本研究旨在探討美國證券管理委員會(The United States Securitiesand Exchange Commission)於2007年11月15日開始實施Acceptance From Foreign Private Issuers of Financial Statements Prepared in Accordance With International Financial Reporting Standards Without Reconciliation to U.S. GAAP,開放外國公司可採用國際會計準則(IFRS),此規定修訂後,公司選定採用IFRS的市場反應。實證結果顯示修訂後改採IFRS及改採US GAAP間在企業價值、成長機會、資訊環境及資訊不對稱下沒有顯著差異,以及修訂後強制採用IFRS及自願採用IFRS間,也得到相同的結論,如過去文獻指出(e.g., Leuz, 2003; Bartov et al., 2005),在US GAAP與IFRS準則之間具替代性關係,因此所做成之結論為IFRS與US GAAP之間具有可比較性關係,以及強制採用IFRS與自願採用IFRS間也具有可比較性,此結果顯示,投資人對於以IFRS編制之財務報表與US GAAP編制的財務報表表是相同的看法,此二者之間在會計品質上並無顯著差異。
This study examines reaction of investors to The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued “acceptance from foreign private issuers of financial statements prepared in accordance with international financial reporting standards without reconciliation to U.S. GAAP”. After November 15, 2011, ADR companies switch their accounting principle to IFRS. We investigate not only voluntarily adopted IFRS but also include those firms that Mandatorily adopted on firm value, growth opportunity, information environment, and information asymmetry. The empirical results indicate that there are no significant differences in firm value, growth opportunity, information environment, and information asymmetry between voluntarily adopted IFRS and U.S. GAAP. Furthermore, we found the same results between volunteer and mandatory IFRS. As the same result as prior research (e.g., Leuz, 2003; Bartov et al., 2005), both IFRS and U.S. GAAP ‘‘meet a minimum quality threshold.’’ Moreover, they argue there is evidence that financial reports prepared under IFRS are of similar quality relative to those under U.S. GAAP. To sum up, we find that investors have no significant reaction to firm value, growth opportunity, information environment, and information asymmetry between adopted IFRS and U.S. GAAP, volunteer and mandatory adoption as well.