Advertisement

Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft

, Volume 78, Issue 12, pp 1317–1342 | Cite as

Vorsichtige Rechnungslegung — Theoretische Erklärung und empirische Evidenz —

  • Rolf Uwe Fülbier
  • Joachim Gassen
  • Thorsten Sellhorn
State of the Art

Zusammenfassung

Vorsichtige Rechnungslegung (accounting conservatism) ist nicht allein Folge vorsichtiger Rechnungslegungsnormen. Vielmehr führen ökonomische Anreize der Rechnungslegungsakteure in unterschiedlichem Ausmaß zu vorsichtigem Rechnungslegungsverhalten. Es gibt also Nachfrage nach accounting conservatism. Diese wirkt als normative Rechtfertigung auf die Entwicklung der Rechnungslegungsnormen zurück (Watts, 2006). In diesem Beitrag diskutieren wir ökonomische Motive für vorsichtige Rechnungslegung und zeigen deren empirische Evidenz in Rechnungslegungsnormen und -verhalten auf. Dabei wird hinsichtlich der Ereignisabhängigkeit der bilanziellen Vorsicht zwischen conditional und unconditional conservatism unterschieden, wobei eine trennscharfe theoretische Zuordnung von Rechnungslegungsregeln problembehaftet ist und eine separate empirische Messung der beiden Phänomene bislang nicht in befriedigender Weise gelungen ist. Da vorsichtige Rechnungslegungspraxis relativ unabhängig von Rechnungslegungsnormen existieren kann, verwundert es nicht, dass die vermeintlich vorsichtigen deutschen GoB im internationalen Vergleich nicht automatisch zum (conditional) vorsichtigsten Rechnungslegungsverhalten führen. Vor diesem Hintergrund ist fraglich, ob IASB und FASB in dem geplanten neuen Rahmenkonzept vorsichtige Rechnungslegung an ökonomischen Effizienzerwägungen vorbei abschaffen sollten. Watts (2003a, S. 210; 2006) fordert die Standardsetter zu Recht auf, ihre ablehnende Haltung gegenüber vorsichtiger Rechnungslegung zu überdenken, da sie wichtige ökonomische Funktionen erfülle, die noch nicht abschließend erforscht seien.

Accounting conservatism — Theoretical foundations and empirical evidence

Summary

Accounting conservatism has received considerable attention in the literature over the past ten years. Contrary to a commonly held notion, conservative practice need not stem from conservative rules alone. Because financial statement users demand different degrees of accounting conservatism, conservative practice reflects managers’ economic incentives. Economic demand for conservative accounting also influences standard setters’ decisions in the rule-making process, shaping the development of accounting regulation over the long term (Watts, 2006). We discuss economic explanations for accounting conservatism and provide empirical evidence of conservative rules and behavior. Depending on the degree to which accounting reflects specific events, the conditional and unconditional types of conservatism are distinguished. It should be noted, however, that a clear distinction between the two types remains an unresolved challenge from both the theoretical and empirical standpoints. Since conservative accounting practice may be observed even where rules are not particularly conservative, it is not surprising that accounting practice induced by the allegedly conservative German system does not rank among the most (conditionally) conservative internationally. Accounting conservatism as an efficient component of corporate governance is not yet fully understood. These considerations cast doubt, expressed by Watts (2003a, S. 210; 2006), on the effectiveness of plans voiced by the IASB and the FASB to eliminate the conservatism principle from their new conceptual framework.

Keywords

Accounting conservatism economic incentives empirical evidence IFRS conceptual framework 

JEL

M41 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Adler / Düring / Schmaltz (ADS) (1995/2005), Rechnungslegung und Prüfung der Unternehmen, 6. Aufl., Stuttgart 1995 (CD-Rom, Stand 12.2005).Google Scholar
  2. Ahmed, Anwer S./ Billings, Bruce K./ Morton, Richard M./ Stanford-Harris, Mary (2002), The role of accounting conservatism in mitigating bondholder-shareholder conflicts over dividend policy and in reducing debt costs, in: The Accounting Review, Vol. 77, S. 867–890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahmed, Anwer S./ Duellman, Scott (2007), Accounting conservatism and board of director characteristics: An empirical analysis, in: Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 43, S. 411–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baetge, Jörg/ Kirsch, Hans-Jürgen/ Thiele, Stefan (2007), Bilanzen, 9. Aufl., Düsseldorf 2007.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, Ray (2001), Infrastructure requirements for an economically efficient system of public financial reporting and disclosure, Brookings-Wharton Papers on Financial Services, S. 127–169, 179–182.Google Scholar
  6. Ball, Ray/ Brown, Philip (1968), An empirical evaluation of accounting income numbers, in: Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 6, S. 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ball, Ray/ Kothari, S.P./ Robin, Ashok (2000), The effect of international institutional factors on properties of accounting earnings, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 29, S. 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ball, Ray/ Robin, Ashok/ Sadka, Gil (2007), Is financial reporting shaped by equity markets or by debt markets? An international study of timeliness and conservatism, Working paper, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  9. Ball, Ray/ Robin, Ashok/ Wu, Joanna Shuang (2003), Incentives versus standards: properties of accounting income in four East Asian countries, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 36, S. 235–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ball, Ray/ Shivakumar, Lakshmanan (2005), Earning quality in U.K. private firms: Comparative loss recognition timeliness, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 39, S. 83–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ballwieser, Wolfgang (2001), § 252, in: Münchener Kommentar zum Handelsgesetzbuch, Bd. 4: Drittes Buch, Handelsbücher, §§ 238–342a HGB, hrsg. von Schmidt, K., München.Google Scholar
  12. Basu, Sudipta (1997), The conservatism principle and the asymmetric timeliness of earnings, in: Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 24, S. 3–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Beaver, William H. (1998), Financial Reporting: An accounting revolution, 3rd ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
  14. Beaver, William H./ Ryan, Stephen G. (2000), Biases and lags in book-value and their effects on the ability of the book-to-market ratio to predict book return on equity, in: Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 38, S. 127–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Beaver, William H./ Ryan, Stephen G. (2005), Conditional and unconditional conservatism: Concepts and modeling, Review of Accounting Studies, Vol. 10, S. 269–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Beidleman, Carl R. (1973), Income smoothing: The role of management, in: The Accounting Review, Vol. 48, S. 653–667.Google Scholar
  17. Bigus, Jochen (2007), Das Vorsichtsprinzip bei Informationsasymmetrien zwischen Gläubigern, in: ZfbF, 59. Jg., S. 567–587.Google Scholar
  18. Bliss, James H. (1924), Management through Accounts, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Busse von Colbe, Walther/ Pellens, Bernhard (Hrsg.) (1998), Lexikon des Rechnungswesens, 4. Aufl., München et al.Google Scholar
  20. Chandra, Uday/ Wasley, Charles E./ Waymire, Gregory B. (2004), Income conservatism in the U.S. Technology Sector, The Bradley Policy Research Center, Financial Research and Policy Working paper No. 04-01, University of Rochester.Google Scholar
  21. Callen, Jeffrey L./ Hope, Ole-Kristian/ Segal, Dan (2006), The pricing of conservative accounting and the measurement of conservatism at the firm-year level, Working Paper, Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  22. Chen, Qi/ Hemmer, Thomas/ Zhang, Yun (2007), On the Relation between Conservatism in Accounting Standards and Incentives for Earnings Management, in: Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 45, S. 541–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Christensen, John A./ Demski, Joel A. (2003), Accounting theory: An information content perspective, Boston et al.Google Scholar
  24. Christensen, Peter O./ Feltham, Gerald A. (2003), Economics of Accounting, Vol. I: Information in Markets, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Coenenberg, Adolf G. (2005), Jahresabschluss und Jahresabschlussanalyse, 20. Aufl., Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  26. Dietrich, J. Richard/ Muller, Karl A./ Riedl, Edward J. (2007), Asymmetric timeliness tests of accounting conservatism, Review of Accounting Studies, Vol. 12, S. 95–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Easton, Peter/ Pae, Jinhan (2004), Accounting conservatism and the relation between returns and accounting data, in: Review of Accounting Studies, Vol. 9, S. 495–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ernst, Christoph/ Seidler, Holger (2007), Kernpunkte des Referentenentwurfs eines Bilanzrechtsmodernisierungsgesetzes, in: Betriebs-Berater, 62. Jg., S. 2557–2566.Google Scholar
  29. Feltham, Gerald A./ Ohlson, James A. (1995), Valuation and clean surplus accounting for operating and financial activities, in: Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 11, S. 689–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Francis, Jennifer/ LaFond, Ryan/ Olsson, Per M./ Schipper, Katherine (2004), Cost of equity and earnings attributes, in: The Accounting Review, Vol. 79, S. 967–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fudenberg, Drew/ Tirole, Jean (1995), A theory of income and dividend smoothing based on incumbency rents, in: Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 103, S. 75–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fülbier, Rolf U./ Gassen, Joachim (2007), Das Bilanzrechtsmodernisierungsgesetz (BilMoG): Handelsrechtliche GoB vor der Neuinterpretation, in: Der Betrieb, 60. Jg., S. 2605–2612.Google Scholar
  33. García Lara, Juan M./ Mora, Araceli (2004), Balance sheets versus earnings conservatism in Europe, in: European Accounting Review, Vol. 13, S. 261–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. García Lara, Juan M./ García Osma, Beatriz/ Penalva, Fernando (2008), Accounting conservatism and corporate governance, erscheint in: Review of Accounting Studies, Vol. 13.Google Scholar
  35. Gassen, Joachim/ Fülbier, Rolf U./ Sellhorn, Thorsten (2006), International differences in conditional conservatism: The role of unconditional conservatism and income smoothing, in: European Accounting Review, Vol. 15, S. 527–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gernon, Helen/ Meek, Gary K. (2001), Accounting, An international perspective, 5. ed., Boston.Google Scholar
  37. Gigler, Frank B./ Hemmer, Thomas (2001), Conservatism, optimal disclosure policy, and the timeliness of financial reports, in: The Accounting Review, Vol. 76, S. 471–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Giner, Begoña/ Rees, William (2001), On the asymmetric recognition of good and bad news in France, Germany and the United Kingdom, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, Vol. 28, S. 1285–1331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Givoly, Dan/ Hayn, Carla (2000), The changing time-series properties of earnings, cash-flows and accruals: has financial reporting become more conservative?, in: Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 20, S. 287–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Givoly, Dan/ Hayn, Carla (2002), Rising conservatism: implications for financial analysis, in: Financial Analysts Journal, Vol. 58, S. 56–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Givoly, Dan/ Hayn, Carla/ Natarajan, Ashok (2007), Measuring reporting conservatism, in: The Accounting Review, Vol. 65, S. 65–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Guay, Wayne/ Verrecchia, Robert E. (2007), Conservative Disclosure, Working Paper, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  43. Guay, Wayne/ Verrecchia, Robert E. (2006), Discussion of an economic framework for conservative accounting and Bushman and Piotroski (2006), Working Paper, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  44. Haller, Axel (1994), Die Grundlagen der externen Rechnungslegung in den USA, 4. Aufl., Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  45. Healy, Paul M. (1985), The effects of bonus schemes on accounting decisions, in: Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 7, S. 85–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Herzig, Norbert (1993), Die rückstellungsbegrenzende Wirkung des Realisationsprinzips, in: Ertragsbesteuerung, Festschrift für Ludwig Schmidt, hrsg. von Raupach, A./ Uelner, A., München, S. 209–226.Google Scholar
  47. Holthausen, Robert W. (2003), Testing the relative power of accounting standards versus incentives and other institutional features to influence the outcome of financial reporting in an international setting, in: Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 36, S. 271–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Joos, Peter/ Lang, Mark (1994), The effects of accounting diversity: Evidence from the European Union, in: Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 32(Suppl.), S. 141–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kampmann, Helga/ Schwedler, Kristina (2006), Zum Entwurf eines gemeinsamen Rahmenkonzepts von FASB und IASB, in: KoR, 6. Jg., S. 521–530.Google Scholar
  50. Kleindiek, Detlef (2002), § 252, in: HGB-Bilanzrecht: Rechnungslegung — Abschlußprüfung — Publizität, Großkommentar, hrsg. von Ulmer, P., Bd. 1, Berlin et al.Google Scholar
  51. Khan, Mozaffar/ Watts, Ross (2007), Estimation and Validation of a Firm-Year Measure of Conservatism, Working Paper, MIT — Sloan School of Management.Google Scholar
  52. Kothari, S. P./ Shu, Susan/ Wysocki, Peter (2007), Do managers withhold bad news?, Working Paper, MIT — Sloan School of Management.Google Scholar
  53. Kwon, Young K./ Newman, D. Paul/ Suh, Yoon S. (2001): The Demand for Accounting Conservatism for Management Control, in: Review of Accounting Studies, Vol. 6, S. 29–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. LaFond, Ryan/ Watts, Ross (2007), The Information Role of Conservatism, Working Paper, MIT — Sloan School of Management (erscheint in: The Accounting Review).Google Scholar
  55. Lai, Cheng/ Taylor, Stephen L. (2007), Estimating and Validating a Firm-Year-Specific Measure of Conservatism: Australian Evidence, Working Paper, University of New South Wales.Google Scholar
  56. Leffson, Ulrich (1987), Die Grundsätze ordnungsmäßiger Buchführung, 7. Aufl., Düsseldorf.Google Scholar
  57. Leuz, Christian (2001), Comment and discussion of Ball (2001), Infrastructure requirements for an economically efficient system of public financial reporting and disclosure, Brookings-Wharton Papers on Financial Services, S. 170–178.Google Scholar
  58. Li, Jing (2007), Accounting Conservatism, Information Uncertainty and Analysts ‘Forecasts, Working Paper, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  59. Liu, Z./ Thornton, D. (2005), The impact of litigiousness on earnings conservatism’s negative association with price-to-book ratio, Working Paper, Queen’s University.Google Scholar
  60. Lubberink, Martien/ Huijgen, Carel (2006), Earnings conservatism and equity raisings of cross-listed firms, Working Paper, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  61. Moxter, Adolf (1984), Bilanzlehre, Bd. I: Einführung in die Bilanztheorie, 3. Aufl., Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  62. Moxter, Adolf (1996), Entziehbarer Gewinn?, in: Rechnungslegung — Warum und Wie (Festschrift für Hermann Clemm), hrsg. von Ballwieser, W. et al., München, S. 231–241.Google Scholar
  63. OECD (1987), The Relationship between Taxation and Financial Reporting, Income Tax Accounting, Report by the Working Group on Accounting Standards, Accounting Standards Harmonization, No. 3, Paris.Google Scholar
  64. Pae, Jinhan/ Thornton, Daniel B./ Welker, Michael (2005), The link between earnings conservatism and the price-to-book ratio, in: Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 22, S. 693–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Peek, Erik/ Cuipers, Rick/ Buijink, Willem (2007), Creditors’ and Shareholders’ Reporting Demands in Public versus Private Firms: Evidence from Europe, Working Paper, Maastricht University.Google Scholar
  66. Pellens, Bernhard/ Fülbier, Rolf U./ Gassen, Joachim (2006), Internationale Rechnungslegung, 6. Aufl., Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  67. Penman, Stephen H. (1996), The articulation of price-earnings ratios and market-to-book ratios and the evaluation of growth, in: Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 34, S. 235–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Penman, Stephen H./ Zhang, X. J. (2002), Accounting conservatism, quality of earnings, and stock returns, in: The Accounting Review, Vol. 77, S. 237–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Pope, Peter F./ Walker, Martin (2003), Ex-ante and ex-post accounting conservatism, asset recognition and asymmetric earnings timeliness, Working Paper, Lancaster University/ University of Manchester.Google Scholar
  70. Qiang, Xinrong (2007), The effects of contracting, litigation, regulation, and tax costs on conditional and unconditional conservatism: cross-sectional evidence at the firm level, in: The Accounting Review, Vol. 82, S. 759–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Raonic, Ivana/ McLeay, Stuart/ Asimakopoulos, Ioannis (2004), The Timeliness of Income Recognition by European Companies: An Analysis of Institutional and Market Complexity, in: Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, Vol. 31, S. 115–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Riahi-Belkaoui, Ahmed (2004), Accounting Theory, 5. ed., London.Google Scholar
  73. Richardson, Gordon/ Tinaikar, Surjit (2004), Accounting based valuation models: What have we learned?, in: Accounting and Finance, Vol. 44, S. 223–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Roychowdhury, Sugata/ Watts, Ross (2007), Asymmetric timeliness of earnings, market-to-book and conservatism in financial reporting, in: Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 44, S. 2–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Ryan, Stephen G. (2006), Identifying conditional conservatism, in: European Accounting Review, Vol. 15, S. 511–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Savary, Jacques (1675), Le parfait négociant ou instruction générale pour ce qui regarde le commerce de toute sorte de Marchandises de France et des pays etrangers. Nachdruck, Düsseldorf 1993.Google Scholar
  77. Schildbach, Thomas (2002), US-GAAP, Amerikanische Rechnungslegung und ihre Grundlagen, 2. Aufl., München.Google Scholar
  78. Schneider, Dieter (1993), Jacques Savarys « Le parfait négociant », in: Vademecum zu einem Klassiker der Handlungswissenschaft, hrsg. von Schefold, B. et al., Düsseldorf, S. 85–98.Google Scholar
  79. Schneider, Dieter (1997), Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Bd. 2: Rechnungswesen, 2. Aufl., München et al.Google Scholar
  80. Selchert, Friedrich. W. (1995), § 252, in: Handbuch der Rechnungslegung, Kommentar zur Bilanzierung und Prüfung, hrsg. von Küting, K./ Weber, C.-P., Bd. 1a, 4. Aufl., Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  81. Shroff, Pervin K./ Venkataraman, Ramgopal/ Zhang, Suning (2004), The Conservatism Principle and the Asymmetric Timeliness of Earnings: An Event-Based Approach, Working Paper, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  82. Sigloch, Jochen (2000), Ein Valet dem Maßgeblichkeitsprinzip, in: BFuP, 52. Jg., S. 157–182.Google Scholar
  83. Sterling, Robert. D. (1967), Conservatism: The fundamental principle of valuation in traditional accounting, in: Abacus, Vol. 3, S. 109–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wagenhofer, Alfred (1996), Vorsichtsprinzip und Managementanreize, in: ZfbF, 48. Jg., S. 1051–1074.Google Scholar
  85. Wagenhofer, Alfred (2005), Bilanzielle Vorsicht und Informationsgehalt der Rechnungslegung, in: Kritisches zu Rechnungslegung und Unternehmensbesteuerung: Festschrift zur Vollendung des 65. Lebensjahres von Theodor Siegel, hrsg. von Schneider, D. et al., Berlin 2005, S. 227–248.Google Scholar
  86. Wagenhofer, Alfred/ Ewert, Ralf (2007), Externe Unternehmensrechnung, 2. Aufl., Berlin et al.Google Scholar
  87. Warner, Jerold B./ Watts, Ross L./ Wruck, Karen H. (1988), Stock Prices and Top Management Changes, in: Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 20, S. 461–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Watts, Ross L. (2003a), Conservatism in Accounting Part I: Explanations and Implications, in: Accounting Horizons, Vol. 17, S. 207–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Watts, Ross L. (2003b), Conservatism in Accounting Part II: Evidence and Research Opportunities, in: Accounting Horizons, Vol. 17, S. 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Watts, Ross L. (2006), What has the invisible hand achieved?, in: Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 36 (Special Issue International Accounting Policy Forum), S. 51–61.Google Scholar
  91. Watts, Ross L./ Zimmerman, Jerold L. (1986), Positive Accounting Theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  92. Winkeljohann, Norbert/ Geißler, Horst (2006), § 252, in: Beck’scher Bilanz-Kommentar, Handels- und Steuerrecht, §§ 238 bis 339 HGB, hrsg. von Ellrott, H. et al., 6. Aufl., München.Google Scholar
  93. Zhang, Jieying (2007), The contracting benefits of accounting conservatism to lenders and borrowers, Working Paper, University of Southern California (erscheint in: Journal of Accounting and Economics).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Gabler Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Lehrstuhl BWL X — Internationale RechnungslegungUniversität BayreuthBayreuthGermany
  2. 2.Institut für Rechnungswesen und WirtschaftsprüfungHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.MBA, Lehrstuhl für Externes RechnungswesenWHU — Otto Beisheim School of ManagementVallendarGermany

Personalised recommendations