Measuring International Harmonization and Standardization

Tay, Joanne Siok Wan; Parker, R. H.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6281.1990.tb00233.x

Cited by 186 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, criticisms of the underlying data used in the previous studies (e.g. Tay and Parker, 1990;Nobes, 1981) mean that these findings should be treated with some degree of caution. Sekely and Collins (1988) examined the relationship between culture and debt.…”

Section: National Culture and Accountingmentioning

confidence: 95%

International Financial Reporting Standards

Burton¹,

Jermakowicz²

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International studies of accounting have recognised the importance of 'culture' in accounting systems. Various definitions of and proxies for culture have been used in the accounting literature. These have contributed little to our understanding, save that culture is a complex issue and is clearly important for the development and practice of accounting. This paper brings together two strands of literature (culture and regulatory compliance) to point out practical weaknesses in the transition to global reporting in the form of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The discussion centres on the European Union (EU), a culturally diverse region that is requiring the use of IFRS in the consolidated financial statements of listed companies from 2005. The article goes on to contribute to the emerging literature on enforcement by proposing a model for policing IFRS.

show abstract

Section: National Culture and Accountingmentioning

confidence: 95%

International Financial Reporting Standards

Burton¹,

Jermakowicz²

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Van der Tas (1988) introduced indices to measure the extent of comparability (harmony) in the financial statements of companies and since then there has been significant improvements in methods, including criticism of existing indices and development of new indices (Cooke, 1989;Tay & Parker, 1990;Herrman & Thomas 1995;Archer, Delvaille, & McLeay, 1995;Lainez et al 1996, Archer, Delvaille, & McLeay, 1996Krisement, 1997;McLeay, et al 1999, Canibano & Mora 2000Aisbitt, 2001). This study uses the flexible framework of indices called the T index (Taplin, 2004;Astami et al, 2006) which has been extended to incorporate statistical inference techniques to allow testing of hypotheses (Taplin, 2010) and sophisticated practices to deal with previous criticisms of indices (Taplin, 2011).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparability of Company Accounts Using IFRS and US GAAP: Empirical Evidence of European and US Financial Statements

Taplin¹,

Verona²

2016

IJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-The main objective of this study is to provide a judgment on the comparability of financial statements prepared under IFRS and US-GAAP. We developed two research questions for evaluating comparability within Europe (IFRS) and within the US (US GAAP) and for testing whether comparability is higher or lower when the US companies are included with the European countries.Design/Methodology/Approach-The T index framework was used to summarize the level of comparability for 13 accounting items using data from 250 companies.Findings-Empirical results are mixed. Of 13 accounting items considered, international comparability is significantly lower for 7 items and significantly higher for 4 items when the US companies are included. Furthermore, comparability amongst companies using IFRS is not consistently higher or lower than comparability amongst companies using US GAAP.Practical implications-Answers to the research questions may provide useful suggestions for IASB's current policy direction towards global accounting standards convergence, and in particular for the IASB-FASB convergence project. The results also have implications for companies or countries considering shifting to IFRS or US GAAP.Research limitations/implications-Lack of comparability within countries, rather than between countries, suggests a need to focus on reducing options within standards rather than on differences between standards or countries.Originality value-Our empirical results show that in most cases lack of comparability may be driven by options within a standard rather than by explicit differences between standards.

show abstract

“…Even though we accept the existence of alternative solutions and realities we believe that reaching the objective of financial reporting practices that are globally accepted requires an intermediate phase of harmonizing accounting regulations. Under these circumstances we consider that accounting harmonization represents a real process (Tay and Parker, 1990; van der Tas, 1988) and seems to be essential in order to improve international comparability of financial statements, therefore increasing cash flows' mobility and reducing costs in terms of financial statements' preparation especially in the case of multinational companies (Carey, 1990;Choi and Mueller, 1992). Rahman et al (2002) consider that accounting harmonization assumes four essential aspects as follows: (1) the influences, (2) the process, (3) the result and (4) the consequences.…”

Section: Differences Between Czech Accounting Practices and Ifrs For mentioning

confidence: 99%