We analyze the impact of IFRS 8 on the usefulness of segment reports from an investor's perspective. The analysis comprises three steps. First, we compare the value relevance of segment reports before and after the introduction of IFRS 8. Second, we analyze a treatment group of firms that had to change their segmentation upon IFRS 8 adoption and a control group that was unaffected by its introduction. Third, the requirement to report financial information for the current and previous year under current accounting rules allows us to analyze a unique data set of segment reports for the same company and the same year under two different standards. Our results based on German listed firms show superior value relevance of segment reports according to IFRS 8 compared to IAS 14 in all three steps. Additional analyses suggest that the adoption of IFRS 8 is also related to a decline in information asymmetry. Our findings are robust to a number of alternative specifications.

ABSTRACT We exploit a regulatory change in Singapore to analyze the capital market effects of mandatory quarterly reporting. The listing rule implemented in 2003 has required firms with a market capitalization above S$75 million—but not firms with a market capitalization below this threshold—to publish quarterly financial statements. Using regression discontinuity analysis for our identification, we provide novel evidence of the causal effects of mandatory quarterly reporting on small firms. We find a 5 percent decrease in firm value, consistent with the notion that mandatory quarterly reporting is perceived as a net burden for small firms. Contrary to popular belief, we cannot find evidence of informational benefits or myopic investment for firms around the threshold. Additional tests suggest positive information spillover effects from large mandatory quarterly reporters to non-quarterly reporting firms. JEL Classifications: M41; M48.

No abstract

No abstract

We analyze the extent to which individual audit partners influence the audited narrative disclosures in their clients’ financial reports. Using a sample of 3,281,423 private and public client firm-pairs, we find that the similarity among audited narrative disclosures is higher when two client firms share the same audit partner. Specifically, we find that the wording similarity of management reports (notes) increases by 30 (48) percent, the content similarity by 29 (49) percent, and the structure similarity by 48 (121) percent. Moreover, we find that audit partners in particular are relevant for their clients’ narrative disclosures because the increase in narrative disclosure similarity when sharing the same audit partner is nine (four) times greater than when sharing the same audit firm (audit office). We show that this influence of audit partners goes beyond adding boilerplate statements and, using novel field evidence, we shed light on the underlying mechanisms. Our findings are economically relevant because a stronger involvement of audit partners with their clients’ narratives is associated with a higher quality of narrative disclosures, which helps users better predict the future profitability of client firms.