IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hcx/wpaper/0413.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Earnings Quality Consequences of Announcements to Voluntarily Adopt the Fair Value Method of Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation

Author

Listed:
  • Shilpa Manaktala

    (University of Connecticut, School of Business)

  • John D. Phillips

    (University of Connecticut, School of Business)

  • Karen Teitel

    (Department of Economics, College of the Holy Cross)

Abstract

We identify 133 firms that between July and December 2002, announced plans to voluntarily adopt the fair value method of accounting for stock-based compensation. We investigate whether such announcements increased the quality of these firms’ earnings as perceived by market participants. Answering this research question not only provides evidence relevant to the debate surrounding the expensing of employee stock options, but doing so provides evidence that conservative accounting choices in general lead to higher perceived earnings quality. Using two measures of earnings quality, the price-earnings relation and the earnings response coefficient, we find evidence consistent with an increase in perceived earnings quality for these firms relative to a control set of firms that in 2002 did not announce plans to adopt the SFAS 123 stock-based compensation recognition provisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Shilpa Manaktala & John D. Phillips & Karen Teitel, 2004. "The Earnings Quality Consequences of Announcements to Voluntarily Adopt the Fair Value Method of Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation," Working Papers 0413, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hcx:wpaper:0413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hcapps.holycross.edu/hcs/RePEc/hcx/HC0413-Teitel_Options.pdf
    File Function: 2004
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Easton, Pd & Harris, Ts, 1991. "Earnings As An Explanatory Variable For Returns," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 19-36.
    2. David Aboody & Mary E. Barth & Ron Kasznik, 2004. "Firms' Voluntary Recognition of Stock‐Based Compensation Expense," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 123-150, May.
    3. Mary E. Barth & Greg Clinch & Toshi Shibano, 2003. "Market Effects of Recognition and Disclosure," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 581-609, September.
    4. Espahbodi, Hassan & Espahbodi, Pouran & Rezaee, Zabihollah & Tehranian, Hassan, 2002. "Stock price reaction and value relevance of recognition versus disclosure: the case of stock-based compensation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 343-373, August.
    5. Fields, Thomas D. & Lys, Thomas Z. & Vincent, Linda, 2001. "Empirical research on accounting choice," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 255-307, September.
    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. Koh, Wei Chern, 2011. "What drives firms' decisions to lobby and determinants of their lobbying positions: Evidence from firms' comment letter submissions during FASB's stock option expensing proposal in 2004," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 1-24, March.
    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. Merz, Alexander, 2017. "What have we learned from SFAS 123r and IFRS 2? A review of existing evidence and future research suggestions," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 14-33.
    4. Choudhary, Preeti, 2011. "Evidence on differences between recognition and disclosure: A comparison of inputs to estimate fair values of employee stock options," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 77-94.
    5. Iatridis, George & Valahi, Styliani, 2010. "Voluntary IAS 1 accounting disclosures prior to official IAS adoption: An empirical investigation of UK firms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-14, January.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Stephen Morris & Hyun Song Shin, 2007. "Optimal Communication," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 5(2-3), pages 594-602, 04-05.
    9. Eugene Kang & Brian R. Tan, 2008. "Accounting Choices and Director Interlocks: A Social Network Approach to the Voluntary Expensing of Stock Option Grants," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(9-10), pages 1079-1102.
    10. Matolcsy, Zoltan & Riddell, Suzanna & Wright, Anna, 2009. "Alternative explanations for the association between market values and stock-based compensation expenditure," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 95-107.
    11. Stephen Morris & Hyun Song Shin, 2012. "Contagious Adverse Selection," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Butzbach, Olivier & Di Carlo, Ferdinando, 2008. "The effects of stock options accounting regulation on corporate governance: A comparative European study," MPRA Paper 14843, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Choudhary, Preeti, 2011. "Evidence on differences between recognition and disclosure: A comparison of inputs to estimate fair values of employee stock options," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 77-94, February.
    14. Ana I Lopes & Isabel Lourenço & Mark Soliman, 2013. "Do alternative methods of reporting non-controlling interests really matter?," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 38(1), pages 7-30, April.
    15. repec:mth:ijafr8:v:9:y:2019:i:1:p:89-121 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Iatridis, George, 2010. "International Financial Reporting Standards and the quality of financial statement information," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 193-204, June.
    17. Marco Di Maggio & Marco Pagano, 2018. "Financial Disclosure and Market Transparency with Costly Information Processing [Bargaining with incomplete information]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 22(1), pages 117-153.
    18. Fargher, Neil & Wee, Marvin, 2019. "The impact of Ball and Brown (1968) on generations of research," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 55-72.
    19. Armstrong, Christopher S. & Guay, Wayne R. & Weber, Joseph P., 2010. "The role of information and financial reporting in corporate governance and debt contracting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 179-234, December.
    20. Yen†Jung Lee & Kathy R. Petroni & Min Shen, 2006. "Cherry Picking, Disclosure Quality, and Comprehensive Income Reporting Choices: The Case of Property†Liability Insurers," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(3), pages 655-692, September.
    21. David Aboody & Mary E. Barth & Ron Kasznik, 2004. "Firms' Voluntary Recognition of Stock‐Based Compensation Expense," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 123-150, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    SFAS; stock options; accounting; expensing options; fair value method;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hcx:wpaper:0413. 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: Victor Matheson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deholus.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.