This paper focuses on earnings differentials in the for-profit and private nonprofit sectors, with specific reference to lawyers. An earnings equation for private lawyers is estimated and is used to predict what the nonprofit sector "public interest" lawyers could earn in the private sector. The finding is that the public interest lawyers are paid substantially less, that they know this, and that the financial sacrifice is permanent. Next, a job choice equation is estimated which suggests that those lawyers who choose public interest work have different "preferences" from those who choose private law practices. The difference may help to account for the willingness of the public interest lawyers to accept lower monetary rewards. Further research is needed to determine whether the differences found for lawyers in the two sectors are also found in other industries, and whether such differences are found only at the level of management or at lower levels. The goal is improved understanding of behavioral differences between for-profit and nonprofit firms.

Peter A. Silhan, The Effects of Segmenting Quarterly Sales and Margins on Extrapolative Forecasts of Conglomerate Earnings: Extension and Replication, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Spring, 1983), pp. 341-347

SFAS No. 55, Cash yield test, Common stock equivalency test, Convertible bonds

Until 1974, firms could capitalize or expense all or part of their research and development (R&D) costs. Managerial choice between these two alternatives is hypothesized to be affected by the existence of debt covenants which employ accounting numbers relating to leverage, interest coverage, and ability to pay dividends. In addition, the use of public versus private debt is hypothesized to affect the accounting choice due to differential renegotiation costs. Lastly, a political cost hypothesis is tested. This study uses a multivariate statistical technique, the generalized jackknife. The results suggest that firms which capitalized R&D costs were more highly levered, used more public debt, were closer to dividend restrictions, and were smaller than firms which expensed R&D costs.

Quarterly earnings, Predictive ability, Overfitting bias, Earnings forecasts

Auditing, Financial forecasts