The Value Relevance of Adopting IFRS or U.S. GAAP for The Cross-listed Financial Firms in the United States

雖然國際會計準則(IFRS)與美國會計準則(U.S. GAAP) 已達到接軌的共識，但兩者間的差異仍存在著許多差異，尤其是在金融海嘯中，更讓國際會計準則委員會(IASB)處於驗證兩者的品質是否相同的壓力下。 為提供相關證據，本研究為以實證研究方法比較國際財務報導準則與美國會計準則，使用2004-2006年之U.S.調整數來驗證其價值攸關程度，樣本來源為在美國上市之外國金融業公司。實證結果發現，美國會計準則之財務報表調整數在市價與報酬率的模型中都有較佳價值攸關性。本研究將這些調整數分成十六的不同的類別，以檢驗何項調整有最大的影響。本研究發現在股東權益中，最大的影響之調整數為投資、股東權益-負債項目及無形資產而在淨利當中最大的影響的調整數分別為，投資、現金及其相關利益以及股東權益-負債項目。Although there is an active process to achieve convergence, the debates of the difference between IFRS and U.S. GAAP also put the IASB under tremendous pressure to conform IFRS to arguably a "lesser-quality" answer under U.S. GAAP. To provide evidences for the debates, this study investigates the market valuation of earnings and book value amounts prepared under IFRS and U.S. GAAP. Using 2004 to 2006 reconciliation disclosures of all financial cross-listed firms in the United States, I find that the U.S. GAAP earnings reconciliation adjustment is value relevant and that U.S. GAAP amounts are valued different for market value and return models. U.S. GAAP appears to be a better performance measure as reflected by the market value than IFRS. I also divide the reconciliation adjustment into 16 categories, and find that we observe that the categories where the reconciling items had the greatest impact in shareholders‘ equities were investments-infrastructure followed by capital-liabilities and equities and intangibles. The reconciling items that had the most influence on net income were investments-infrastructure, cash and benefits and capital-liabilities and equities