The number of countries that have adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in some form has grown each year. However, the existing literature generally ignores the varied types and the complex timing of IFRS adoption. Our paper provides a cross-reference of IFRS adoption dates and types for 195 countries and territories around the world. This definitive data, including an extensive online dataset, was developed to help researchers better identify IFRS adoption events in the samples used in their empirical studies. Additionally, we highlight potential challenges in identifying IFRS adoption types and dates as well as provide areas of future research that can benefit from our dataset, which can be accessed online https://about.illinoisstate.edu/mktrimb/song-trimble-2022-dataset/ .

No abstract

Purpose This paper aims to compare US market reactions to the restatement announcements of foreign firms listed in the USA and those of US firms by applying the Capital Market Liability of Foreignness (CMLOF) concept. It further investigates the incremental effect of an improved information environment, proxied by analyst following, on mitigating the negative market reaction to a restatement for foreign vs domestic firms. Design/methodology/approach Regression tests are performed on a matched-sample, which matches foreign and domestic firms based on industry and firm size. Market reaction is defined as three-day abnormal stock returns calculated using a market model. The sources of CMLOF are defined as institutional distance, information costs, unfamiliarity costs and cultural distance. Findings Results suggest that, on average, the magnitude of the market reaction to a restatement is 1.8 per cent lower for foreign firms than for domestic firms. Information and unfamiliarity costs contribute to the differing market reactions. In addition, it appears that the improved information environment created by a higher analyst following is more important for foreign firms who face CMLOF than for domestic firms. Originality/value While prior research establishes a negative market reaction to restatement announcements, comparing the market reactions for foreign and domestic firms provides evidence regarding whether US investors treat foreign and domestic firms differently. Additionally, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that examines CMLOF using restatement announcements.

This paper investigates the determinants of foreign firms’ value in U.S. markets by examining both firm and country characteristics. Prior studies have agreed on foreign firms’ value premium when they cross-list stocks in U.S. exchanges. However, little research has pursued evidence regarding how these foreign firms are valued after the cross-listing. I attempt to answer this question by comparing the determinants of firm value for both foreign cross-listing firms and U.S. domestic firms. The results from regression models show that, although foreign firms share similar firm-level determinants with U.S. firms (firm size, firm leverage, and firm growth), they are on average undervalued by U.S. investors. Furthermore, the home countries’ characteristics, such as the rule of law, play an important role in foreign firms’ market value. In fact, the undervaluation is only observed in foreign firms from the weak rule of law countries, but not from strong rule of law countries. Overall, foreign firms’ market value is determined by both firm-level and country-level characteristics after they cross-list in the U.S. markets.

This paper investigates whether the U.S. market rewards cross-listed foreign firms and domestic firms differently when they meet or beat earnings expectations (MBE). Using 1,800 matched pairs of foreign firms and domestic firms from year 2005 to 2014, we find that (1) the MBE premium is discounted for foreign firms compared to U.S. domestic firms, (2) although the reward for MBE is discounted for foreign firms, they suffer a similar penalty as domestic firms when they miss expectations, (3) foreign firms from countries with strong legal enforcement and full or substantial IFRS adoption enjoy an MBE premium similar to that of domestic firms, while foreign firms from countries with weak legal enforcement and without full or substantial IFRS adoption experience a discounted MBE premium, and (4) both language difference and culture distance appear to account for the differential MBE premium between foreign firms and domestic firms as well.