On The Legitimacy of Accounting Standards

Mark Penno
{"title":"On The Legitimacy of Accounting Standards","authors":"Mark Penno","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3238742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While it is widely agreed upon that accounting standards must be legitimate, ‘legitimacy’ is not well-defined. Accordingly, I model three widely accepted hallmarks of legitimacy: (1) an increasing likelihood that independent experts with the same facts will arrive at the same classification (objectivity), (2) an increasing similarity of otherwise identically classified transactions (financial transparency) and (3) promoting management’s stewardship (governance) while providing financial statement users with a better understanding of that stewardship (governance transparency). The results indicate that factors commonly associated with increased enforcement (e.g., career concerns, securities regulation, or courts) unambiguously increase all three aspects of legitimacy, while specifying an accounting standard in more detail may have little or no effect on objectivity, or have ambiguous effects on financial transparency. Surprisingly, the model demonstrates that the level of governance and governance transparency may change in opposite directions as a standard’s specificity changes.","PeriodicalId":12319,"journal":{"name":"Financial Accounting eJournal","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Financial Accounting eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3238742","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

While it is widely agreed upon that accounting standards must be legitimate, ‘legitimacy’ is not well-defined. Accordingly, I model three widely accepted hallmarks of legitimacy: (1) an increasing likelihood that independent experts with the same facts will arrive at the same classification (objectivity), (2) an increasing similarity of otherwise identically classified transactions (financial transparency) and (3) promoting management’s stewardship (governance) while providing financial statement users with a better understanding of that stewardship (governance transparency). The results indicate that factors commonly associated with increased enforcement (e.g., career concerns, securities regulation, or courts) unambiguously increase all three aspects of legitimacy, while specifying an accounting standard in more detail may have little or no effect on objectivity, or have ambiguous effects on financial transparency. Surprisingly, the model demonstrates that the level of governance and governance transparency may change in opposite directions as a standard’s specificity changes.
论会计准则的合法性
虽然人们普遍认为会计准则必须是合法的,但“合法性”并没有明确定义。因此,我对三个被广泛接受的合法性标志进行了建模:(1)具有相同事实的独立专家得出相同分类(客观性)的可能性越来越大,(2)在其他方面分类相同的交易(财务透明度)的相似性越来越大,(3)促进管理层的管理(治理),同时为财务报表使用者提供更好的理解管理(治理透明度)。结果表明,通常与加强执法相关的因素(例如,职业考虑、证券监管或法院)无疑增加了合法性的所有三个方面,而更详细地规定会计准则可能对客观性几乎没有影响,或者对财务透明度有模糊的影响。令人惊讶的是,该模型表明,随着标准特异性的变化,治理水平和治理透明度可能会朝着相反的方向变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信