Discretion in revenue recognition timing and comparability: Evidence from the implementation of SOP 97-2
Adam Bordeman
Abstract
Open-access reader
Adam Bordeman
Abstract
Open-access reader
An objective of financial reporting regulation is to encourage the production of decision-useful information. This paper examines the association between the level of discretion allowed in accounting standards and comparability, a key characteristic of decision-useful reporting. To study this link, I investigate changes in comparability around regulation SOP 97-2, which decreased discretion in the timing of revenue recognition on software-related transactions. Using a difference-in-differences research design, I find a positive association between discretion and comparability for affected firms, relative to control firms. This result is attenuated for firms with low reporting quality prior to the rule change and those that experienced a larger direct impact on their revenue recognition practices. This paper furthers understanding of the linkage between reporting discretion and the decision-usefulness of accounting outputs. Additionally, the results highlight the complex interactions between various financial reporting attributes.
OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
An objective of financial reporting regulation is to encourage the production of decision-useful information. This paper examines the association between the level of discretion allowed in accounting standards and comparability, a key characteristic of decision-useful reporting. To study this link, I investigate changes in comparability around regulation SOP 97-2, which decreased discretion in the timing of revenue recognition on software-related transactions. Using a difference-in-differences research design, I find a positive association between discretion and comparability for affected firms, relative to control firms. This result is attenuated for firms with low reporting quality prior to the rule change and those that experienced a larger direct impact on their revenue recognition practices. This paper furthers understanding of the linkage between reporting discretion and the decision-usefulness of accounting outputs. Additionally, the results highlight the complex interactions between various financial reporting attributes.
Key concepts: Comparability, Discretion, Accounting, Revenue, Business, Quality (philosophy), Association (psychology), Revenue recognition