Advertisement

Review of Accounting Studies

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 526–562 | Cite as

Why do pro forma and Street earnings not reflect changes in GAAP? Evidence from SFAS 123R

  • Mary E. Barth
  • Ian D. Gow
  • Daniel J. Taylor
Article

Abstract

This study examines how key market participants—managers and analysts—responded to SFAS 123R’s controversial requirement that firms recognize stock-based compensation expense. Despite mandated recognition of the expense, some firms’ managers exclude it from pro forma earnings and some firms’ analysts exclude it from Street earnings. We find evidence consistent with managers opportunistically excluding the expense to increase earnings, smooth earnings, and meet earnings benchmarks but no evidence that these exclusions result in an earnings measure that better predicts future firm performance. In contrast, we find that analysts exclude the expense from earnings forecasts when exclusion increases earnings’ predictive ability for future performance and that opportunism generally does not explain exclusion by analysts incremental to exclusion by managers. Thus our findings indicate that opportunism is the primary explanation for exclusion of the expense from pro forma earnings and predictive ability is the primary explanation for exclusion from Street earnings. Our findings suggest the controversy surrounding the recognition of stock-based compensation expense may be attributable to cross-sectional variation in the relevance of the expense for equity valuation, as well as to differing incentives of market participants.

Keywords

Stock-based compensation SFAS 123R Non-GAAP earnings Street earnings Pro forma earnings Earnings forecast exclusions Incentives 

JEL Classification

G10 M4 M41 M43 M45 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank David Aboody; Tom Lys; Robert Magee; Sarah McVay; Richard Sloan (editor); workshop participants at the 2011 Review of Accounting Studies conference, especially discussant Theodore Christensen; American Accounting Association annual meeting, especially discussant Valentina Zamora; the Financial Accounting and Reporting Section midyear meeting, especially discussant Melissa Lewis; the Kellogg School of Management; Lancaster University; Santa Clara University; Stanford University; University of Southern California; Yale University; and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and suggestions. We thank our respective schools for financial support.

References

  1. Aboody, D. (1996). Market valuation of employee stock options. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22, 357–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aboody, D., Barth, M. E., & Kasznik, R. (2004a). SFAS No. 123 stock-based compensation expense and equity market values. The Accounting Review, 79(2), 251–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aboody, D., Barth, M. E., & Kasznik, R. (2004b). Firms’ voluntary recognition of stock-based compensation expense. Journal of Accounting Research, 42(2), 123–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Accounting Principles Board. (1973). Accounting for stock issued to employees. New York, NY: APB.Google Scholar
  5. Baik, B., Farber, D. B., & Petroni, K. (2009). Analyst incentives and street earnings. Journal of Accounting Research, 47(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barth, M. E., Beaver, W. H., & Landsman, W. R. (1998). Relative valuation roles of equity book value and net income as a function of financial health. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 25(1), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression diagnostics. New York, NY: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blacconiere, W. G., Frederickson, J. R., Johnson, M. F., & Lewis, M. F. (2011). Are voluntary disclosures that disavow the reliability of mandated fair value information informative or opportunistic? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 52(2–3), 235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Black, D., & Christensen, T. (2009). US managers’ use of ‘pro forma’ adjustments to meet strategic earnings benchmarks. Journal of Business, Finance and Accounting, 36, 297–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Black, F., & Scholes, M. (1973). The effects of dividend yield and dividend policy on common stock prices and returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 1, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bhattacharya, N., Black, E. L., Christensen, T. E., & Larson, C. R. (2003). Assessing the relative informativeness and permanence of pro forma earnings and GAAP operating earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 36, 285–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bradshaw, M. T., & Sloan, R. G. (2002). GAAP versus the Street: An empirical assessment of two alternative definitions of earnings. Journal of Accounting Research, 40(1), 41–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, L. D., & Sivakumar, K. (2003). Comparing the value relevance of two operating income measures. Review of Accounting Studies, 8, 561–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brown, L. D., & Y.-J. Lee. (2006). The impact of SFAS 123R on changes in option-based compensation. Working paper, Georgia State University.Google Scholar
  15. Brown, N. C., Christensen, T. E., Elliott, W. B., & Mergenthaler, R. D. (2011). Investor sentiment and pro forma earnings disclosures. Journal of Accounting Research, 50, 1–40.Google Scholar
  16. Burgstahler, D., & Dichev, I. (1997). Earnings management to avoid earnings decreases and losses. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24, 99–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carter, M. E., & Lynch, L. J. (2003). The consequences of the FASB’s 1998 proposal on accounting for stock option repricing. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 35, 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Choudhary, P., Rajgopal, S., & Venkatachalam, M. (2009). Accelerated vesting of employee stock options in anticipation of FAS 123-R. Journal of Accounting Research, 47(1), 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Christensen, T. E., Merkley, K. J., Tucker, J. W., & Venkataraman, S. (2011). Do managers use earnings guidance to influence street earnings exclusions? Review of Accounting Studies, 16, 501–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Christie, A. A. (1987). On cross-sectional analysis in accounting research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 9(3), 231–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Clarke, K. (2003). Nonparametric model discrimination in international relations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 47, 724–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Clarke, K. (2007). A simple distribution-free test for nonnested model selection. Political Analysis, 15(3), 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cohen, D., Hann, R., & Ogneva, M. (2007). Another look at GAAP versus the Street: an empirical assessment of measurement error bias. Review of Accounting Studies, 12(2–3), 271–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Curtis, A., McMahon, S., McVay, S., & Whipple, B. (2011). Non-GAAP earnings: Informative or opportunistic? An analysis of transitory gains. Working paper. University of Utah.Google Scholar
  25. Doyle, J. T., Lundholm, R. J., & Soliman, M. T. (2003). The predictive value of expenses excluded from pro forma earnings. Review of Accounting Studies, 8(2–3), 145–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Financial Accounting Standards Board. (1995). Statement of financial accounting standards no. 123: Accounting for stock-based compensation. Norwalk, CT: FASB.Google Scholar
  27. Financial Accounting Standards Board. (2004). Statement of financial accounting standards no. 123 (revised 2004): Share-based payment. Norwalk, CT: FASB.Google Scholar
  28. First Call (1999). Present methodology for US earnings estimates, company documentation. New York, NY: First Call.Google Scholar
  29. Francis, J., & Philbrick, D. (1993). Analysts’ decisions as a product of a multi-task environment. Journal of Accounting Research, 31, 216–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gow, I. D., Ormazabal, G., & Taylor, D. J. (2010). Correcting for cross-sectional and time-series dependence in accounting research. The Accounting Review, 85(2), 483–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gu, Z., & Chen, T. (2004). Analysts’ treatment of nonrecurring items in street earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 38, 129–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hanlon, M., Rajgopal, S., & Shevlin, T. (2003). Are executive stock options associated with future earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 36, 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hagopian, K. (2006). Point of view: Expensing employee stock options is improper accounting. California Management Review, 48, 136–156.Google Scholar
  34. Johnston, D., & Rock, S. (2006). The effect of expense recognition on stock option grants and operating performance. Working paper.Google Scholar
  35. Jones, S. D. (2006, April 4). Options expensing jars consensus. Wall Street Journal.Google Scholar
  36. Kasznik, R., & McNichols, M. F. (2002). Does meeting earnings expectations matter? Evidence from analyst forecast revisions and share prices. Journal of Accounting Research, 40(3), 727–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kolev, K., Marquardt, C. A., & McVay, S. E. (2008). SEC scrutiny and the evolution of non-GAAP reporting. The Accounting Review, 83(1), 157–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kothari, S. P., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1995). Price and return models. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 20(2), 155–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Landsman, W. R., Miller, B. L., & Yeh, S. (2007). Implications of components of income excluded from pro forma earnings for future profitability and equity valuation. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 34(3–4), 650–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lambert, R. A. (2004). Discussion of ‘analysts’ treatment of non-recurring items in street earnings’ and ‘loss function assumptions in rational expectations tests on financial analysts’ earnings forecasts’. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 38(1–3), 205–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Larcker, D. F. (2003). Discussion of ‘are executive stock options associated with future earnings?’ Journal of Accounting and Economics, 36, 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lin, H., & McNichols, M. F. (1998). Underwriting relationships, analysts’ earnings forecasts and investment recommendations. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 25, 101–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lougee, B., & Marquardt, C. (2004). Earnings informativeness and strategic disclosure: An empirical examination of ‘pro forma’ net income’. The Accounting Review, 79, 769–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McConnell, P., Pegg, J., Senyek, C., & Mott, D. (2003, September 4). More companies voluntarily adopt fair value expensing of employee stock options. Bear Stearns Equity Research.Google Scholar
  45. McVay, S. (2006). Earnings management using classification shifting: An examination of core earnings and special items. The Accounting Review, 81(3), 501–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Michaely, R., & Womack, K. (1999). Conflict of interest and the credibility of underwriter analyst recommendations. Review of Financial Studies, 12, 653–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ohlson, J. A. (1995). Earnings, equity book values, and dividends in equity valuation. Contemporary Accounting Research, 31, 661–687.Google Scholar
  48. Ohlson, J. A. (1999). On transitory earnings. Review of Accounting Studies, 3, 145–162.Google Scholar
  49. Richardson, S., Teoh, S. H., & Wysocki, P. D. (2004). The walk-down to beatable analyst forecasts: The role of equity issuance and insider trading incentives. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21(4), 885–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Riedl, E. J. (2004). An examination of long-lived asset impairments. Accounting Review, 79(3), 823–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Riedl, E. J., & Srinivasan, S. (2010). Signaling firm performance through financial statement presentation: An analysis using special items. Contemporary Accounting Research, 27, 289–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Senyek, C., Pegg, J., Mott, D., & Calingasan, A. (2007, January 16). Consensus estimates exclude stock-based compensation expense for 32% of NASDAQ 100 companies. Bear Stearns Equity Research.Google Scholar
  53. Vuong, Q. (1989). Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica, 57(2), 307–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary E. Barth
    • 1
  • Ian D. Gow
    • 2
  • Daniel J. Taylor
    • 3
  1. 1.Graduate School of BusinessStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Harvard Business SchoolBostonUSA
  3. 3.The Wharton SchoolUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations