IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcjaxx/v10y2022i3p301-322.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cannot investors really price the book-tax differences correctly? Evidence from accelerated depreciation policies

Author

Listed:
  • Hang Liu
  • Yichao Zhao

Abstract

Extensive studies have found that investors misprice book-tax differences (BTDs). We take the accelerated depreciation policies of fixed assets implemented in China since 2014 as the research setting and investigate the following issues: When a temporary BTD is generated due to the tax preferential policies of accelerated depreciation, and the temporary BTD disclosed in financial statements can be clearly understood by investors, will investors still misprice it? We find that accelerated depreciation policy-induced temporary BTD (AccBTD) and other temporary BTD (OthBTD) are both informative. Furthermore, investors could correctly price AccBTD while misprice OthBTD. Finally, active institutional investors and analysts can promote the correct pricing of AccBTD but cannot alleviate the mispricing of OthBTD. Overall, our evidence suggests that investors do not always misprice BTDs. Specifically, when we decompose the specific components of BTDs and control the measurement errors effectively, we will have completely different findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Hang Liu & Yichao Zhao, 2022. "Cannot investors really price the book-tax differences correctly? Evidence from accelerated depreciation policies," China Journal of Accounting Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 301-322, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcjaxx:v:10:y:2022:i:3:p:301-322
    DOI: 10.1080/21697213.2022.2143671
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21697213.2022.2143671
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21697213.2022.2143671?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.

    More about this item

    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:taf:rcjaxx:v:10:y:2022:i:3:p:301-322. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcja .

    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.