RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI우수등재

      금융비용 자본화에 대한 주석공시의 유용성에 관한 연구

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A100856553

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Before the KAS No. 7 was issued on December 17, 2001, the interest costs associated with acquisition of inventory, investment, tangible and nontangible assets had been capitalized. In principle the KAS No. 7 treats the interest costs as expenses, but allows alternative treatment of the capitalization. Namely, firms may choose either the capitalization method or the expended method. The KAS No. 7 aligns with the IAS No. 23 and the SFAS No. 34 which allow both methods of capitalizing and expending.The major issues involved are the possibility of excessive capitalization or expenditure under the each treatment, and diverse recognition of acquisition costs depending on the financing methods. However, the accounting standard requires firms to disclose the differential amounts between two alternatives, to enhance the comparability of financial statements adopting different accounting treatments. The footnote disclosure includes the types of assets capitalized and the effects to the income under alternate expended approach. The omission of these footnote items may mislead the users of financial statements, if the information omitted is material. The materiality is the fundamental attributes of accounting information as a basis of judging the materially important amount which has an influence on users’decision making. In this regard, this study examines whether or not the footnote disclosure influences to investors.If the amount difference between two alternative methods is material, then the footnote disclosure may have effects on users’decision making with regard to the firm valuation or investment. But the amount difference is not material, then the disclosure may have no effects on users’decision making process. To investigate the effects of the footnote disclosure, this paper uses the materiality basis imposed by the Korean Financial Supervisory Service.The main purpose of financial statements is to provide useful information to the participants in the capital markets, as described in the conceptual framework of financial accounting. Therefore, if the differential amount disclosed in the footnote has influences on the firm value or the stock return, the footnote disclosure is a material information. This study investigates whether the footnote disclosure is material, by testing the explanatory power in the traditional return-earnings model and excess-earnings model. Firstly, this study examines which accounting treatment better explains the stock return in the traditional return-earnings model. Secondly, this study examines which accounting treatment better explains firm’s value in excess-earnings model. Thirdly, this study examines whether the capitalized amount has value-relevance.The result shows that the footnote disclosure under the capitalization method has no significant difference of the explanatory power(R2) with regard to firm’s return and value. Namely, the changes of financial statements’figures such as earnings and assets under alternative accounting methods have no effects on the capital markets. Specifically, contrary to the expectation, the footnote disclosure notifying the accounting differences has no effect on the investment decisions. However, the result implies that the mandatory disclosure of the effect of alternative method may not be necessary, guaranteeing further examination and discussion of the possibility of eliminating the mandatory disclosure requirements of KAS No. 7.
      번역하기

      Before the KAS No. 7 was issued on December 17, 2001, the interest costs associated with acquisition of inventory, investment, tangible and nontangible assets had been capitalized. In principle the KAS No. 7 treats the interest costs as expenses, but ...

      Before the KAS No. 7 was issued on December 17, 2001, the interest costs associated with acquisition of inventory, investment, tangible and nontangible assets had been capitalized. In principle the KAS No. 7 treats the interest costs as expenses, but allows alternative treatment of the capitalization. Namely, firms may choose either the capitalization method or the expended method. The KAS No. 7 aligns with the IAS No. 23 and the SFAS No. 34 which allow both methods of capitalizing and expending.The major issues involved are the possibility of excessive capitalization or expenditure under the each treatment, and diverse recognition of acquisition costs depending on the financing methods. However, the accounting standard requires firms to disclose the differential amounts between two alternatives, to enhance the comparability of financial statements adopting different accounting treatments. The footnote disclosure includes the types of assets capitalized and the effects to the income under alternate expended approach. The omission of these footnote items may mislead the users of financial statements, if the information omitted is material. The materiality is the fundamental attributes of accounting information as a basis of judging the materially important amount which has an influence on users’decision making. In this regard, this study examines whether or not the footnote disclosure influences to investors.If the amount difference between two alternative methods is material, then the footnote disclosure may have effects on users’decision making with regard to the firm valuation or investment. But the amount difference is not material, then the disclosure may have no effects on users’decision making process. To investigate the effects of the footnote disclosure, this paper uses the materiality basis imposed by the Korean Financial Supervisory Service.The main purpose of financial statements is to provide useful information to the participants in the capital markets, as described in the conceptual framework of financial accounting. Therefore, if the differential amount disclosed in the footnote has influences on the firm value or the stock return, the footnote disclosure is a material information. This study investigates whether the footnote disclosure is material, by testing the explanatory power in the traditional return-earnings model and excess-earnings model. Firstly, this study examines which accounting treatment better explains the stock return in the traditional return-earnings model. Secondly, this study examines which accounting treatment better explains firm’s value in excess-earnings model. Thirdly, this study examines whether the capitalized amount has value-relevance.The result shows that the footnote disclosure under the capitalization method has no significant difference of the explanatory power(R2) with regard to firm’s return and value. Namely, the changes of financial statements’figures such as earnings and assets under alternative accounting methods have no effects on the capital markets. Specifically, contrary to the expectation, the footnote disclosure notifying the accounting differences has no effect on the investment decisions. However, the result implies that the mandatory disclosure of the effect of alternative method may not be necessary, guaranteeing further examination and discussion of the possibility of eliminating the mandatory disclosure requirements of KAS No. 7.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 "차입비용의 자본화에 대한 연구" 제7권 (제7권): 29-60, 1998

      2 "자본시장에서의 회계정보 유용성" 신영사 325-, 2003

      3 "이자비용의 자본화 문제에 대한 연구, 기업회계기준서 제7호" 회계편람, 한국공인회계사회 제13권 (제13권): 109-122, 2003

      4 "베타 및 시장위험프레미엄 측정과 시장수익률 대용치의 선택" 제23권 (제23권): 139-159, 1998

      5 "금융비용에 관한 회계기준의 비교연구" 제19권 : 257-280, 2001

      6 "금융비용 자본화의 문제점, 서강경영논총" 한국회계연구원 59 : 1-17, 20031998

      7 "금융비용 자본화가 재무제표에 미치는 영향" 제12권 (제12권): 39-63, 2003

      8 "“대체적 EPS 측정방법과 이를 이용한 이익 매출액 및 비용의 정보가치분석 ” 회계학연구 제17권" 1-28, 1993

      9 "“Full Disclosure of Interestcapitalization Decisions" 20-44, 1994

      10 "“Accounting for the Cost ofEquity" 1973

      1 "차입비용의 자본화에 대한 연구" 제7권 (제7권): 29-60, 1998

      2 "자본시장에서의 회계정보 유용성" 신영사 325-, 2003

      3 "이자비용의 자본화 문제에 대한 연구, 기업회계기준서 제7호" 회계편람, 한국공인회계사회 제13권 (제13권): 109-122, 2003

      4 "베타 및 시장위험프레미엄 측정과 시장수익률 대용치의 선택" 제23권 (제23권): 139-159, 1998

      5 "금융비용에 관한 회계기준의 비교연구" 제19권 : 257-280, 2001

      6 "금융비용 자본화의 문제점, 서강경영논총" 한국회계연구원 59 : 1-17, 20031998

      7 "금융비용 자본화가 재무제표에 미치는 영향" 제12권 (제12권): 39-63, 2003

      8 "“대체적 EPS 측정방법과 이를 이용한 이익 매출액 및 비용의 정보가치분석 ” 회계학연구 제17권" 1-28, 1993

      9 "“Full Disclosure of Interestcapitalization Decisions" 20-44, 1994

      10 "“Accounting for the Cost ofEquity" 1973

      11 "“Accountign Earnings andCash Flows as Measures of Firm Performance The Role of Accounting Accruals ”Journal of Accounting and Economics" 8 : 3-42, 1994

      12 "“A Heteroscedasticity-ConsistentCovariance Matrix Estimator and a DirectTest for Heteroscedasticity" ” eco (” eco): 817-838, 1980

      13 "What does “Materiality” Really Mean?" 61-67, jun2002

      14 "The Usefulof Long-term Accruals" 37 (37): 110-131, 2001

      15 "Statements of Financial AccountingStandards No Capitalization of InterestCost" 1979

      16 "SFAS34: A recipe for Diversity" AccountingHorizons 62-67, Septembe,1998

      17 "Earnings,Adaption and Equity Value" The AccountingReview 187-215, April,1997

      18 "Capitalization of Borrowing Costs" 1984

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2022 평가예정 계속평가 신청대상 (등재유지)
      2017-01-01 평가 우수등재학술지 선정 (계속평가)
      2013-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2010-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2008-01-01 평가 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
      2006-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2004-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2001-07-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      1999-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 1.45 1.45 1.48
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      1.64 1.69 2.793 0.2
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼