Purpose -This paper seeks to examine whether companies are providing transparent financial disclosures in compiling with the provisions of SFAS No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets", and to determine whether the adequacy of these disclosures is impacted by firm size. Design/methodology/approach -The authors conducted a random sample of companies that reported goodwill impairments for the first year of adoption of SFAS No. 142. The firms were then stratified into three groups according to asset size. Subsequent analysis consisted of assessing the financial transparency of companies' goodwill reporting practices in total and by firm size, utilizing an approach suggested in Adams. Findings -The study's findings suggest that many companies are not willing to provide additional voluntary disclosures to improve financial transparency, despite having the necessary information easily accessible. It also found that compliance with the provisions of SFAS 142 was sporadic and unpredictable.Originality/value -This study provides evidence that companies are not providing transparent financial information.

Statement of Financial Standards No. 133 (SFAS No. 133), “Accounting for derivative instruments and hedging activities” became effective for all publicly held companies for fiscal periods starting after 15 December 2000. Consequently, 31 December 2001 was the first reporting date for most companies under its provisions. This study examines the annual reports of the 30 companies that comprise the Dow Jones Industrial Average to determine the extent to which these companies complied with the provisions of SFAS No. 133. A surprising finding was that a large number of the sample companies reported that the effect of their hedging activities was immaterial. The study also found that the information disclosed about the derivatives held by the sample of companies was scattered throughout their annual reports, hard to understand, difficult to follow and lacked uniformity. It was concluded that it would take a great deal of effort for even a reasonably informed reader of the financial statements to gather and analyze the information relating to a company's use of derivatives, and as a result the desired level of financial transparency on the use of derivative financial instruments is not being achieved. It is recommended that a more uniform reporting format be developed and used.

Audit fees, Compliance cost, Cross listing, International implications, Sarbanes–Oxley, M41,

Economic impact, Fair value, SFAS 157, M41 Accounting,

No abstract