IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/afr111/v2y2013i2p45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Event Study Analysis of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158

Author

Listed:
  • Abraham N. Fried

Abstract

This study examines the economic consequences of the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 158 requirement to recognize previously disclosed net pension and postretirement benefit obligations on the balance sheet. The study documents a negative stock price reaction around the release of the SFAS No. 158 Exposure Draft. Additionally, the results indicate that the market reaction varies cross-sectionally with the magnitude of the balance sheet adjustment required by SFAS No. 158 and is driven by the other postretirement plan adjustment rather than the pension plan adjustment. The findings have important implications for the recognition versus disclosure debate because they document a significant market reaction to the relocation of already disclosed information from the financial statements footnotes to the balance sheet.

Suggested Citation

  • Abraham N. Fried, 2013. "An Event Study Analysis of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(2), pages 1-45, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:jfr:afr111:v:2:y:2013:i:2:p:45
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/afr/article/download/2716/1576
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/afr/article/view/2716
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paquita Y. Davis†Friday & Chao†Shin Liu & H. Fred Mittelstaedt, 2004. "Recognition and Disclosure Reliability: Evidence from SFAS No. 106," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 399-429, June.
    2. Jeremy Gold, 2005. "Accounting/Actuarial Bias Enables Equity Investment By Defined Benefit Pension Plans," North American Actuarial Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 1-21.
    3. Julia Lynn Coronado & Steven A. Sharpe, 2003. "Did Pension Plan Accounting Contribute to a Stock Market Bubble?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 34(1), pages 323-371.
    4. Aboody, D, 1996. "Recognition versus disclosure in the oil and gas industry," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34, pages 21-32.
    5. Dowdell, Thomas D. & Klamm, Bonnie K. & Spindle, Roxanne M., 2010. "Predicting cash flows related to defined benefit plan contributions," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 505-532, October.
    6. Fried, Abraham N., 2012. "Disclosure versus recognition: Evidence from lobbying behavior in response to SFAS No. 158," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 25-32.
    7. Martin Feldstein & Randall Morck, 1983. "Pension Funding Decisions, Interest Rate Assumptions, and Share Prices," NBER Chapters, in: Financial Aspects of the United States Pension System, pages 177-210, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Barth, Mary E. & Beaver, William H. & Landsman, Wayne R., 1992. "The market valuation implications of net periodic pension cost components," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 27-62, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kusano, Masaki, 2023. "Does recognition versus disclosure of pension liabilities affect credit ratings? Evidence from Japan," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    2. Coronado, Julia & Mitchell, Olivia S. & Sharpe, Steven A. & Blake Nesbitt, S., 2008. "Footnotes aren't enough: the impact of pension accounting on stock values," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 257-276, November.
    3. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2012-010 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Edward M. Werner, 2011. "The value relevance of pension accounting information: evidence fromFortune200 firms," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(4), pages 427-458, November.
    5. Tao, Qizhi & Chen, Carl & Lu, Rui & Zhang, Ting, 2017. "Underfunding or distress? An analysis of corporate pension underfunding and the cross-section of expected stock returns," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 116-133.
    6. Ana Isabel Morais, 2012. "Value relevance of alternative methods of accounting for actuarial gains and losses," International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 69-90.
    7. Yiwei Dou & M. H. Franco Wong & Baohua Xin, 2019. "The Effect of Financial Reporting Quality on Corporate Investment Efficiency: Evidence from the Adoption of SFAS No. 123R," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2249-2266, May.
    8. Xiaoyan Cheng & David Smith, 2013. "Disclosure versus recognition: the case of expensing stock options," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 591-621, May.
    9. Kusano, Masaki, 2020. "Does recognition versus disclosure affect risk relevance? Evidence from finance leases in Japan," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    10. Santanu Mitra & Mahmud Hossain, 2009. "Value-relevance of pension transition adjustments and other comprehensive income components in the adoption year of SFAS No. 158," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 279-301, October.
    11. Fried, Abraham N. & Davis-Friday, Paquita Y., 2013. "Economic consequences of mandatory GAAP changes: The case of SFAS No. 158," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 186-194.
    12. Nakajima, Kan & Sasaki, Takafumi, 2010. "Unfunded pension liabilities and stock returns," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 47-63, January.
    13. Paul J. M. Klumpes & Kevin McMeeking, 2007. "Stock Market Sensitivity to U.K. Firms' Pension Discounting Assumptions," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 10(2), pages 221-246, September.
    14. Julia Lynn Coronado & Steven A. Sharpe, 2003. "Did Pension Plan Accounting Contribute to a Stock Market Bubble?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 34(1), pages 323-371.
    15. Masaki KUSANO & Yoshihiro SAKUMA, 2019. "Recognition versus Disclosure and Audit Fees and Costs:Evidence from Pension Accounting in Japan," Discussion papers e-19-007, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    16. Luca Larcher & Francis Breedon, 2020. "Discounting and the market valuation of defined benefit pensions," Working Papers 932, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    17. Takafumi Sasaki, 2017. "Pension accruals and share prices: evidence from the amortization costs of transition amounts," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1-2), pages 216-231, April.
    18. Kusano, Masaki & Sakuma, Yoshihiro, 2019. "Effects of recognition versus disclosure of finance leases on audit fees and costs: Evidence from Japan," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 53-68.
    19. Ragland, Linda & Reck, Jacqueline L., 2016. "The effects of the method used to present a complex item on the face of a financial statement on nonprofessional investors' judgments," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 77-89.
    20. Jan Faβhauer & Martin Glaum, 2008. "Bewertungsrelevanz von Rechnungslegungsinformationen über betriebliche Altersversorgungssysteme deutscher Unternehmen," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 60(59), pages 72-113, January.
    21. Comiran, Fernando & Graham, Carol M., 2016. "Comment letter activity: A response to proposed changes in lease accounting," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 109-117.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jfr:afr111:v:2:y:2013:i:2:p:45. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.