Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/18870
標題: 再探不同財務會計處理方法對資本市場反應之影響-以研究發展支出為例
The Impact of Differences in Accounting Regimes on Stock Market Reaction - The Case of R&D Expenditures
作者: 鄭衣麗
Yi, Li-Cheng
關鍵字: 研究發展支出;Research & Development Expenditures;國際財務報導準則;美國財務報導準則;資本市場反應;International Financial Reporting Standards;Statement of Financial Accounting Standard;Capital Market Reaction
出版社: 會計學研究所
引用: 一、中文部份 馬嘉應和盧聯生。民國九十二年。「電子商務之研究發展支出資本支出與股東報 酬之探討」。中國經濟評論第三卷第八期。 江美艷與陳怡婷。民國95年。「勤業眾信通訊」。九月號。 二、西文部份 Aboody, D. and B. Lev, 1998, ”The Value Relevance of Intangibles:The Case of Software Capitalization,” Journal of Accounting Research Supplement, Vol.36,pp.161-191. Aboody, D. and B. Lev, 2000, “Information Asymmetry, R&D, and Insider Gains,” Journal of Finance, Vol.55, No.6, pp.2747–2767. Amir, E., T. S. Harris and E. K. Venuti, 1993, “A Comparison of the Value-relevance of US versus Non-US-GAAP Accounting Measures Using Form 20-F Reconciliations,” Journal of Accounting Research Supplement, Vol.31, pp.230-264. Ampofo, A. A. and R. J. Sellani, 2005, “Examining the Differences between United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) and International Accounting Standards (IAS): Implications for the Harmonization of Accounting Standards,” Accounting Forum, Vol.29, No.2, pp.219-231. Ashbaugh, H. and M. Pincus, 2001, “Domestic Accounting Standards, International Accounting Standards, and the Predictability of Earnings,” Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.39, No.3, pp.417-434. Ball, R., S. P. Kothari and A. Robin, 2000, “The Effect of International Institutional Factors on Properties of Accounting Earnings,” Vol.29, No.1, pp.1-51. Banz, R. W., 1981, “The Relationship between Return and Market Value of Common Stocks,” Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 9, No.1, pp.3-18. Bartov, E., S. Goldberg and M. Kim, 2005, “Comparative Value Relevance among German, U.S., and International Accounting Standards: A German Stock Market Perspective,” Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, Vol.20, No.2, pp.95−119. Barth, M. E. and G. Clinch, 1996, “International Accounting Differences and Their Relation to Share Prices: Evidence from U.K., Australian, and Canadian Firms,” Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol.13, No.1, pp.135-170. Bayless, R., J. Cochrane, T. Harris, J. Leisenring, J. McLaughlin and J.P. Wirtz, 1996, “International Access to US Capital Markets - An AAA Forum on Accounting Policy,” Accounting Horizons, Vol.10, No.1, pp.75-94. Biddle, G. C. and S. M. Saudagaran, 1991, “Foreign Stock Listings: Benefits, Costs, and the Accounting Policy Dilemma,” Accounting Horizons, Vol.5, pp.69-80. Blanco, J. L. U. and B. G. Osma, 2004, “The Comparability of International Accounting Standards and US GAAP: An Empirical Study of Form 20-F Reconciliations,” International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, Vol.1, No.1, pp.5-36. Cazavan-Jeny, A. and T. Jeanjean, 2006, “The Negative Impact of R&D Capitalization: A Value Relevance Approach,” European Accounting Review, Vol.15, No.1, pp.37-61. Chan, K. C. and G. S. Seow, 1996, “The Association between Stock Returns and Foreign GAAP Earnings versus Earnings Adjusted to U.S. GAAP,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol.21, No.1, pp.139-158. Easton, P. D. and T. S. Harris, 1991, “Earnings as An Explanatory Variable for Returns,” Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.29, No.1, pp.19-36. FASB, 1974, “Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 2: Accounting for Research and Development Costs,” FASB, Norwalk, CT. Gornik-Tomaszewski, S. and M. A. Millan, 2005, “Accounting for Research and Development Costs,” Review of Business, Vol.26, No.2, pp.42-47. Grabowski, H. G. and D. C. Mueller, 1978, “Industrial Research and Development, Intangible Capital Stocks, and Firm Profit Rate,” The Bell Journal of Economics, Vol.9, No.2, pp.328-343. Harris, M. and K. Muller III, 1999, “The Market Valuation of IAS versus U.S.-GAAP Accounting Measures Using Form 20-F Reconciliations,” Journal of Accounting & Economics, Vol.26, pp.285−312. Han, B. H. and D. Manry, 2004, “The Value-relevance of R&D and Advertising Expenditures: Evidence from Korea,” The International Journal of Accounting, Vol.39, No.2, pp.155–173. IASB, 2004, International Accounting Standard No. 38: Intangible Assets, IASC, London, England. Kothari, S. P., and J. L. Zimmerman, 1995, “Price and Return Models,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol.20, No.2, pp. 155 – 192. Leuz, C., 2003, ”IAS versus U.S. GAAP: Information-asymmetry Based Evidence from Germany''s New Market,” Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.41, No.3, pp.445-472. Lev, B., 1989, “On The Usefulness of Earnings and Earnings Research: Lessons and Directions from Two Decades of Empirical Research,” Journal of Accounting Research Supplement, Vol.27, pp.153-192. Lev, B. and T. Sougiannis, 1996, “The Capitalization, Amortization and Value Relevance of R&D,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol.21, No.1, pp. 107-138. Lev, B., T. Sougiannis and B. Sarath , 2005, “R&D Reporting Biases and Their Consequences,” Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol.22, No.4, pp.977-1026. Lev, B. and P. Zarowin, 1999, “The Boundaries of Financial Reporting and How to Extend Them,” Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.37, No.2, pp.353-385. Madden, D., 1972, “The Materiality of Research and Development Expenditures,” Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.10, No.2, pp.417-420. McGregor, W., 1999, “An Insider’s View of the Current State and Future Direction of International Accounting Standard Setting,” Accounting Horizon, Vol.13, No.2, pp.159–168. Meulen, S. V., A. Gaeremynck and M. Wilekens, 2007, “Attribute Differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS Earnings: An Exploratory Study,” The International Journal of Accounting, Vol.42, No2, pp.123-142. Ohlson, J. A., 1995, “Earnings, book values, and dividends in security valuations,” Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol.11, No.2, pp.661-687. Pope, P. F. and W. P. Rees, 1992, “International Differences in GAAP and the Pricing of Earnings,” Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, Vol.4, No.3, pp.190-219. Vincent, L., L. Maines, E. Bartov, P. Farifield, D. Hirst, T. Iannaconi, et al., 2003, “Evaluating Concepts-based vs. Rules-based Approaches to Standard Setting,” Accounting Horizons, Vol.17, No.1, pp.73-89. Zhao, R., 2002, “Relative Value Relevance of R&D Reporting:An International Comparison,” Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, Vol. 13, No 2, pp.153-175.
摘要: 
由於文化與商業習性的差異,導致各國財務報導準則之制定皆以符合其國情為主。然而,各國財務報導準則之差異使財務報表之比較性降低,並進而增加跨國籌資之成本與困難度。職是之故,國際會計準則委員會(International Accounting Standards Board,IASB)與美國財務會計準則委員會(Financial Accounting Standards Board,FASB)正著手進行兩大準則之調和(harmonization),以期制定一套足以反映資本市場快速變動的本質,並可便利國際間比較的準則。本研究主要檢視目前兩大財務報導準則的差異性對資本市場可能產生的影響,本文以研究發展支出為例。在現存的差異裡,美國財務報導準則第2號公報(SFAS No.2)將研究發展支出立即費用化,而國際財務報導準則第38號公報(IAS No.38)則要求發展支出必須符合特定條件的規定,方可予以資本化,並將相關研究支出以費用入帳。前者造成淨利和淨資產之減少,後者則導致淨利和淨資產增加,因而使投資人無法在一致的基礎下比較不同公司的經營績效和財務狀況。
本文以在美國上市的外國公司為研究對象,研究期間為2004年到2006年。實證結果發現,在評價模型裡,因研究發展支出準則處理的不同所導致的帳面價值差異對於公司權益價值有顯著影響,代表將研究發展支出予以適當地資本化,對於投資者而言,將對公司價值產生正面提升的作用。然而,在報酬模型裡,因研究發展支出處理準則的不同所造成的淨利差異之變動數對於股價報酬呈現邊際顯著(marginal significant)的負相關性。此結果指出兩套準則對於研究發展支出費用認列方式的不同,可能使投資者感到困惑,進而造成公司報酬下降。本文之實證結果可提供目前正在進行的全球會計準則調和工作之實證參考,也可供準則制定者決策之依據。

Due to the differences in the culture and business environment characteristics, every country has its own specific financial reporting standards. However, the existence of variances in the financial reporting standards would impair the comparability of financial reports and further increase the costs of financing and difficulties across borders. The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) have thus tried to harmonize the two major financial reporting regimes - the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) and the Statement of Financial Accounting standard (SFAS), in the hope of establishing a set of accounting standards that can reflect the nature of the fast grow capital market and increasing the comparability. This paper aims to examine whether the divergence of the two accounting regimes would have any possible impact on the stock market, using the R&D Expenditures as an example. The Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No.2 mandates immediate expensing of all research and development costs; whereas the International Accounting Standard (IAS) No.38 requires capitalizing the development costs, if certain criteria are met. IAS No. 38 also requests expensing relative research costs. The former would under-estimate net income and net assets, while the latter would overestimate net income and net assets. Investors thus could not evaluate management's performance and financial condition on the same basis for different companies.

This paper analyzes the foreign companies listed in the America; these companies issue American Depository Receipts (ADRs) over the period of 2005-2006. The empirical results indicate that the book value diversities result from the different accounting regimes have a significant effect on firm values in the price model. This suggests that firm values would increase as perceived by the investors. Nonetheless, the variations in the change of net income, due to different accounting regimes, has only marginal negative impact in the return model. The result suggests that investors are confused about the different ways of recognizing the R&D expenditures, and hence lead to a drop in the returns. Bring together, the empirical results could provide empirical evidence to support the convergence of accounting standards across borders, and would also aid the police makers to make decisions.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/18870
其他識別: U0005-1806200815394300
Appears in Collections:會計學系所

Show full item record
 

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.