Accounting comparability and cash flows versus accruals

Purpose This study aims to examine whether accounting comparability between two firms, as measured by De Franco et al. (2011), reflects closeness in the amounts of cash flows and accruals between the firms. Design/methodology/approach Using 278,452 pair-year observations over the years 2003–2019, the author evaluates the research question using regression models. Findings Closeness in cash flows and closeness in accruals both increase accounting comparability and the effect of closeness in cash flows is greater. The effect of closeness in earnings is greater than the combined effects of closeness in cash flows and accruals. Earnings quality strengthens, while product closeness weakens, the effects of closeness in earnings and closeness in cash flows. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to empirically test the link between the closeness in earnings components and accounting comparability. This study is also the first to examine cash flows versus accruals in the context of accounting comparability.

Comparing Non-GAAP EPS in Earnings Announcements and Proxy Statements

We compare non-GAAP earnings per share (EPS) in firms’ annual earnings announcements and proxy statements using hand-collected data from U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings. We find that proxies for capital market incentives (contracting incentives) are more highly associated with firms’ disclosure of non-GAAP EPS in annual earnings announcements (proxy statements). However, we find systematic differences in the properties of firms’ non-GAAP earnings and exclusions depending on whether they disclose non-GAAP EPS in both the earnings announcement and the proxy statement. When firms disclose non-GAAP EPS in both documents, we find that non-GAAP EPS is more useful for assessing firm value. Specifically, these firms are more likely to: (1) exclude nonrecurring items, (2) exclude less persistent earnings components, and (3) provide less aggressive non-GAAP EPS. Our results suggest that non-GAAP EPS is higher in quality for investors when disclosed in both the annual earnings announcement and the proxy statement. We provide some of the first large-sample evidence consistent with the use of non-GAAP EPS metrics in both financial reporting and compensation contracting. This paper was accepted by Brian Bushee, accounting.

Another Look at the Macroeconomic Information Content of Aggregate Earnings: Evidence from the Labor Market

We examine the macroeconomic information content of aggregate earnings from the labor market's perspective. We use insights from the labor economics literature to characterize the information contained in aggregate GAAP earnings and its components that is relevant for predicting aggregate job creation and destruction. Our results suggest that not only does aggregate earnings news convey information about future labor market aggregates, but its information content is incremental to other macroeconomic variables at near-term horizons. Further, the source of this information stems primarily from two earnings components: aggregate core earnings and special items. Shocks to core earnings signal persistent changes in economy-wide profitability that predict aggregate job creation up to four quarters ahead, while shocks to special items predict job destruction up to one quarter. Taken together, our results suggest that aggregate earnings contain useful information about future labor market conditions, with the nature of such information varying across earnings components.

Analysts, Taxes, and the Information Environment

ABSTRACT This paper investigates the extent to which analysts incorporate tax-based earnings information into their earnings forecasts relative to other earnings information. We find that analysts' misreaction to tax-based earnings information is distinct from their misreaction to other (nontax) accounting information, on average. We then show that analysts differ in their misestimation of tax and other (nontax) earnings components only when firms have weak information environments; when firms have strong information environments, analysts' forecasts fully incorporate tax-based earnings information and exhibit no difference incorporating tax-based earnings information relative to other accounting information. Our evidence suggests that, on average, forecasting tax-based earnings information is more difficult for analysts relative to forecasting other accounting information. However, access to appropriate information and resources enables analysts to better process tax information. Overall, we contribute to the literature by providing a more complete understanding of the source of analysts' tax-related forecast errors. JEL Classifications: H25; M41; D82; G14. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources identified in the text.

Earnings Shortfalls and Strategic Profit Allocations in Segment Reporting

SYNOPSIS I examine whether firms strategically classify earnings components when reporting bad earnings news. Specifically, I examine whether firms reporting small earnings shortfalls allocate profits across their business segments in a manner that understates the future implications and within-firm drivers of disappointing earnings performance. I find that firms reporting small earnings shortfalls transfer profits toward segments in which profit rates are more informative for firm value and away from segments that operate in industries with higher frequencies of bad earnings news. In addition, I find that shortfall shifting initially tempers negative market responses to shortfall news, but pricing effects reverse in the months following shortfall announcements. My findings suggest that firms strategically classify earnings components when reporting small earnings shortfalls and that strategic classifications temporarily affect the pricing of shortfall news. Data Availability: Data are available from public sources identified in this paper.

Revisiting the (Mis)Pricing of Accruals

Our paper examines inconsistent conclusions regarding the accrual anomaly and demonstrates the importance of aligning regression specifications with hypotheses. Richardson, Sloan, Soliman, and Tuna (2005) conclude that accruals are mispriced and the mispricing seems to increase as accrual reliability decreases. Barone and Magilke (2009) and Ball, Gerakos, Linnainmaa, and Nikolaev (2016) conclude that cash flows rather than accruals are mispriced. We show that the divergent conclusions come from misalignment between the null hypothesis and regression specification in Richardson et al. (2005) . In addition, analysis of the contemporaneous relations between stock returns and components of earnings supports an initial underreaction to cash flows by investors. We fail to detect links between the reliability measures in Richardson et al. (2005) and investor behavior once we align the statistical tests with the null hypothesis. Our reexamination of prior findings benefits accounting academics, standard setters, and others interested in how investors use earnings components. JEL Classifications: M41. Data Availability: All data used in this study are publicly available from the sources identified in the text.