Rilevanza ed affidabilità del valore contabile dell’avviamento e dei beni immateriali sul mercato italiano

Anteprima

Il presente lavoro si propone di indagare quale sia la rilevanza e l’affidabilità percepita dal mercato finanziario sul valore espresso nel bilancio d’esercizio sui beni immateriali e l’avviamento delle società quotate. Lo studio ha analizzato le aziende quotate al FTSE Italia All-share, nel periodo fra il 2002 ed il 2008. Attraverso un modello di regressione a più variabili si è verificato che: a) il valore contabile dei beni immateriali e dell’avviamento sono correlati positivamente al valore di mercato del capitale, b) la transizione agli IAS/IFRS non ha comportato un incremento della rilevanza ed affidabilità percepita dal mercato dei beni immateriali e avviamento.

______________________________________

We examine the value relevance and reliability perceived by the market for goodwill and identifiable intangible assets as reported in the financial statements of a sample of Italian listed companies. The dataset is composed of companies listed on FTSE Italia All-share during the period 2002-2008. Using a multiple regression model, our findings suggest that for the Italian companies the information relating to goodwill and identifiable intangible assets is value relevant in terms of market value. Moreover, we did not find any significant change in the reliability of these items after the introduction of IAS/IFRS.

 _

Keywords: intangible assets, goodwill, value relevance, reliability, market value, IAS/IFRS

Bibliografia
  1. Aboody D., Lev B. (1998), The value relevance of intangibles: the case of software capitalization, Journal of Accounting Research, 36, pp. 161-191.
  2. Ahmed A.S., Morton R.M., Schaefer T.F. (2000), Accounting conservatism and the valuation of accounting numbers: evidence on the Feltham Ohlson (1996) model, Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 15, pp. 271-292.
  3. Ball R., (2006), International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS): Pros and cons for investors, Accounting and Business Research, International Accounting Policy Forum, pp. 5-27.
  4. Barth M.E., Beaver W.H., Landsman W.R. (2001), The relevance of the value relevance literature for financial standard setting, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31 (1- 3), pp. 77-104.
  5. Barth M.E., Clinch G. (1998), Revalued Financial, tangible and intangible assets: associations with share prices and non market-based value estimates, Journal of Accounting Research, 36, pp. 199-233.
  6. Besley D.A., Kuh F., Welsh R.E. (1980), Regression diagnostics: identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. (New York: Wiley Interscience).
  7. Boone J.P. e Raman K.K. (2001), Off-balance sheet R&D assets and market liquidity, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 20, pp. 97-128.
  8. Botosan C.A. (1997), Disclosure level and the cost of equity capital, The Accounting Review, 72, 3, pp. 323-349.
  9. Chalmers K., Clinch G., Godfrey J. (2008), Adoption of international financial reporting standards: impact on the value relevance of intangible assets, Australian Accounting Review, 18, 46, pp. 237-247.
  10. Choi W.W., Kwon S.S., Lobo G.J. (2000), Market valuation of intangible asset, Journal of Business Research, 49, pp. 35-45.
  11. Dahmash F.N., Durand R.B., Watson J. (2009), The value relevance and reliability of reported goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, The British Accounting Review, 41, pp. 120-137.
  12. Dechow P.M., Hutton A.P., Sloan R.G. (1999), An empirical assessment of the residual income valuation model, Journal of Accounting and Economics, pp. 1-34.
  13. Dimson E., Marsh P., Staunton M. (2002), Triumph of the optimists: 101 years of global investment returns. (Princeton: University Press).
  14. Di Pietra R., McLeay S., Riccaboni A. (2001), Regulation accounting within the political and legal system, Contemporary issues in accounting regulation. (Boston: Kluwer Academic Publisher), pp. 59-77.
  15. Easley D., O’Hara M. (2004), Information and the cost of capital, The Journal of Finance, 59, 4, pp. 1553-1583.
  16. Feltham G.A., Ohlson J.A. (1995), Valuation and clear surplus accounting for operating and financial activities, Contemporary Accounting Research, pp. 689-731.
  17. Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) (1978), Objectives of Financial Reporting by Business Enterprises, Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts, 1.
  18. Garcìa-Ayuso M. (2003), Factors explaining the inefficient valuation of intangibles, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 16, pp. 57-69.
  19. Godfrey J., Koh P.S. (2001), The relevance to firm valuation of capitalizing intangible assets in total and by cathegory, Australian Accounting Review, 11, 2, pp. 39-48.
  20. Holthausen R.W. e Watts R.L. (2001), The relevance of the value relevance literature for financial accounting standard setting, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31, pp. 3-76.
  21. International Accounting Standard Board (IASB) (2008), Exposure draft of an improved conceptual framework for Financial Reporting.
  22. Jeggings R., Robinson J., Thomson II R.B., Duvall L. (1996), The relation between accounting goodwill numbers and equity values, Journal of business finance and accounting, 6, pp. 513-533.
  23. Lev B. (2001), Intangibles: management, measurement and reporting. (Washington: Brookings Institution Press).
  24. Lev B. (2008), A rejoinder to Douglas Skinner’s Accounting for intangibles – a critical review of policy recommendations, Accounting and Business Research, 38, 3, pp. 209-213.
  25. Lev B., Zarowin P. (1999), The Boundaries of Financial Reporting and how to extend them, Journal of Accounting Research, 37, 3, pp. 353-386.
  26. McCarthy M.G., Schneider D.K. (1995), Market perception of goodwill: some empirical evidence, Accounting and Business Research, 26, 1, pp. 69-81.
  27. McKinnox J.G., White H. (1985), Some heteroschedasticity consistent covariance matrix estimator with improved finite sample properties, Journal of Econometrics, 29, pp. 53-57.
  28. McLay S, Riccaboni A. (2001), Contemporary issues in accounting regulation. (Boston: Kluwer Academic Publisher).
  29. Morais A.I., Curto J.D., (2009), Mandatory Adoption of IASB Standards: Value relevance and Country-Specific Factors, Australian Accounting Review, 19, 2, pp. 128-143.
  30. Morricone S., Oriani R., Sobrero M. (2010), The value relevance of intangibile assets: evidence of mandatory adoption of International Accounting Standards (IAS/IFRS),Working Paper.
  31. Moscariello N., Pizzo M., Skerrat L. (2011), The impact of the IFRS on the debt contracting process: a comparison between Italy and UK, Working Paper.
  32. Nissim D., Penman S.H. (2001), Ratio analysis and equity valuation: from research to practice, Review of Accounting Studies, 6, pp. 109-154.
  33. Ohlson J.A. (1995), Earnings, book values and dividend in equity valuation, Contemporary Accounting Research, 11, pp. 661-688.
  34. Oliveira L., Rodrigues L.L., Craig R. (2010), Intangible assets and value relevance: evidence from Portuguese Stock Exchange, The British Accounting Review, 30, pp. 1-12.
  35. Paglietti P. (2009), Investigating the effects of the EU mandatory adoption of IFRS on accounting quality: evidence from Italy, International Journal of business and management, 12, 4, pp. 3-18.
  36. Sengupta P. (1998), Corporate disclosure quality and the cost of debt, The Accounting Review, 73, 4, pp. 459-474.
  37. Shahwan Y. (2004), The Australian Market perception of goodwill and identifiable intangibles, Journal of Applied Business Research, 20, 4, pp. 45-63.
  38. Skinner D.J. (2008), Accounting for intangibles – critical review of policy recommendation, Accounting and Business Research, 38, 3, pp. 191-204.
  39. Soderstrom N.S., Sun K.J. (2007), IFRS Adoption and accounting quality, a review, European Accounting Review, 16,4, pp. 675-702.
  40. Tsoligkas F., Tsalavoutas I. (2010), Value relevance in the UK after IFRS mandatory implementation, Working Paper, SSRN.
  41. White H. (1980), A Heteroschedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroschedasticity, Econometrica, pp. 817-838.