| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 304.79 KB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Some standards permit a choice between different measurement bases. IAS 16 and
IAS 40 allow entities to choose between fair value and cost-based measurement for
property, plant and equipment (PPE) and investment property (IP), respectively.
This study analyzes the accounting practice concerning measurement of PPE and IP
after recognition, under IFRS. The sample was extracted from stock exchange listed
European companies included in the S&P Europe 350 Index. Data was hand collected
from firm’s annual reports for the years of 2004 and 2005.
Findings indicate great resistance to the fair value model. The preference for historical
cost model is almost unanimous among European firms that prepared their
consolidated financial statements in compliance with IFRS for the first time in 2005.
Results seem to be consistent with the explanation that invokes the familiarity as
being one of the reasons underlying the preparers’ preference for historical cost. That
is, firms that applied historical cost model under former GAAP tend to carry on with
historical cost under IFRS. Firms that had revaluate fixed assets before or at the
transition date are more likely to adopt fair value model under IFRS. However, most
of the companies that reported tangible fixed assets revaluations under previous
GAAP shift to historical model under IFRS.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Contexto Educativo
Citação
ANNUAL CONGRESS OF THE EUROPEAN ACCOUNTING ASSOCIATION, 30th, Lisbon, Portugal, 25-27 April, 2007. 21 p.
Editora
European Accounting Association