2017•Australasian Accounting Business and Finance JournalOpen access

The Influence of IFRS Adoption on Corporate Transparency and Accountability: Evidence from New Zealand

Jude Edeigba, Felix Amenkhienan

Open full text 33 citations

Abstract

This study investigates the implications of the gap between International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and New Zealand International Financial Reporting Standards (NZIFRS) on financial reporting transparency, accountability and corporate fraud. Content analysis of IFRS and NZIFRS was carried out to determine if there are differences between IFRS and NZIFRS. Four IFRS, namely IAS 12, IFRS 13, IFRS 15, IAS 17 and IFRS 16 were analysed on the basis of adoption concessions and Reduced Disclosure Regime (RDR) for tier 1 and 2 entities. The findings from these standards led to a review of the associated IFRS to further understand the implications of the standards on financial reporting transparency and decline in incidences of corporate fraud. We found that the difference between IFRS and NZIFRS lies in the financial reporting framework for tier 2 entities. However, we did not find a difference between IFRS and NZIFRS for entities in tier 1 but we identified a decline in incidences of corporate fraud after IFRS was adopted. We further identified the presence of information asymmetry for tier 2 which is capable of retaining Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAPs). These differences may increase the incidence of corporate fraud among the entities in tier 2 of External Reporting Framework. This is due to an excessive concession from IFRS implementation in New Zealand.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This study investigates the implications of the gap between International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and New Zealand International Financial Reporting Standards (NZIFRS) on financial reporting transparency, accountability and corporate fraud. Content analysis of IFRS and NZIFRS was carried out to determine if there are differences between IFRS and NZIFRS. Four IFRS, namely IAS 12, IFRS 13, IFRS 15, IAS 17 and IFRS 16 were analysed on the basis of adoption concessions and Reduced Disclosure Regime (RDR) for tier 1 and 2 entities. The findings from these standards led to a review of the associated IFRS to further understand the implications of the standards on financial reporting transparency and decline in incidences of corporate fraud. We found that the difference between IFRS and NZIFRS lies in the financial reporting framework for tier 2 entities. However, we did not find a difference between IFRS and NZIFRS for entities in tier 1 but we identified a decline in incidences of corporate fraud after IFRS was adopted. We further identified the presence of information asymmetry for tier 2 which is capable of retaining Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAPs). These differences may increase the incidence of corporate fraud among the entities in tier 2 of External Reporting Framework. This is due to an excessive concession from IFRS implementation in New Zealand.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 33 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This study investigates the implications of the gap between International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and New Zealand International Financial Reporting Standards (NZIFRS) on financial reporting transparency, accountability and corporate fraud. Content analysis of IFRS and NZIFRS was carried out to determine if there are differences between IFRS and NZIFRS. Four IFRS, namely IAS 12, IFRS 13, IFRS 15, IAS 17 and IFRS 16 were analysed on the basis of adoption concessions and Reduced Disclosure Regime (RDR) for tier 1 and 2 entities. The findings from these standards led to a review of the associated IFRS to further understand the implications of the standards on financial reporting transparency and decline in incidences of corporate fraud. We found that the difference between IFRS and NZIFRS lies in the financial reporting framework for tier 2 entities. However, we did not find a difference between IFRS and NZIFRS for entities in tier 1 but we identified a decline in incidences of corporate fraud after IFRS was adopted. We further identified the presence of information asymmetry for tier 2 which is capable of retaining Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAPs). These differences may increase the incidence of corporate fraud among the entities in tier 2 of External Reporting Framework. This is due to an excessive concession from IFRS implementation in New Zealand.

Key concepts: International Financial Reporting Standards, Accounting, Business, Transparency (behavior), Accountability, Political science, Law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Influence of IFRS Adoption on Corporate Transparency and Accountability: Evidence from New Zealand — Research Paper | ScholarLens