IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v69y2006i4p355-372.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Misleading Disclosure of Pro Forma Earnings: An Empirical Examination

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Entwistle
  • Glenn Feltham
  • Chima Mbagwu

Abstract

The Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) Act was passed in 2002 in response to various instances of corporate malfeasance. The Act, designed to protect investors, led to wide-ranging regulation over various actions of managers, auditors and investment analysts. Part of SOX, and the focus of this study, targeted the disclosure by firms of “pro formaâ€\x9D earnings, an alternate (from GAAP earnings), flexible and unaudited measure of firm performance. Specifically, SOX directed the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to craft regulation which would reduce – and preferably eliminate – any pro forma earnings disclosure which might be “misleadingâ€\x9D. Examining earnings press releases over a 3-year period, this study addresses three questions. Were firms disclosing pro forma in a potentially misleading manner, what was the nature of this potentially misleading disclosure, and did SOX affect the disclosure practices? We find the following. In 2001 (prior to SOX), 53 firms – over 10% of all U.S. S&P 500 firms – were disclosing pro forma earnings in a potentially misleading manner. This was being done most commonly by using traditional GAAP terminology (e.g., “net incomeâ€\x9D) in the press release headline to describe what was later in the press release revealed to be a pro forma amount (i.e., “net income excluding special itemsâ€\x9D). By 2003 (subsequent to the SEC regulation), potentially misleading disclosure practices were seen in less than 1% of the earnings press releases of S&P 500 firms. This significant reduction suggests that managers, prior to the regulation, were either careless in their pro forma reporting practice, or were intentionally – and unethically – attempting to mislead investors. Either way, we conclude that the SEC regulation was both necessary and effective. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Entwistle & Glenn Feltham & Chima Mbagwu, 2006. "Misleading Disclosure of Pro Forma Earnings: An Empirical Examination," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 355-372, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:69:y:2006:i:4:p:355-372
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-006-9095-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-006-9095-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-006-9095-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bhattacharya, Nilabhra & Black, Ervin L. & Christensen, Theodore E. & Larson, Chad R., 2003. "Assessing the relative informativeness and permanence of pro forma earnings and GAAP operating earnings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 285-319, December.
    2. Peltzman, Sam, 1981. "The Effects of FTC Advertising Regulation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 403-448, December.
    3. Mark T. Bradshaw & Richard G. Sloan, 2002. "GAAP versus The Street: An Empirical Assessment of Two Alternative Definitions of Earnings," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 41-66, March.
    4. Kristi Yuthas & Rodney Rogers & Jesse F. Dillard, 2002. "Communicative Action and Corporate Annual Reports," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 141-157, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ivan Bozhikin & Nikolay Dentchev, 2018. "Discovering a Wilderness of Regulatory Mechanisms for Corporate Social Responsibility: Literature Review," Economic Alternatives, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria, issue 2, pages 145-174, June.
    2. Steven Young, 2014. "The drivers, consequences and policy implications of non-GAAP earnings reporting," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(4), pages 444-465, August.
    3. Visani, Franco & Di Lascio, F. Marta L. & Gardini, Silvia, 2020. "The impact of institutional and cultural factors on the use of non-GAAP financial measures. International evidence from the oil and gas industry," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    4. Silvia Gardini & F. Marta L. Di Lascio & Franco Visani, 2017. "Opportunism in disclosing pro-forma indicators: rationale and contextual drivers," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series BEMPS42, Faculty of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
    5. Dilla, William N. & Janvrin, Diane J. & Jeffrey, Cynthia, 2014. "Pro forma accounting disclosures: The effect of reconciliations and financial reporting knowledge on nonprofessional investors' judgments," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 43-54.
    6. David Hillier & Allan Hodgson & Peta Stevenson-Clarke & Suntharee Lhaopadchan, 2008. "Accounting Window Dressing and Template Regulation: A Case Study of the Australian Credit Union Industry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 579-593, December.
    7. Jeffrey Miller, 2009. "Opportunistic Disclosures of Earnings Forecasts and Non-GAAP Earnings Measures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 3-10, May.
    8. Sascha B. Herr & Peter Lorson & Jochen Pilhofer, 2022. "Alternative Performance Measures: A Structured Literature Review of Research in Academic and Professional Journals," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 389-451, September.
    9. Amber Johnson & Majella Percy & Peta Stevenson-Clarke & Robyn Cameron, 2014. "The Impact of the Disclosure of Non-GAAP Earnings in Australian Annual Reports on Non-Sophisticated Users," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 24(3), pages 207-217, September.

    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. Florian Meier, 2020. "The Age of Cheap Money and Passive Investing: Are Pro Forma Earnings Value Relevant?," Journal of Finance and Investment Analysis, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 9(2), pages 1-1.
    2. Mei Luo & Shuai Shao & Frank Zhang, 2018. "Does financial reporting above or below operating income matter to firms and investors? The case of investment income in China," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1754-1790, December.
    3. Dirk E. Black & Ervin L. Black & Theodore E. Christensen & Kurt H. Gee, 2022. "Comparing Non-GAAP EPS in Earnings Announcements and Proxy Statements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1353-1377, February.
    4. Campbell, Linda & Pitman, Marshall K., 2009. "Post-regulation G findings," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 100-106.
    5. Zachary Kaplan & Xiumin Martin & Yifang Xie, 2021. "Truncating Optimism," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1827-1884, December.
    6. Jeremiah W. Bentley & Theodore E. Christensen & Kurt H. Gee & Benjamin C. Whipple, 2018. "Disentangling Managers’ and Analysts’ Non‐GAAP Reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 1039-1081, September.
    7. Asher Curtis & Valerie Li & Paige H. Patrick, 2021. "The use of adjusted earnings in performance evaluation," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 1290-1322, December.
    8. Greg Clinch & Ann Tarca & Marvin Wee, 2023. "Cross‐country diversity and non‐IFRS financial performance measures," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(2), pages 2473-2502, June.
    9. Jeffery S. Abarbanell & Reuven Lehavy, 2007. "Letting the “Tail Wag the Dog†: The Debate over GAAP versus Street Earnings Revisited," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 675-723, September.
    10. Susan M. Albring & María T. Cabán‐García & Jacqueline L. Reck, 2010. "The value relevance of a non‐GAAP performance metric to the capital markets," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(3), pages 264-284, August.
    11. Aubert, François & Grudnitski, Gary, 2014. "The role of reconciliation quality in limiting mispricing of non-GAAP earnings announcements by EURO STOXX firms," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 154-167.
    12. Dirk E. Black & Theodore E. Christensen, 2009. "US Managers' Use of 'Pro Forma' Adjustments to Meet Strategic Earnings Targets," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3-4), pages 297-326.
    13. Ting Zhang & So Yean Kwack & Yi Si & Gaoliang Tian, 2023. "Non‐GAAP earnings reporting following going‐concern opinions," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(3), pages 3217-3252, September.
    14. Wang, Qian & Ettredge, Michael, 2015. "Discretionary allocation of corporate income to segments," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-13.
    15. Bok Baik & David B. Farber & Kathy Petroni, 2009. "Analysts' Incentives and Street Earnings," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 45-69, March.
    16. Jarva, Henry & Kallunki, Juha-Pekka & Livne, Gilad, 2019. "Earnings performance measures and CEO turnover: Street versus GAAP earnings," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 249-266.
    17. Mark Brosnan & Keith Duncan & Tim Hasso & Janice Hollindale, 2023. "Non‐GAAP earnings and executive compensation: An experiment," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4375-4398, December.
    18. Nicola Gennaioli & Yueran Ma & Andrei Shleifer, 2016. "Expectations and Investment," NBER Macroeconomics Annual, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(1), pages 379-431.
    19. Elizabeth Demers & Clara Vega, 2008. "Soft information in earnings announcements: news or noise?," International Finance Discussion Papers 951, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    20. Vasiliki Athanasakou & Norman Strong & Martin Walker, 2009. "Earnings management or forecast guidance to meet analyst expectations?," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 3-35.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:69:y:2006:i:4:p:355-372. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.