|
||||
|
||||
Has the Regulation of Pro Forma Reporting in the U.S. Changed Investors’ Perceptions of Pro Forma Earnings Disclosures?Dirk E. BlackDuke University - Fuqua School of Business Ervin L. Black Sr.Brigham Young University - Marriott School of Management Theodore E. ChristensenBrigham Young University - Marriott School of Management William G. HeningerBrigham Young University - School of Accountancy June 12, 2012 Forthcoming, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting Abstract: We explore whether investors’ perceptions of pro forma earnings numbers have changed following the regulation of pro forma reporting imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). First, we find that investors appear to pay more attention to pro forma earnings disclosures in the post-SOX period, consistent with the notion that they perceive that regulation generally renders these disclosures more credible. Second, the results indicate that investors discount aggressive pro forma earnings reports in both periods. However, they appear to discount at least some potentially misleading pro forma earnings disclosures more in the post-SOX period. Finally, our results imply that the regulation of pro forma reporting has increased the average quality of pro forma earnings disclosures by filtering out those that are most likely to be misleading. These results are consistent with the conclusions that (1) the quality of pro forma reporting has improved following SOX, and (2) investors’ perceptions of pro forma earnings metrics have changed in the post-SOX regulatory environment.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 40 Keywords: Pro forma earnings, corporate disclosure, The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 JEL Classification: K22, M41 working papers seriesDate posted: April 25, 2011 ; Last revised: June 18, 2012Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.500 seconds