利润表中的投资性房地产在公允价值模式下的变化来自于香港的证据外文翻译

《利润表中的投资性房地产在公允价值模式下的变化来自于香港的证据外文翻译》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《利润表中的投资性房地产在公允价值模式下的变化来自于香港的证据外文翻译（11页珍藏版）》请在装配图网上搜索。

1、中文2900字本科毕业论文（设计）外 文 翻 译外文题目 Value-relevance of presenting changes in fair value of investment properties in the income statement: evidence from Hong Kong 外文出处 Accounting and Business Research 外文作者 Stella So and Malcolm Smith 原文：Value-relevance of presenting changes in fair value of investment prope

2、rties in the income statement: evidence from Hong KongIAS 40 (2000) represents the first time that the IASB permits a fair value model for non-financial assets (IASCF, 2008c). Under the fair value model, investment properties are carried at fair values and changes in fair value, whether up or down,

3、are included in the profit or loss for the period and presented in the income statements. Supporters of the fair value model believe that fair values give users of financial statements more useful information than other measures, such as depreciated cost, and changes in fair value are inextricably l

4、inked as integral components of the financial performance of an investment property and are therefore presented in the income statements (IASCF, 2008c). Although IAS 40 (2000) permits entities to choose between a fair value model or a cost model, the Basis for Conclusions on IAS 40 (2000) states cle

5、arly that it is highly unlikely that a subsequent change from the fair value model to the cost model can be made on the grounds of more appropriate presentation (IASCF, 2008c). However, Penman (2007) does not entirely agree; he evaluates historical cost and fair value accounting from two perspective

6、s-equity valuation and stewardship and concludes that while fair value accounting is a plus at a conceptual level, the minuses add up with fair value implemented as exit price (whether estimated or observed in active markets) and the problems with historical cost accounting remains unresolved. Singl

7、eton-Green (2007) summarises the problems of fair value accounting as: (1) the lack of active markets for most assets and liabilities, which means that most fair value measurements are estimates and are highly subjective and potentially unreliable; (2) costly information, especially for smaller comp

8、anies; and (3) the recognition of profits based on fair values, which mean that unrealised profits or losses from changes in fair value are recognised, and result in greater volatility and unpredictability. This study focuses on the third issue, the presentation of changes in fair value of investmen

9、t properties, in the income statement versus the revaluation reserve. Empirical studies assessing the relevance and reliability of fair value accounting versus historical cost-based accounting focus on financial instruments, and the results from these studies are generally mixed. Barth (1994) finds

10、that, for a sample of US banks with data from 19711990, disclosed fair value estimates of investment securities provide significant incremental explanatory power for bank share prices beyond that provided by historic costs. Fair value gains and losses of investment securities (constructed from two a

11、nnually disclosed fair value estimates) are, however, found to have no significant incremental explanatory power for annual returns (changes in share price), due to the increased measurement errors (Barth, 1994). Similar results are obtained in Barth et al. (1995), Barth et al. (1996), Eccher et al.

12、 (1996) and Nelson (1996), all using bank data. Results from Carroll et al. (2003) differ; instead of using bank data, they sample closed-end mutual funds which typically have investment securities (report-ed at fair values) comprising virtually all their assets and with negligible liabilities and o

13、ther assets. This is an advantage because the potential problem introduced by measuring some assets and liabilities at fair value but others at historical cost, is eliminated. Significant association between share prices and the fair value of investment securities, as well as between share returns a

14、nd fair value securities gains and losses are found. To examine whether differences in the reliability of the fair value of investment securities affect investors assessments of the usefulness of the information, Carroll et al. (2003) examine the association between share prices and fair values acro

15、ss different fund types and find that in all cases, including those traded in thin markets, there is a significant association between the share prices and fair values. In contrast, Danbolt and Rees (2008), using UK data, report no support for full fair value accounting. While fair value income is c

16、onsiderably more value-relevant than historic cost income, the higher relevance disappears in the presence of changes in fair value accounting balance sheet values. Danbolt and Rees (2008) interpret their results as evidence of the absence of an obvious advantage from adopting fair value income acco

17、unting if fair value balance sheet values are available to the user. Value-relevance research studies the association between fair value estimates and share prices or returns. Sloan (1999) comments that while this association provides evidence that investors find fair value estimates to be relevant,

18、 the inferences regarding reliability are indirect and limited by the fact that share prices reflect many factors other than the fair value estimates. Dietrich et al. (2001) subsequently use a direct approach to investigate the reliability of mandatory annual fair value appraisal estimates by charte

19、red surveyors for UK investment properties and find that appraisal estimates understate actual selling prices but are considerably less biased and more accurate measures of selling price than respective historical costs. Dietrich et al. (2001) also find that the reliability of appraisal estimates in

20、creases when monitored by external appraisers and Big Six auditors. The New Zealand (hereafter NZ) SSAP No. 17 Accounting for Investment Properties and Properties Intended for Sale (NZSA, 1989) previously allowed NZ companies the choice of recognising unrealised gains or losses either in the income

21、statement, or as movements in an investment property revaluation reserve, unless the total of the reserve was insufficient to cover a deficit, in which case the amount of deficit was to be charged in the income statement as part of operating results. The NZ equivalent of IAS 40 came into effect on 1

22、 January 2005, resulting in the elimination of the choice of recognising unrealised gains in the revaluation reserve. Owusu-Ansah and Yeoh (2006) investigate the relative value-relevance of the two alternative accounting treatments for unrealised gains on investment properties, based on a sample of

23、NZ companies over the period 1990 to 1999, when the choice was still available. Their results show that recognition of unrealised gains in the income statement is not superior to recognition of unrealised gains in the revaluation reserve in terms of their value-relevance. However, Owusu-Ansah and Ye

24、oh (2006) include only companies with positive changes in the value of their investment properties. Taken together, findings from prior studies of firms in the US, UK and Australian capital markets during the 1990s suggest that investors have been provided with fair value information (whether recogn

25、ised or disclosed) that is generally reliable and relevant (whether fair value estimated by management or independent valuer). More research should be undertaken to test empirically whether relevance and reliability improve after the implementation of the fair value standards on financial instrument

26、s (e.g. IAS 39) and with the extension of fair value accounting to non-financial assets (i.e. IAS 40). Like Owusu-Ansah and Yeoh (2006), this study examines the extension of fair value accounting to investment properties and the presentation of their fair value changes in the income statements (rath

27、er than in the revaluation reserve) in particular. Unlike Owusu-Ansah and Yeoh (2006), this study employs data from accounting periods when the related fair value accounting standard HKAS 40 is implemented. Comparison is then made with those from the immediate pre-implementation accounting periods w

28、hen SSAP 13 (2000) was in effect. Also, unlike Owusu-Ansah and Yeoh (2006), this study includes companies with both increases and decreases in fair values and uses a return model adapted from Easton and Harris (1991), Amir et al. (1993) and the earnings capitalisation approach from Barth (1994). Emp

29、irical resultsAlthough HKAS 40 (2004) allows a free choice between cost and fair value models, all 92 companies in the initial sample chose to adopt the fair value model.All the 92 companies are retained for data analysis,with extreme variable values verified against their sources. Since no procedur

30、al errors or extraordinaryevents are identified, all the data collected for the 92 companies are retained for the subsequent analysis. Each company is evaluated twice, in two consecutive accounting years before and after the adoption of HKAS 40 (2004).Table 1 describes the distribution of accounting

31、 year-ends, years of last-time following of SSAP 13 (2000) and years of first-time adoption of HKAS 40 (2004) for the 92 companies in this study.Appendix A details their identities. Most companies have March 31 or December 31 accounting year-ends, and adopt HKAS 40 (2004) for the first time in 2005

32、or 2006. While HKAS 40 (2004) mandates adoption for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2005, 17 companies choose to adopt HKAS 40 (2004) early.13 Tables 2A and 2B contain descriptive statistics for the 92 sample companies in the study during the year(s) when HKAS 40 (2004) is adopted for

33、 the first time compared to the year(s) when SSAP 13 (2000) is adopted for the last time.On the whole, when companies apply HKAS 40 (2004) for the first time, they are experiencing higher earnings and higher market values and offering their investors higher abnormal returns; this may be attributable

34、 to the strong economy in Hong Kong in 2005 and 2006. The Centa-City Index has indeed been increasing during the sample period, although at a significantly lower rate when HKAS 40 (2004) is applied for the first time. Firm size and Centa-City index changes are both controlled for in this study. Also

35、 all independent variables in this study are scaled by the companys beginning market value. Results show a significant increase in the proportion of investment properties relative to total assets, from 0.345 when SSAP 13(2000) is applied to 0.403 when HKAS 40 (2004) is applied.There is also an indic

36、ation of higher earnings volatility14 as a result of applying HKAS 40 (2004). The mean gains and losses in fair value of investment properties are HK$827m which is almost equal to the earnings before such gains and losses of HK$848m. In contrast, the mean investment properties open market value exce

37、ss deficits or surpluses of HK$24m amounts to only 3% of the earnings before such excess deficits or surpluses of HK$757m.Further indication of higher earnings volatility15 is available in Table 3 showing the results of a paired-sample t-test performed to compare the earnings volatility before and a

38、fter the application of HKAS 40 (2004). Earnings volatility is expressed as the number of standard deviations from a five-year mean (mean of the earnings of the five years ending on the year of HKAS 40 (2004) application). Earnings volatility is significantly higher after the adoption of HKAS 40 (20

39、04) (t = 4.678, p = 0.000).4.1. Short window event studyTable 4 reports the regression results from the estimation of equation (1). Results for the shortwindow event study provide evidence that the presentation of changes in fair value of investment properties in the income statements as required by

40、 HKAS 40 (2004) is more informative to investors than the presentation required by SSAP 13 (2000).Investors respond to the information on changes in fair value in the income statement, as released in the results announcement, causing abnormal returns. The coefficient 8 of the interaction variable IP

41、VC*AFTER in equation (1) is positive and significant at the 5% level (p = 0.022).As expected, neither earnings (EARNB) nor earnings change before investment properties open market value/changes in fair value (EARNB) is significant in explaining the abnormal return within the short window when SSAP 1

42、3 (2000) is adopted in the financial statements.Although the overall R2 is only 1.0%, this is consistent with the results from prior short-window studies.All the coefficients are positive except that of investment properties value changes (i.e. IPVC),which is negative (but not statistically signific

43、ant).Barth et al. (1990) and Barth (1994) also find similar negative coefficients for securities market price gains and losses and interpret them as evidence of a market that perceives that securities gains and losses are used to smooth earnings.4.2. Long-window abnormal return unexpected earnings a

44、ssociationThe regression results for the long window abnormal return and unexpected earnings association are reported in Table 4. As the window opens wider, the earnings before changes in open market value or fair value (i.e. EARNB) in equation (2) also become significant at the 5% level and the ove

45、rall adjusted R2 increases to 17.7%. This is consistent with the results from prior studies using long windows where significance of earnings is found together with higher overall R2.Source: Stella So .Malcolm Smith, Value-relevance of presenting changes in fair value of investment properties in the

46、 income statement: evidence from Hong Kong. Accounting and Business Research, 2009 Vol. 39. No. 2. pp. 103-118. 译文：利润表中的投资性房地产在公允价值模式下的变化：来自于香港的证据国际会计准则第40（2000）首次声明，国际会计准则委员会允许非金融资产的公允价值模式（IASCF，2008c）。根据公允价值模式，投资性房地产随着公允价值变动，无论是向上或向下，都包含在该期间的利润或亏损中，并体现在收益报表中。公允价值模式的支持者认为，公允价值与其他任何模式相比，给财务报表使用者提供了更

47、多有用的信息，如折旧费用，并且在公平价值模式下的变动与投资性房地产的财务的有机组成部分有着千丝万缕的联系，并且因此表现在收入报表中（IASCF，2008c）。虽然国际会计准则第40号（2000）允许主体在公允价值模式和成本模式中进行选择，国际会计准则第40号的基础结论（2000年）明确指出，从公允价值模式到成本模式的后续计量的进行是基于更加适当的表现（IASCF，2008c）。然而,作者(2007)并不完全同意,他评估来自两种观点的股票估值和服务意识的历史成本计量和公允价值会计,并认为,当公允价值会计是在一个概念水平上的相加,并且历史成本会计问题仍未解决。辛格尔顿-格林（2007）总结了公允价

48、值会计的问题：(1)对大多数资产和负债缺乏活跃的市场,这就意味着大多数公允价值计量是估计方法和具有高度主观性和潜在的不可靠性;(2)昂贵的信息,特别是小的公司;(3)基于公允价值的对于盈利的认识,而这通常意味着利润或损失的完成从公允价值变动计入当期损益,并导致更大的波动和不可预测性。本研究集中在第三期,投资性房地产的公允价值变动,在利润表和估价准备金。评估公允价值会计与历史成本会计的相关性和可靠性的证实研究是集中在金融工具的,来自于这些研究得结果一般具有混合性。巴特(1994)发现,以美国的银行1971到1990年数据为例,揭示的公允价值的估计增量为银行的股价提供了显著的债券投资解释力，它超越

49、所能够提供的历史成本。公允价值收益和证券投资损失（其结构来自于每年两次的公允价值评估）,然而,发现解释力增量对于一年一度的收益率(股价)却并没有显著的变化，由于增加了测量误差。近似结果全部等得到使用银行数据。与卡鲁而的结果(2003)等不同;与其使用银行数据,他们以封闭式基金为样本，在封闭式基金中通常包含投资证券，还包括了与其他资产和负债微不足道几乎所有的资产。这是一个有利条件,因为潜在的问题已经被消除了，这些潜在的问题是通过公允价值计量模式来测量资产和负债的，而不是其他历史成本模式。股票价格和投资证券的公允价值之间的关联,以及分享收益和公允价值之间证券的利得和损失，这些都被发现了。为了研究证

50、券投资的公允价值的可靠性差异是否影响信息，卡罗尔等人检测了股票价格和不同类型的公允价值基金之间的关联，并发现，在所有情况下，包括在市场上的交易，在股票价格和公允价值之间有着密不可分的联系。相反,里斯(2008),使用英国数据,报告不支持全公允价值会计。当然公允价值收入要比历史成本收益有更多的价值相关。 Danbolt和里斯(2008)解释他们的证据结果对于采用公允价值会计没有一个明显的优势，如果公允价值收入资产负债表是提供给用户的话。价值相关性调查研究了公允价值估计和股票价格或者返利之间的关联。史隆(1999)评论,虽然这个关联性提供证据表明，投资人发现公允价值估计相关关于可靠性是间接推论和有

51、限的事实,股票价格的反映了许多其他的因素公允价值评估。迪特里希孙俐 (2001)后来使用了更直接的方法来调查每年强制性的公允价值鉴定的可靠性，这是由英国投资性房地产的特许计量师来实现的。迪特里希孙俐 (2001)等人还发现了考核信度在由部监测评估师和六大核数师的监控下，在不断上升。新西兰(以下简称纽西兰)SSAP 17号的“投资性房地产会计和拟出售房地产”（NZSA,1989）之前允许新西兰公司未变现收益或亏损的选择，无论是在利润表, 或在投资性房地产得重估储备变动，除非总储备已经不足以支付赤字,在这种情况下,赤字的金额作为经营业绩的一部分，在收益表扣除。Owusu-Ansah和Yeoh(20

52、06)研究了两种可供选择的会计处理的相对价值的相关性。他们的研究结果表明，在损益表确认未实现的收益并不在他们的价值的相关条款中。然而,Owusu-Ansah和Yeoh(2006)只包括具有在投资性房地产价值具有积极变化的公司。综合起来看,公司在此之前的研究发现，在美国、英国和澳大利亚的资本市场在20世纪90年代就建议，投资者一直被提供公允价值信息（无论是被确认的或被披露的),这些信息一般都具有可靠性和相关性 (无论是被管理层还是独立评估师评估的公允价值)。更多的研究应该进行实证，检验是否具有相关性和可靠性，工程实施后提高公允价值标准(例如金融工具IAS 39)和扩展到非财务资产公允价值(如下。

53、IAS 40)。实证结果虽然HKAS 40期(2004年)允许在成本与公允价值模式之间自由选择,92家公司在首次样品中选择采用公允价值模式。所有的92家分公司维持数据的分析,极其变量值验证了他们的来源。因为没有程序错误或非凡的事件被确认, 92家公司所有的所收集到的数据都为后续分析所保留。每个公司评估两次,并在连续两个会计年前后均采用HKAS 40(2004)。表1描述了在这项研究中的92家公司在会计年结束以及最后一次遵循会计准则第13（2000）条那年和首次采用香港会计准则第40号（2004）那年的分布。附录A详细描述了他们的身份。大多数公司采用3月31日或12月31日会计年度为结束时间，并

54、在2005年或2006年第一次采用会计准则第40号（2004）。而香港会计准则第40号（2004年）规定采用2005年1月1日开始的或其之后的年度期间，17家公司选择最先采用香港会计准则第40号（2004）。表2A和2B包含研究中的92家样本公司在与最后一次采用会计实务准则13号（2000）那年相比，第一次采用香港会计准则第40号（2004）那年期间的描述性统计分析。总的来说,当公司第一次使用香港会计准则第40号(2004)时,都经历较高的收入和更高的市场价值并为他们的投资者提供了异常高的回报;这可能是由于2005年和2006年香港的强大经济。中原指数在采样周期的确一直在增加,尽管是以较低的比

55、率在增加，那时香港会计准则第40号（2004）是第一次应用。公司规模和中原指数的变化都在本研究中受到控制。本研究中的所有自变量也按公司的开始的市场价值在增加。结果表明了相对于总资产的投资性房地产的比例的显著增加,即从会计实务准则13号（2000）应用时的0.345 上升到香港会计准则第40号（2004）应用时的0.403。由于应用香港会计准则第40号（2004）还存在一个较高的收入波动的迹象。在投资性质的公允价值中的平均利润和损失为827m港元,几乎相当于在848m港元损益下收益。相比之下, 在超过757m港元的亏损或者盈余之前，平均的投资性房地产公开市值超过只占收入3%的2400万港元的亏损

56、或者盈余。较高收入波动的迹象在表3中是可利用的，显示了在香港会计准则第40号（2004）应用的前后的相比于收益波动的配对样本的结果。收入波动是根据历时五年的平均收入的标准差数量来表述的。收入波动在采用香港会计准则第40号（2004）后有显著的提高。表4报道了估计方程的结果。较短的事件研究的结果提供了一些证据,表明香港会计准则第40号（2004）需要的损益表中的投资性房地产公允价值变动的表述是包含更多的信息给投资者。投资者对损益表中公允价值变动信息做出反应,发布最后公告时,会导致不正常的回报。虽然整体R2只是1.0%,这是符合原有较短的研究的结果。所有的系数是积极的,除了投资性房地产价值，它是消极的但不是重要的。Barthetal（1990）和Barth（1994）也发现了类似的证券的市场价格收益和损失负系数并把其作为市场的证据来解释。出处:斯特拉，史密斯.收入报表中的投资性房地产在公允价值模式下的变化：证据来自于香港J.会计和商业研究,2009(39):103-118. 11