analyst forecast revisions agrees (disagrees) with the sign of unexpected earnings. We document larger (smaller) earnings response coefficients for announcements accompanied by reinforcing (contradicting) analyst forecast revisions. Analyses of management forecasts suggest that analyst revisions and management forecasts convey complementary information. Cross-sectional tests show that investors react more to earnings announcements accompanied by analyst forecast revisions when there is greater consensus among analysts (lower dispersion) and that better earnings quality (higher persistence) mitigates the negative impact of contradictory analyst forecast revisions.

Although balanced budget rules are widely used throughout the world, there is considerable debate on whether and how they impact fiscal outcomes. Existing research shows that states with strict balanced budget rules address deficits by raising taxes and curbing expenditures. However, little is known about whether politicians can meet budget rules by shifting resources inter-temporally or by transferring revenues from funds not subject to balanced budget rules into funds that are required to meet a balanced budget. We show that, in addition to increasing taxes and cutting expenditures, states with strict balanced budget rules sell public assets and transfer resources across government funds to close the budget shortfall. Our findings suggest that current budget deficits not only influence the current-period taxpayers, but also impact future taxpayers and other funds within the government. The results complement existing research by expanding our understanding of the effects of balanced budget restrictions on politicians' fiscal actions.

A fundamental accounting question is whether investors perceive low risk when earnings are smooth relative to the volatility of operating cash flows. We conduct two experiments to examine this question. Absent additional information concerning the likelihood of earnings management, our first experiment finds that investors give managers the benefit of the doubt and perceive low risk when earnings are relatively smooth. Given this finding, our second experiment examines whether additional information that supports investors' suspicions of earnings management affects investors' risk judgments when earnings are relatively smooth. We find that investors no longer give managers the benefit of the doubt when additional information suggests that managers have either the opportunity or the incentive to report smooth earnings. Our study provides important insights to the literature concerning both “whether” and “when” relatively smooth earnings affect investors' risk judgments. Data Availability: Contact the authors.

We investigate the effects of audit partner rotation among U.S. publicly listed firms, utilizing the fact that audit partners are periodically copied by name in public correspondence between issuers and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Relative to non-rotation firms, we find no evidence of a change in the frequency of misstatements following the partner rotation; however, there is an increase in the frequency of restatement discoveries and announcements. We also find an increase in deferred tax valuation allowances. Overall, the results provide some evidence suggesting that U.S. partner rotations support a fresh look at the audit engagement. JEL Classifications: M41; M42; M48. Data Availability: Data are publicly available from sources identified in the article.

Overconfident CEOs are more willing to initiate investment projects that require experimentation, yet tend to defer responding to the bad news when the project is not performing as planned. Accounting conservatism accelerates the recognition of the bad news and its dissemination to gatekeepers, making it more likely that the CEO will acknowledge the problem earlier and start searching for solutions. Therefore, firms where both characteristics—CEO overconfidence and accounting conservatism—are present should perform better. Our empirical tests confirm this prediction: firms that practice conservative accounting and are run by overconfident CEOs exhibit better cash flow performance. Our results continue to hold in a variety of settings, including market reactions to acquisitions, cash flow downside risk, and analyst following. Further, the joint positive effect of CEO overconfidence and accounting conservatism on firm performance is stronger in high-uncertainty environments and in firms facing less stringent financing constraints, consistent with theoretical predictions.

Using a financial reporting and valuation model, we investigate the construct validity of Basu's (1997) asymmetric timeliness (AT) regression coefficient as a measure of conditional conservatism in corporate financial reporting. We predict that the AT coefficient will be positive even in the absence of conditional conservatism, and it will vary with non-accounting factors even if the degree of conditional conservatism is held constant. Our empirical analysis shows that AT coefficient estimates vary in directions predicted by our theory. Specifically, we find that AT coefficient estimates increase with expected returns and asymmetry in the distribution of returns, and decrease with cash flow persistence. Importantly, we identify the spread between the variances of bad news and good news accruals as an alternative measure of conditional conservatism that is free of the effects confounding the AT coefficient. Consistent with a key implication of conditional conservatism, we find that the variance of bad news accruals is significantly higher than the variance of good news accruals primarily due to conditionally conservative accruals related to inventory write-downs, long-term asset write-downs, and goodwill impairments. A series of placebo tests provides additional support for the construct validity of our alternative measure of conditional conservatism. Data Availability: Data are publicly available from the sources indicated in the text.