Disentangling mandatory IFRS reporting and changes in enforcement

Mary E. Barth, Doron Israeli

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We discuss “Mandatory IFRS Reporting and Changes in Enforcement” by Christensen, Hail, and Leuz (CHL, in this issue). We begin by discussing CHL in the context of prior literature, and subsequently discuss the research design, results, and inferences. CHL seeks to contribute to the literature by disentangling the liquidity benefits of changes in accounting standards from those of changes in enforcement. Taken at face value, we believe that the evidence in CHL suggests that both change in enforcement and adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) confer liquidity benefits. The largest benefits obtain when the change to IFRS reporting is combined with change in enforcement. This is not to say that enforcement conveys capital market benefits but IFRS reporting does not, or that IFRS reporting conveys capital market benefits but enforcement does not; both are necessary to confer capital market benefits.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)178-188
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Accounting and Economics
Volume56
Issue number2-3
Publication statusPublished - Dec 15 2013

Fingerprint

International Financial Reporting Standards
Enforcement
Capital markets
Liquidity
Inference
Research design
Accounting standards

Cite this

Disentangling mandatory IFRS reporting and changes in enforcement. / Barth, Mary E. ; Israeli, Doron.

In: Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 56, No. 2-3, 15.12.2013, p. 178-188.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a4fb531d53144e539bd72b637e266566,
title = "Disentangling mandatory IFRS reporting and changes in enforcement",
abstract = "We discuss “Mandatory IFRS Reporting and Changes in Enforcement” by Christensen, Hail, and Leuz (CHL, in this issue). We begin by discussing CHL in the context of prior literature, and subsequently discuss the research design, results, and inferences. CHL seeks to contribute to the literature by disentangling the liquidity benefits of changes in accounting standards from those of changes in enforcement. Taken at face value, we believe that the evidence in CHL suggests that both change in enforcement and adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) confer liquidity benefits. The largest benefits obtain when the change to IFRS reporting is combined with change in enforcement. This is not to say that enforcement conveys capital market benefits but IFRS reporting does not, or that IFRS reporting conveys capital market benefits but enforcement does not; both are necessary to confer capital market benefits.",
author = "Barth, {Mary E.} and Doron Israeli",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
day = "15",
language = "English",
volume = "56",
pages = "178--188",
journal = "Journal of Accounting and Economics",
issn = "0165-4101",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2-3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Disentangling mandatory IFRS reporting and changes in enforcement

AU - Barth, Mary E.

AU - Israeli, Doron

PY - 2013/12/15

Y1 - 2013/12/15

N2 - We discuss “Mandatory IFRS Reporting and Changes in Enforcement” by Christensen, Hail, and Leuz (CHL, in this issue). We begin by discussing CHL in the context of prior literature, and subsequently discuss the research design, results, and inferences. CHL seeks to contribute to the literature by disentangling the liquidity benefits of changes in accounting standards from those of changes in enforcement. Taken at face value, we believe that the evidence in CHL suggests that both change in enforcement and adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) confer liquidity benefits. The largest benefits obtain when the change to IFRS reporting is combined with change in enforcement. This is not to say that enforcement conveys capital market benefits but IFRS reporting does not, or that IFRS reporting conveys capital market benefits but enforcement does not; both are necessary to confer capital market benefits.

AB - We discuss “Mandatory IFRS Reporting and Changes in Enforcement” by Christensen, Hail, and Leuz (CHL, in this issue). We begin by discussing CHL in the context of prior literature, and subsequently discuss the research design, results, and inferences. CHL seeks to contribute to the literature by disentangling the liquidity benefits of changes in accounting standards from those of changes in enforcement. Taken at face value, we believe that the evidence in CHL suggests that both change in enforcement and adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) confer liquidity benefits. The largest benefits obtain when the change to IFRS reporting is combined with change in enforcement. This is not to say that enforcement conveys capital market benefits but IFRS reporting does not, or that IFRS reporting conveys capital market benefits but enforcement does not; both are necessary to confer capital market benefits.

M3 - Article

VL - 56

SP - 178

EP - 188

JO - Journal of Accounting and Economics

JF - Journal of Accounting and Economics

SN - 0165-4101

IS - 2-3

ER -