Adopting a Label: Heterogeneity in the Economic Consequences of IFRS Adoptions *

By Holger Daske, Luzi Hail, Christian Leuz, Rodrigo S. Verdi. 2007

291 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/de948b3b554aa748b100fda3f9c2b840b18e2f9c

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Transparency and Liquidity Uncertainty in Crisis Periods (2011, background): “Prior research provides evidence that the use of international accounting standards and high quality auditors is most beneficial in environments in which there is substantial local oversight and litigation exposure [Daske et al. (2009) and Hope, Kang, Thomas and Yoo (2009)].”
The Impact of Mandatory IFRS Adoption on Equity Valuation of Accounting Numbers for Security Investors in the EU (2010, background): “(2007) suggest that firms opposing the transition to IFRS or towards more transparency are unlikely to make material changes to their reporting policies.”
Global Accounting Convergence and the Potential Adoption of IFRS by the United States: An Analysis of Economic and Policy Factors (2009, background): “Firms that oppose the switch to IFRS or towards more transparency are unlikely to make material changes to their reporting policies (e.g., Ball, 2006; Nobes, 2006; Christensen et al., 2007; Daske et al., 2007).”
Different approaches to corporate reporting regulation: How jurisdictions differ and why (2010, background): “…firms are subject to the same accounting standards, and that differences in reporting practices can be explained by differences in factors that shape firms’ reporting incentives (e.g., Ball et al., 2003; Ball and Shivakumar, 2005; Burgstahler et al., 2006; Lang et al., 2006; Daske et al., 2009).”
New institutional accounting and IFRS (2011, unknown): “Local capital markets, enforcement institutions and economic forces are simply too strong and diverse, making uniform implementation of IFRS around the globe highly unlikely (see also Ball 2006, Nobes 2006, Daske et al. 2008, 2009).”
Compliance with IFRS 3- and IAS 36-required disclosures across 17 European countries: company- and country-level determinants (2013, background): “…that reside in countries where early adoption was allowed but decided to wait until IFRS became mandatory (‘resisters’), and (iii) mandatory adopters, i.e. companies domiciled in countries not allowing early adoption (e.g. Christensen et al. 2008, Daske et al. 2008, 2011, Capkun et al. 2012).”
Are IFRS-based and US GAAP-based accounting amounts comparable? $ (2012, unknown): “The second is that Daske et al. (2007) reports that the Worldscope data field contains classification errors.”
On the global acceptance of IAS/IFRS accounting standards: The logic and implications of the principles-based system (2008, background): “…developing countries and economies in transition, empirical research addressing developed settings reveals that the flexibility of the IAS/IFRS standards may serve the purposes of label adoption (Daske et al., 2007a): that is, firms use flexibility to retain their traditional accounting policies.”