Do Analysts and Investors Fully Appreciate the Implications of Book‐Tax Differences for Future Earnings?*

By David P. Weber. 2009

169 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fc107ab532ccd5a495f229178c7b942b90db6b2b

How researchers see this paper

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

In Accounting

1. Sunhwa Choi
2. J. Chae
3. David B. Farber
4. Bok Baik
5. Fabio B. Gaertner
6. Alex Edmans
7. P. Kent
8. J. Stewart

In Strategy and Management

1. Sunhwa Choi
2. J. Chae
3. David B. Farber
4. Bok Baik
5. Fabio B. Gaertner

Citations in the corpus

• A review of tax research (2010, unknown): “14 Weber (2009) examines whether Lev and Nissim’s return results are attributable to mispricing or risk.”
• Tax Aggressiveness and Corporate Transparency (2019, unknown): “In a similar vein, Guay, 6 For example, Lev and Nissim (2004) and Weber (2009) find that the ratio of taxable income to book income is useful in predicting earnings growth, and Hanlon (2005) documents that extreme book-tax differences provide a signal on the persistence of accruals.”
• Changes in Operational Efficiency and Firm Performance: A Frontier Analysis Approach (2013, methodology): “One set of studies finds that analysts do not fully impound accounting information in their forecasts (e.g., Abarbanell and Bernard 1992; Bradshaw, Richardson, and Sloan 2001; Weber 2009).”
• CEO After-Tax Compensation Incentives and Corporate Tax Avoidance (2014, background): “Prior literature shows that analysts do not fully comprehend firms’ tax implications (Weber 2009).”