IFRIC 19認為公司所發行之外幣計價可轉債之轉換權符合負債之定義。然而將外幣計價可轉債之轉換權認列為負債,將使損益與股價呈反向變動。當企業股價上揚時,轉換權價值提升,但轉換權係企業之金融負債,企業反而須認列金融負債評價損失,造成公司獲利表現良好卻需要認列損失之奇特現象,此規定更進一步導致分析企業信用風險時陷入矛盾,外幣計價可轉債分類為負債之合理性似乎有待商榷。 本研究試圖以普通股風險及預期報酬與外幣可轉債之關係,探討新台幣及外幣計價可轉換公司債之性質究竟為負債抑或權益。實證結果顯示,普通股風險及預期報酬與新台幣計價之可轉債及外幣計價之可轉債均呈顯著負相關,顯示我國資本市場將我國企業所發行之外幣計價可轉債及新台幣計價可轉債均視為權益,與以功能性貨幣所發行之可轉債相同。實證結果也顯示,轉換價格普通重設條款及轉換價格特別重設條款並不影響外幣計價可轉債之性質。
Under current accounting rules, Convertible Bonds (CBs) are treated as equity while European Convertible Bonds (ECBs) are treated as debt. This study reviews the logic and the theories behind this controversial rule and investigates empirically whether European Convertible Bonds share key characteristics of liabilities or equities. We find evidence that ECBs, similar to CBs, are negatively associated with the common equity risk and expected return, consistent with the notion that the market treated it as equity. The above association still exist for ECBs with repricing clauses.