JSE前40强公司公允价值运用程度分析

IF 1.1 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
W. van Zijl, Valencia Hewlett
{"title":"JSE前40强公司公允价值运用程度分析","authors":"W. van Zijl, Valencia Hewlett","doi":"10.1080/10291954.2020.1860484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fair value’s advantages, disadvantages and ideology have been debated thoroughly by academics and practitioners for decades. The few implementation papers which do exist are primarily concerned with developed economies. This gap is despite the prior literature acknowledging the likely difficulties of fair value use by less developed markets and economies. This paper contributes to addressing this gap by providing an analysis of the extent and use of fair value by Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) Top 40 companies for the period 2013–2017. This paper finds limited use of fair value by JSE Top 40 companies. On average, only 184 assets and liabilities make use of fair value each year and this has not changed significantly over time. Most fair value use is by the financial services industry (41%) and for financial instruments (80%). Critically, only 28% of all financial elements made use of Level 1 inputs, and only 15% were classified overall as Level 1 inputs. The findings suggest Level 1 inputs are not widely available for financial elements and are rarely available for non-financial assets. When fair values are used for non-financial assets, this is mainly for investment property, commodity-inventories and impairment tests. Because of the reliance on Level 2 and 3 inputs, the results suggest fair value is a costly measurement basis to implement in South Africa and frequently requires management judgement. The consequence is that many fair values are susceptible to bias and manipulation.","PeriodicalId":43731,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Accounting Research","volume":"36 1","pages":"81 - 104"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10291954.2020.1860484","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An analysis of the extent and use of fair value by JSE Top 40 companies\",\"authors\":\"W. van Zijl, Valencia Hewlett\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10291954.2020.1860484\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Fair value’s advantages, disadvantages and ideology have been debated thoroughly by academics and practitioners for decades. The few implementation papers which do exist are primarily concerned with developed economies. This gap is despite the prior literature acknowledging the likely difficulties of fair value use by less developed markets and economies. This paper contributes to addressing this gap by providing an analysis of the extent and use of fair value by Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) Top 40 companies for the period 2013–2017. This paper finds limited use of fair value by JSE Top 40 companies. On average, only 184 assets and liabilities make use of fair value each year and this has not changed significantly over time. Most fair value use is by the financial services industry (41%) and for financial instruments (80%). Critically, only 28% of all financial elements made use of Level 1 inputs, and only 15% were classified overall as Level 1 inputs. The findings suggest Level 1 inputs are not widely available for financial elements and are rarely available for non-financial assets. When fair values are used for non-financial assets, this is mainly for investment property, commodity-inventories and impairment tests. Because of the reliance on Level 2 and 3 inputs, the results suggest fair value is a costly measurement basis to implement in South Africa and frequently requires management judgement. The consequence is that many fair values are susceptible to bias and manipulation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43731,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal of Accounting Research\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"81 - 104\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10291954.2020.1860484\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal of Accounting Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10291954.2020.1860484\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Accounting Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10291954.2020.1860484","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

公允价值的优势、劣势和意识形态几十年来一直是学术界和实践者争论的焦点。现有的几份执行文件主要涉及发达经济体。尽管先前的文献承认较不发达的市场和经济体使用公允价值可能存在困难,但这一差距仍然存在。本文通过对约翰内斯堡证券交易所(JSE)前40家公司2013-2017年期间公允价值的程度和使用进行分析,有助于解决这一差距。本文发现JSE排名前40的公司对公允价值的使用有限。平均而言,每年只有184项资产和负债使用公允价值,而且随着时间的推移,这一比例并没有显著变化。大多数公允价值的使用是金融服务业(41%)和金融工具(80%)。关键是,所有财务要素中只有28%使用了第一级投入,只有15%被总体归类为第一级投入。调查结果表明,一级投入并不广泛用于金融要素,很少用于非金融资产。当公允价值用于非金融资产时,主要用于投资性房地产、商品库存和减值测试。由于对第2级和第3级输入的依赖,结果表明公允价值是在南非实施的昂贵的计量基础,并且经常需要管理层的判断。其结果是,许多公允价值容易受到偏见和操纵。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An analysis of the extent and use of fair value by JSE Top 40 companies
Fair value’s advantages, disadvantages and ideology have been debated thoroughly by academics and practitioners for decades. The few implementation papers which do exist are primarily concerned with developed economies. This gap is despite the prior literature acknowledging the likely difficulties of fair value use by less developed markets and economies. This paper contributes to addressing this gap by providing an analysis of the extent and use of fair value by Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) Top 40 companies for the period 2013–2017. This paper finds limited use of fair value by JSE Top 40 companies. On average, only 184 assets and liabilities make use of fair value each year and this has not changed significantly over time. Most fair value use is by the financial services industry (41%) and for financial instruments (80%). Critically, only 28% of all financial elements made use of Level 1 inputs, and only 15% were classified overall as Level 1 inputs. The findings suggest Level 1 inputs are not widely available for financial elements and are rarely available for non-financial assets. When fair values are used for non-financial assets, this is mainly for investment property, commodity-inventories and impairment tests. Because of the reliance on Level 2 and 3 inputs, the results suggest fair value is a costly measurement basis to implement in South Africa and frequently requires management judgement. The consequence is that many fair values are susceptible to bias and manipulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
×
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