本研究探討我國適用財務會計準則第34號公報後,以公平價值衡量之金融商品(金融資產FVA、金融負債FVL)與總資產或總負債扣除金融商品以公平價值衡量之部分後的其他資產(NFVA)、負債(NFVL)二者價值攸關性是否具有差異,並以會計師事務所規模作為審計品質之衡量變數,研究良好之審計品質能否提升金融商品公平價值之攸關性。 研究結果顯示,在全體產業下,FVA與NFVA均具有價值攸關性,且FVA之價值攸關性高於NFVA。而在FVL及NFVL中,僅NFVL具有價值攸關性,但FVL及NFVL之價值攸關性無顯著差異。將樣本再區分為非金融業及金融業後,非金融業的實證結果與全體產業相類似,金融業的結果則為NFVL與FVL之攸關性具有顯著差異,而FVA與NFVA之價值攸關性則無顯著差異。其次,只有在非金融業下,企業的財務報表若為四大會計師事務所查核,其揭露FVA之相關財務資訊具有價值攸關性,說明了審計品質確實能強化公平價值計量下財務報導資訊的價值攸關性,但對於FVL並沒有發現相同的結論。
Taiwan has adopted the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 34 for financial instruments since 2006. This paper investigates the value relevance difference between financial instruments measured by fair value and non-financial instruments. Furthermore, this study also examines whether audit quality measured with different sized audit firms (big 4) can increase the value relevance of financial instruments measured by fair value. The sample is from Taiwan Stock Exchange listed companies during the period 2006 to 2011. The empirical result shows FVA (financial asset measured by fair value), NFVA (total asset subtracted financial asset measured by fair value) and NFVL (total liability subtracted financial asset measured by fair value) are value relevance but FVL (financial liability measured by fair value) isn’t. The value relevance of FVA is higher than NFVA. Furthermore, we divide the sample into financial industry and non-financial industry. In financial industry, the value relevance of FVL is higher than NFVL. Therefore, fair value accounting information of financial asset (liability) has incremental value relevance in non-financial industry (financial industry) and proves the value relevance between financial instruments measured by fair value and non-financial instruments are not same. The financial statements audited by big4 can improve the value relevance of FVA in non-financial industry. Thus, audit quality can indeed strengthen the value relevance of fair value accounting information of financial asset.