前期銷貨變動方向對成本習性及不對稱性之調節效果—臺灣之實證

The Moderating Effects of Prior Sales Change Direction on Cost Behaviors and on Cost Asymmetry-Empirical Evidence from Taiwan

陳建中(Chien-Chung Chen) ； 林家豪(Jia-Hao Lin)

《會計審計論叢》 7卷1期 (2017/06) Pp. 1-41

摘要

Anderson et al. (2003，以下簡稱ABJ)發現營業費用的成本習性具有負不對稱性的現象。Banker et al. (2014，以下簡稱BBCM)發現前期銷貨變動方向對成本不對稱性及成本習性有調節效果。本研究採用BBCM 之兩期模型探討臺灣公司1983-2013 年的營運成本、其成分項目與員工人數等成本項目，是否於前期銷貨成長時具有負不對稱性、於前期銷貨衰退時具有正不對稱性；本研究亦探討此調節效果的來源為何，亦即探討相較於前期銷貨成長的情形，前期銷貨衰退的情形下，銷貨成長時的成本增加率是否較低、銷貨衰退時的成本減少率是否較高。本研究發現上述探討的所有現象於臺灣公司所有成本項目皆存在。探討成本不對稱性時，過去文獻多使用ABJ 之基本模型及其延伸模型；本研究比較臺灣資料於BBCM 模型、ABJ 模型與其延伸模型三者之結果，發現於後兩者模型之結果中，不對稱性的估計與前期銷貨變動方向調節效果的估計都忽略或嚴重低估；據此，本研究建議後續研究解釋與預測臺灣公司成本不對稱性時採用BBCM 模型。

關鍵字

成本習性 ； 成本不對稱性 ； 前期銷貨變動方向

並列摘要

Anderson et al. (2003, hereafter referred to simply as ABJ) finds the existence of negative cost asymmetry. Banker et al. (2014, hereafter referred to simply as BBCM) finds that the moderating effects of prior sales change directions on cost asymmetry and on cost behaviors exist. Using Taiwan’s publicly traded companies data in 1983-2013, the purposes of this paper are to investigate, first, whether negative cost asymmetry (costs decreases to sales decreases is less than costs increases to sales increases) exists, while prior sales increases, and positive cost asymmetry (costs decreases to sales decreases is more than costs increases to sales increases) exists, while prior sales decreases, and, second, whether costs increases (decreases) to sales increases (decreases) is less (more) while prior sales decreases than while prior sales increases. Adopting BBCM two-period model, this study finds that, for all different categories of costs, including operating cost, its components, and employee number, the above hypotheses are all significantly supported. While exploring cost behaviors and its asymmetry, the ABJ basic one-period model and extended model are pervasively adopted recently. Comparing the results of applying Taiwan’s data in Banker et al.’s two-period model, ABJ one-period model and its extended model, this paper finds, under ABJ’s two models, the estimations of cost asymmetries (stickiness and anti-stickiness) and of the moderation effects of prior sales change direction on cost behaviors and its asymmetry are all ignored or seriously under-biased. This evidence suggests further researches, while studying cost asymmetries of Taiwan's companies, to adopt BBCM model.

並列關鍵字

Cost behaviors ； Cost asymmetry ； Prior sales change directions

參考文獻

林有志、傅鍾仁與陳筱平，2011，成本僵固性之實證研究，當代會計，第 12 卷，第 2期：191-220。(Lin, Yu-Chih, Chung-Jen Fu, and Shaw-Ping Chen. 2011. An empirical study on cost stickiness. Journal of Contemporary Accounting 12 (2): 191-220.)

陳建中，2016，銷管費用僵固性、帝國建立動機與公司治理個別機制之成效，當代會計，第 17 卷，第 2 期：131-171。(Chen, Chien-Chung. 2016. SGA cost stickiness, empire-building incentives, and the effects of individual corporate governance mechanisms. Journal of Contemporary Accounting 17 (2): 131-171.)

Anderson, M. C., R. D. Banker, and S. N. Janakiraman. 2003. Are selling, general, and administrative costs “sticky”?. Journal of Accounting Research 41 (1): 47-63.

Balakrishnan, R., M. J. Petersen, and N. S. Soderstrom. 2004. Does capacity utilization affect the “stickiness” of cost?. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 19 (3): 283-299.

Banker, R. D., and D. Byzalov. 2014. Asymmetric cost behavior. Journal of Management Accounting Research 26 (2): 43-79.