Comparabilidade das Escolhas Contábeis na Mensuração do Imobilizado de Empresas Listadas na BM&FBOVESPA e na NYSE

Sirlei Lemes; Patrícia de Souza Costa; Vinícius Aversari Martins

doi:10.51341/1984-3925_2018v21n2a5

Autores

Sirlei Lemes Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)
Patrícia de Souza Costa Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)
Vinícius Aversari Martins Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51341/1984-3925_2018v21n2a5

Palavras-chave:

Comparabilidade, Escolhas contábeis, Imobilizado, Índice T, Análise de Conglomerados

Resumo

O estudo teve por objetivo identificar os setores com práticas contábeis similares no reconhecimento do imobilizado, a partir da comparabilidade das escolhas contábeis realizadas por 63 companhias brasileiras pertencentes ao IBOVESPA e por 63 companhias estrangeiras com maior volume de ações negociadas na NYSE, após a adoção das IFRS. Os resultados apontaram um alto ou moderado índice de comparabilidade para as sete práticas investigadas nas companhias listadas em cada bolsa de valores e entre todas as companhias das duas bolsas. A exceção foi a mensuração inicial, em que a alta dispersão das práticas resultou em baixa comparabilidade. Na análise setorial, verificou-se que a comparabilidade das práticas contábeis é maior entre companhias estrangeiras do mesmo setor do que entre as companhias nacionais. Analistas, investidores, reguladores e normatizadores podem se beneficiar dos resultados deste estudo ao avaliarem o tradeoff entre comparabilidade e representação fidedigna no reconhecimento do imobilizado.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Sirlei Lemes, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)

Professora do Programa de Pós Graduação em Ciências Contábeis - Faculdade de Ciências Contábeis

Patrícia de Souza Costa, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)

Professora do Programa de Pós Graduação em Ciências Contábeis - Faculdade de Ciências Contábeis

Referências

Barth, M. E. (2008). Global financial reporting: implications for U.S. academics. The Accounting Review, 83(5), 1159-1179. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2008.83.5.1159.

Barth, M. E.; Landsman, W. R., Lang, M., & Williams, C. (2012). Are IFRS-based and US GAAP-based accounting amounts comparable? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 54(1), 68-93. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1585404.

Barth, M. E. (2013). Global comparability in financial reporting: what, why, how, and when? China Journal of Accounting Studies, 1(1), 2-12. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21697221.2013.781765.

Barth, M. E. (2014, June). Measurement in financial reporting: the need for concepts (Commentary). Accounting Horizons, 28(2), 331-352. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-50689.

Botinha, R. A., & Lemes, S. (2017). Comparabilidade das Escolhas Contábeis em Propriedades para Investimentos de Empresas Listadas na BM&FBOVESPA e NYSE. Contabilidade, Gestão e Governança, 20(1), 113-132. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21714/1984-3925_2017v20n1a7.

Cairns, C., Massoudi, D., Taplin, R., & Tarca, A. (2011). IFRS Fair Value measurement and accounting policy choice in the United Kingdom and Australia. The British Accounting Review, 43(1), 1-21. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2010.10.003.

Christensen, H. B., & Nikolaev, V. V. (2013). Does fair value accounting for non-financial assets pass the market test? Review of Accounting Studies, 18, 734-775. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-013-9232-0

Cole, V., Branson, J., & Breesch, D. (2009). How to measure the comparability of financial statements? Int. J. Managerial and Financial Accounting, 1(4), 379-397. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMFA.2009.025363.

Cole, V., & Branson, J., & Breesch, D. (2011). Determinants influencing the De facto Comparability of European IFRS Financial Statements, 2011. Retrieved June18, 2017, from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1967001.

Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis (CPC). (2011). Estrutura Conceitual para Elaboração e Divulgação de Relatório Contábil-Financeiro(R1). Recuperado em 26 agosto, 2017, de http://static.cpc.mediagroup.com.br/Documentos/147_CPC00_R1.pdf.

Demaria, S., & Dufour, D. (2007). First time adoption of IFRS, fair value option, conservatism: evidences from French listed companies. In 30ème Colloque de l’EAA (p. 24). Retrieved March 28, 2018, fromhttps://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00266189/document

Dias Filho, J. M., & Machado, L. H. B. (2012). Abordagens da pesquisa em Contabilidade. In: S. de Iudícibus & A. B. Lopes. Teoria Avançada da Contabilidade. 2.ed. São Paulo: Atlas.

Dichev, I. D., Li, F. (2013). Growth and accounting choice. Australian Journal of Management, 38(2), 221–252. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896212469520.

Dragu, I. M. (2010). Diversity of national and international accounting practices: the case of intangible assets. Directory of Open Access Journals, University of Oradea.

Durocher, S., & Gendron Y. (2011). IFRS: on the docility of sophisticated users in preserving the ideal of comparability. European Accounting Review, 20(2), 233-262. Doi: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09638181003687869.

Fields, T. D., Lys, T. Z., & Vincent, L. (2001). Empirical research on accounting choice. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31(1-3), 255-307. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00028-3.

Francis. J. (2001). Discussion of empirical research on accounting choice. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31(1-3), 309-319. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00017-9.

International Accounting Standards Board (IAS). (2003). International Accounting Standard 16 - Property, Plant and Equipment. Retrieved August 26, 2017, from http://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-16-property-plant-and-equipment/.

Jaafar, A., & McLeay, S. (2007). Country effects and sector effects on the harmonization of accounting policy choice. ABACUS, 43(2), 156-189. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6281.2007.00224.x.

Nobes, C. W. (2006). The survival of international differences under IFRS: towards a research agenda. Accounting and Business Research, 36(3), 233-245. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2006.9730023.

Nobes, C.W. (2013). The continued survival of international differences under IFRS. Accounting and Business Research, 43(2), 83-111. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2013.770644.

Preface IFRS. (2014). International Financial Reporting Standards. IASC Foundation: United Kingdom. Retrieved September 20, 2017, from https://www.iasplus.com/en/standards/other/preface.

Schipper, K. (2003). Principles-based accounting standards (Commentary). Accounting Horizons, 17(1), 61-72. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.2003.17.1.61.

Silva, D. M., Martins, V. A., & Lemes, S. (2016). Escolhas contábeis: reflexões para a pesquisa. Revista Contemporânea de Contabilidade, 13(29), 129-156. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/2175-8069.2016v13n29p129.

Souza, F. E., & Lemes, S. (2016). Comparability of accounting choices in subsequent measurement of fixed assets, intangible assets, and investment property in South American companies. Revista Contabilidade e Finanças, 27(71), 169-184. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1808-057x201501480.

Stadler, C., & Nobes, C. W. (2014). The Influence of Country, Industry, and Topic Factors on IFRS Policy Choice. ABACUS,50(4), 386-421.Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/abac.12035.

Taplin, H. R. (2004). A unified approach to the measurement of international accounting harmony. Accounting and Business Research, 34(1), 57-73. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2004.9729951.

Taplin, H. R. (2006). A practical guide to constructing specialised indices of international accounting harmony using the harmoniser software. FRRaG – Financial Reporting, Regulation and Governance, 5(1), 1-28. Retrieved September 20, 2017, from http://ceebi.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/3.FRRaG_2006_5-1_Refereed_Taplin.pdf.

Taplin, H. R. (2010). Statitical inference using the T index to quantify the level of comparability between accounts. Accounting and Business Research, 40(1), 75-101. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2010.9663385.

Taplin, R. H. (2011). The Measurement of Comparability in Accounting Research. Abacus, 47(3), 383-409.Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6281.2011.00345.x.

Taplin, R. H., Verona, R., & Doni, F. (2011). The process of global convergence IFRS/US-GAAP: an empirical analysis on IFRS-compliant and US GAAP-compliant financial statements. Proceedings of the Accounting Renaissance: lessons from the crisis and looking into the Future Veneza, Italy.

Taplin, R. H., Yuan, W., & Brown. A. (2014). The use of fair value and historical cost accounting for investment properties in Chine. Australian, Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 8(1), 101-113. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v8i1.6.

Tudor, A. T., & Dragu, I. M. (2010). Impact of International Financial Reporting Standards on Accounting Practices Harmonization within European Union – particular case of intangible assets. Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 12(1), 191-206.

Watts, R. L. (1992). Accounting choice theory and market-based research in accounting. British Accounting Review, 24(3), 235-267. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-8389(05)80023-X.

Watts, R. L., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1990). Positive Accounting Theory: a ten-year perspective. The Accounting Review, 65(1), 131-156. Retrieved September 20, 2017, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/247880.

Zhang, Y., & Andrew, J. (2010). Land in China: re-considering comparability in financial reporting. Australasian Accounting Business and Finance Journal, 4(1), 53-75.