Domestic Accounting Standards, International Accounting Standards, and the Predictability of Earnings

By Hollis Ashbaugh, Morton Pincus. 2001

788 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b43cf010103aa6ff998d81a2819569aa35456ba6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

The voluntary adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards and loan contracting around the world (2011, neutral): “, Ashbaugh and Pincus 2001). Bharath et al. (2008) provide evidence suggesting that lenders use more stringent (non-price) contractual terms for borrowers with poor reporting quality.”
Relevance of Differences Between Net Income Based on IFRS and Domestic Standards for European Firms (2012, neutral): “For example, Bae et al. (2008) reviews 21 standards in 49 countries and identifies differences between the requirements of those standards and those of each country’s domestic standards.”
Why do national GAAP differ from IAS? The role of culture (2005, background): “…are out of date (Price Waterhouse International, 1973, 1975, 1979); others concern only a limited number of countries (Ordelheide & Semler, 1995; Ashbaugh & Pincus, 2001), cover only a selection of accounting issues (Adhikari & Tondkar, 1992) or deal with measurement of accounting differences…”
The Role of Firm-Specific Incentives and Country Factors in Explaining Voluntary IAS Adoptions: Evidence from Private Firms (2008, positive): “Consistent with these arguments, listed firms applying IAS have been found to exhibit less earnings management, more timely loss recognition, more value relevant accounting numbers and smaller analyst forecast errors than non-adopting firms (Ashbaugh and Pincus, 2001; Barth et al., 2005).”
Understanding Earnings Quality: A Review of the Proxies, Their Determinants and Their Consequences (2010, background): “, reduce analyst forecast error); Ashbaugh and Pincus (2001), who suggest that IAS is of higher quality than a firm’s home country GAAP; and Bhattacharya et al. (2003a), who show that pro forma earnings are of higher quality than GAAP operating earnings. Further, Kim and Schroeder (1990) show that a”
International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality (2008, positive): “5 Findings in Ashbaugh and Pincus (2001) also suggest that IAS are of higher quality by showing that firms using IAS exhibit smaller analyst forecast errors.”
The Determinants and Consequences of Heterogeneous IFRS Compliance Levels Following Mandatory IFRS Adoption: Evidence from a Developing Country (2011, positive): “First, Ashbaugh and Pincus (2001) find a negative association between domestic GAAP-IAS differences and analysts’ earnings forecast accuracy. After the adoption of IAS, they find a corresponding improvement in analysts’ forecast accuracy, suggesting an improvement in firm information environment. Ba”
Adopting a Label: Heterogeneity in the Economic Consequences of IFRS Adoptions * (2007, background): “Using a small sample of IAS adoptions before 1993, Ashbaugh and Pincus (2001) present evidence suggesting that analysts’ forecast accuracy improves after IAS adoption.”
IFRS Adoption and Accounting Quality: A Review (2007, background): “Ashbaugh and Pincus (2001) investigate whether analyst forecast errors decrease after a firm adopts IAS.”