IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/accoun/v43y2008i4p387-393.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discussion of 'Accounting Premium' for IAS/IFRS and U.S. GAAP Vis-à-vis German GAAP"

Author

Listed:
  • Cready, William M.

Abstract

Ernstberger and Vogler [Ernstberger, J. & Vogler, O. (2008-this issue). Analyzing the German Accounting Triad with an Enhanced Multifactor Model--'Accounting Premium' for IAS/IFRS and U.S. GAAP Vis-à-vis German GAAP. International Journal of Accounting.] employ the concurrent use of three distinct accounting-standard regimes (German GAAP; U.S. GAAP; and IAS/IFRS GAAP) in Germany as a foundation for evaluating the relation between accounting standard regime and equity-return attributes. They find that firms using U.S. or IAS/IFRS GAAP have higher betas but yield lower returns (cost of capital) relative to firms employing German GAAP. They also find that portfolios designed to isolate the return impacts of U.S. and IAS/IFRS GAAP relative to German GAAP are priced in a risk-factor-like fashion. In this discussion I suggest that a good bit of this empirical evidence is problematic. I also discuss the implausibility of information quality being priced in a Fama and French [Fama, E.F. & French, K.R. (1992). The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns. The Journal of Finance 47 (2): 427-465.] factor-like fashion. Finally, I introduce the importance of conditioning analyses of the relation between firm-level information quality and equity-market return (cost of capital) on the degree to which the shareholder base of a firm holds diversified portfolios.

Suggested Citation

  • Cready, William M., 2008. "Discussion of 'Accounting Premium' for IAS/IFRS and U.S. GAAP Vis-à-vis German GAAP"," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 387-393, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:accoun:v:43:y:2008:i:4:p:387-393
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020-7063(08)00090-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:accoun:v:43:y:2008:i:4:p:387-393. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620179 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.