How did IFRS affect financial statements of Canadian companies?

Transcription

1 How did IFRS affect financial statements of Canadian companies? by Michel Blanchette, FCPA, FCMA, CA Professor, Université du Québec en Outaouais Financial Management Institute of Canada PD Week - November 2012 michel.blanchette@uqo.ca

2 What company is more attractive? Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

3 What company is more attractive? Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

4 Objectives Analyze Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by Canadian companies Identify Effects on key financial ratios and accounting figures In comparison to pre-changeover Canadian generally accepted accounting principles (hereafter GAAP) Concluding remarks Overview of upcoming IFRS developments Advices to analysts Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

5 QUESTIONS Does IFRS change the accounting image of companies in Canada? More conservative? More volatility? What range of discrepancies do we observe in comparison to GAAP? Main areas of differences (fair value accounting, financial instruments, other)? Impact on liquidity, leverage, profitability, cash flow? What characteristics drive the differences? Industry, timing of adoption? Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

6 Outline (1) Background (2) Methodology and data (3) Results (4) Upcoming IFRS developments (5) Concluding remarks Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

7 (1) BACKGROUND IFRS Accounting standards developed internationally Applied in more than 120 countries, including the European Union Not adopted in the U.S. but... Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

8 Canada Decision in 2006 Adoption of IFRS in 2011 Mandatory for listed companies Optional for private enterprises Earlier adoption possible Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

9 Main features of IFRS a) Principle-based b) Fair value orientation c) Comprehensive income d) Entity theory (consolidation) e) Transparency Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

10 IFRS features: (a) Principle-based Accounting decisions Financial reporting Transactions Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

11 IFRS features: (b) Fair value orientation Two methods for unrealized gains/losses Through profit Through other comprehensive income (OCI) Two types of application Mandatory Optional Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

12 Fair value through profit Investment property (optional) Agricultural assets Financial instruments held-for-trading Impairment Derivatives (not used in cash flow hedges) Fair value hedges (optional) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

13 Fair value through OCI Property, plant and equipment (optional) Intangible assets (optional) Financial instruments available-for-sale (optional) Cash flow hedges (optional) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

14 IFRS features: (c) Comprehensive income Comprehensive income/loss Profit/loss from income statement = ± Gains/losses recognized in OCI Accumulate in retained earnings Accumulate directly in shareholders equity Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

15 IFRS features: (d) Entity theory (consolidation) Non-controlling interest (NCI) in balance sheet Equity in IFRS vs Liability or in-between in GAAP Annual variation of NCI Allocated directly to equity in IFRS vs Expensed in GAAP Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

16 IFRS features: (e) Transparency More disclosure in IFRS (details and notes) IFRS 1 First-time adoption Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

17 Prior research on IFRS - internationally - Low application of fair value accounting Except for investment property and financial instruments [KPMG, 2006] Quality of information under IFRS Depends on voluntary vs mandatory adoption [Christensen et al, 2008] and incentives [Barth et al, 2008; JeanJean and Stolowy, 2008; Ball, 2006] Impact on ratios in Europe (Finland) Increased liabilities in IFRS (leases + other), and increased profitability [Lantto and Sahlström, 2009] Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

18 Prior research on IFRS - Canada - More volatility of IFRS ratios Early adopters in [Blanchette et al, 2011] Resources on IFRS See [Chartered Accountants of Canada, 2012] Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

19 (2) METHODOLOGY AND DATA 2.1) Transition requirements (IFRS 1) 2.2) Variables for testing 2.3) Sample 2.4) Research design Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

20 (2.1) Transition requirements (IFRS 1) Comparative figures Retreated in IFRS Except for a number of exceptions and exemptions Transition note Reconciliation of equity and comprehensive income with previous GAAP Explanation of how the transition affected the reported financial position, performance and cash flows Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

21 Comparative figures IFRS vs GAAP Comparison possible Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

22 (2.2) Variables for testing a) Accounting figures b) Financial ratios c) Selected differences between IFRS and GAAP Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

23 (a) Accounting figures Balance sheet Assets and liabilities (current/total), shareholders equity, noncontrolling interests Income statement Operating revenues, net profit/loss Statement of comprehensive income Comprehensive income/loss Cash flow statement Net operating cash flow Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

24 (b) Financial ratios Liquidity Current ratio Leverage Debt ratio (total liabilities total assets) Profitability Net profit margin, ROA, Comprehensive ROA Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

25 (c) Selected categories of differences (d i ) in IFRS vs GAAP Fair value accounting Property, plant and equipment or PPE (d4) Intangibles (d6) Investment property (d7) Impairment of PPE (d2) and intangibles (d5) Financial instruments In general (d9) Derivatives and hedges (d10) Other (...) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

26 Other...differences (cont d) Revenues (d1) Capitalization (d3) Foreign currencies (d11) Asset retirement obligations (d8) Leases (d12) Pension and other employee benefits (d13) Share-based compensation (d14) Consolidation and strategic investments (d15) Noncontrolling interests (d16) Income tax (d17) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

27 (2.3) Sample Mandatory adopters Companies having shifted to IFRS on 1st Jan companies in 10 sectors (N=150) Listed on the TSX Data Converted to CDN-equivalent Using the exchange rate at the balance sheet date Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

28 Sectors Code NAICS Sector 21 Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction 22 Utilities 23, 53 Construction, real estate and rental and leasing Manufacturing Retail trade Transportation and warehousing 51 Information and cultural industries 52 Finance and insurance 54 Professional, scientific, and technical services 55 Management of companies and enterprises Source: Statistics Canada (2012) and TSX inc (2011) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

29 (2.4) Research design Comparison of means, medians and variances Breakdown of differences (d i ) Magnitude of differences Range of values (lowest highest) Importance of individual categories of differences Investigation of differences Differences = function of SECTOR Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

30 Testing limitations Income tax differences (d17) Not tested Because adjustments for diverging income tax rules (IAS 12) are combined with tax adjustments caused by other standards Other differences (d18) Not tested Unclear adjustments Size effect Weighted values = (IFRS GAAP) total assets in GAAP Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

31 HYPOTHESES TO TEST General comparison of IFRS vs GAAP H1: Mean of IFRS values = Mean of GAAP values H2: Median of IFRS values = Median of GAAP values H3: Variance of IFRS values = Variance of GAAP values Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

32 Specific effects Differences between IFRS and GAAP values: H4: Differences are consistent throughout sectors H5: Differences are similar for voluntary and mandatory adopters H6: Differences are consistent for various auditors Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

33 Models for specific effects IFRS = intercept + β 0 GAAP + β j EFFECT j + ε Differences (d i ) = intercept + β j EFFECT j + ε Where d i = IFRS GAAP EFFECT j = dummy variables (0,1) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

34 (3) RESULTS 3.1) Asset base and leverage 3.2) Profitability 3.3) Liquidity 3.4) Cash flow 3.5) Industry effect This research is in progress Results are preliminary Please do not quote Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

35 (3.1) Asset base and leverage Accounting figures Total assets Total liabilities Debt ratio Breakdown of differences Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

36 Asset base ($M) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

37 Liabilities ($M) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

38 Debt ratio Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

39 Tests of equality on the DEBT RATIO and its components Comparison of IFRS and GAAP values Equality of means Equality of medians Equality of variances Debt ratio n.s. n.s. n.s. Total assets in $ n.s. n.s. ** (IFRS>GAAP) Total liabilities in $ n.s. n.s. ** (IFRS>GAAP) ** Equality of variances significantly rejected at the 5% level of confidence Means and medians: equality not rejected Variances: significantly higher in IFRS for both components... but no significant difference in the ratio... because of offset effects Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

40 Importance of individual categories of differences in ASSET BASE Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

41 Breakdown...ASSET BASE Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

42 Conclusion on asset base and leverage Overall Central values Not significantly different in IFRS Volatility Variance of debt ratio not significantly different in IFRS But variance of components significantly higher Offset effects (...) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

43 ...conclusion on asset base (cont d) Asset base Range of differences = from -57% to +101% (IFRS ~ from half to double GAAP...!) Areas reducing IFRS assets the most d15 conso = down to -53% d5 impairment of intangibles = down to -33% Areas increasing IFRS assets the most d7 investment property at FV = up to +97% d10 derivatives and hedges = up to +103% (...) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

44 ...conclusion on leverage (cont d) Liabilities Range of differences = from -22% to +103% (IFRS ~ from ¼ to double GAAP...!) Areas reducing IFRS liabilities the most d15 conso = down to -22% (weighted by assets in GAAP) d16 non-controlling interest = down to -21% (w.) Areas increasing IFRS liabilities the most d10 derivatives and hedges = up to +105% (w.) d9 financial instruments = up to +72% (w.) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

45 (3.2) Profitability Accounting figures Sales Profit/loss Comprehensive income/loss Ratios Profit margin ROA Comprehensive ROA Breakdown of differences Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

46 Sales ($M) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

47 Profit/loss ($M) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

48 Comprehensive income/loss ($M) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

49 Profit margin Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

50 Tests of equality on the PROFIT MARGIN and its components Comparison of IFRS and GAAP values No significant differences in means, medians and variances Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

51 Breakdown...sales Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

52 ROA Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

53 Comprehensive ROA Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

54 Tests of equality on the RETURN ratios and their components Comparison of IFRS and GAAP values Means and medians: equality not rejected Variances: significantly higher volatility of the component assets in IFRS But no overall statistical effect on the ratios Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

55 Importance of individual categories of differences in PROFIT/LOSS Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

56 Breakdown...ROA Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

57 Breakdown...Comprehensive ROA Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

58 Conclusion on profitability Overall Differences in sales = almost nil Slightly higher profit figures in IFRS (although not statistically significant) Range: from -13% to +24% (weighted by assets in GAAP) No significant effect on profitability ratios Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

59 ...conclusion on profitability (cont d) Individual categories of differences Areas reducing IFRS profitability the most Sales (rarely) = down to -50% (weighted by assets in GAAP) d15 conso = down to -12% (w.) d10 derivatives and hedges = down to -11% (w.) Areas increasing IFRS profitability the most d7 FV of investment property = up to +19% (w.) d2 impairment of PPE = up to +19% (w.) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

60 (3.3) Liquidity Accounting figures Current assets Current liabilities Ratio Current ratio Breakdown of differences Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

61 Current assets ($M) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

62 Current liabilities ($M) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

63 Current ratio Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

64 Tests of equality on the CURRENT RATIO and its components Comparison of IFRS and GAAP values Equality of means Equality of medians Equality of variances Current ratio n.s. n.s. * (GAAP>IFRS) Current assets in $ n.s. n.s. n.s. (IFRS>GAAP) Current liabilities in $ n.s. n.s. * (IFRS>GAAP) Means and medians: equality not rejected Variances: significant difference for the ratio = higher in GAAP Although higher variances in IFRS for both components Offset effects...! * Equality significantly rejected at the 10% level of confidence Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

65 Breakdown...current Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

66 Conclusion on liquidity Overall Low importance of differences in current items Current assets = 1.4% (weighted by total assets in GAAP) Current liabilities = 1.8% (w.) Central values Not significantly different in IFRS Volatility Higher variance of current items in IFRS (on both sides, assets and liabilities) BUT higher variance of current ratio in GAAP...! Offset effects Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

67 ...conclusion on liquidity (cont d) Areas affecting the current ratio the most in IFRS d15 conso and d9 financial instruments Range of values (weighted by assets in GAAP) d15 conso d9 fin. instruments Differences in current assets Differences in current liabilities -12% to +19% -2% to +3% -6% to +13% -11% to +33% Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

68 (3.4) Cash flow Accounting figure Net operating cash flow (from the cash flow statement) Breakdown of differences Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

69 Net operating cash flow ($M) (from the cash flow statement) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

70 Tests of equality on NET OPERATING CASH FLOW Comparison of IFRS and GAAP values Equality of means Equality of medians Equality of variances Net operating cash flow in $ n.s. n.s. n.s. No significant differences in the cash flows in $ Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

71 Cash flows not always equal in IFRS and GAAP Reasons Scope of consolidation (d15) Reclassifications from operating to financing or investing Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

72 (3.5) Industry effects a) Association between differences and sectors Model: Differences (d i ) = intercept + β1 SECTOR j + ε Where d i = IFRS GAAP, weighted by total assets in GAAP SECTOR j = dummy variables (0,1) b) Timing of IFRS adoption per sector Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

73 (a) Sectors showing significant effects Preliminary observations Where correlation > 30% Sector 52: Finance and insurance Financial institutions, such as banks and insurance companies Sector 55: Management of companies and enterprises Entities owning a controlling interest in other companies Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

74 Sector 52: Finance and insurance Differences d7 FV investment property Other Total assets d7 FV investment property Other Profit (loss) Magnitude +14,3% in IFRS +0,3%_ +14,6% +3,1% in IFRS +1,3%_ +4,4% *** *** *** *** *** Results significant at the 1% level of confidence More assets and more profit in IFRS Driven by accounting for investment properties (d7) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

75 Sector 55: Management of companies and enterprises Differences d9 Financial instruments d10 Derivatives and hedges Other Total assets d9 Financial instruments Other Total liabilities Magnitude +13,4% in IFRS +13,7% -3,8%_ +23,3% +12,8% in IFRS +9,7%_ +22,5% *** *** *** *** *** *** Results significant at the 1% level of confidence More assets and more liabilities in IFRS Driven by accounting for financial instruments (d9 and d10) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

76 (b) Sector influenced by the timing of IFRS adoption Sector 21: Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction 78% of early adopters (21 on 27) Questions to investigate (future research) Incentives to early-adopt Behavior of early vs mandatory adopters... in terms of categories of accounting adjustments... frequency + magnitude Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

77 (4) UPCOMING IFRS DEVELOPMENTS Pension accounting Lease accounting Financial instruments Fair value measurement Presentation of financial statements U.S. convergence Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

78 Pension accounting (IAS 19) Corridor method = eliminated Full fair value measurement Actuarial gains/losses = bypass the income statement = allocated to OCI Effective: 2013 Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

79 Lease accounting (IAS 17) One method for all leases Liability = present value of lease payments Asset = right-of-use Target Exposure Draft: 2013 Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

80 Financial instruments (IFRS 9) Simplified standard Reducing management discretion Two basic methods reinforced Amortized COST (for interest-related instruments) FAIR VALUE through profit (for investments in equity instruments) Work plan Effective: 2015 Next phases: impairment, hedges Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

81 Financial instruments (IFRS 9) Interest-related assets and liabilities Equity-related assets Held to collect or pay cash flows COST (excluding hedges...) (rare circumstances) (mismatch) Held-for trading FV through profit Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November 2012 Not heldfor trading CHOICE FV through OCI 81

82 Fair value measurement (IFRS 13) Definition Price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants Three levels Level 1 = unadjusted quoted values in active markets Level 2 = adjusted values based on observable inputs Level 3 = estimations based on unobservable inputs Effective: 2013 Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

83 Major reform Presentation of financial statements Consistent classification across statements Categories similar to the cash flow statement Operating, Investing, Financing + Tax, Discontinued operations Cohesive relationships e.g. operating profit vs operating assets interest expense vs debts investment revenues vs invested assets Work plan: project on hold... Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

84 U.S. convergence IFRS in the U.S. Currently accepted for foreign issuers Individual joint projects FASB-IASB But no formal commitment in the U.S. of adopting IFRS so far... Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

85 (5) CONCLUDING REMARKS - Figures from financial statements - Median values in IFRS and GAAP Not significantly different overall BUT Much more volatility in IFRS Especially in balance sheet Driven by Individual categories of accounting adjustments Industry practices Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

86 Conclusion (cont d) - Impact on ratios - Balance sheet = more conservative in IFRS Assets ~ Liabilities Current ratio Debt ratio ~ Profitability figures = better in IFRS Profit Comprehensive income Profit margin ROA Comprehensive ROA Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

87 Conclusion (cont d) - Higher volatility in IFRS - Much wider range of values in IFRS Variance of accounting figures in $ Current assets (higher in IFRS, n.s.) Total assets (IFRS, **) Current liabilities (IFRS, *) Total liabilities (IFRS, **) But offsetting effects on ratios Current ratio (GAAP, *) Debt ratio (IFRS~, n.s.) n.s. not significant * significant at the 10% level ** significant at the 5% level Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

88 Conclusion (cont d) - Main areas of differences - Consolidation and strategic investments (d15) Assets Liabilities Profit Cash flows ~ Financial instruments (d9, d10) Assets Liabilities Profit Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

89 Conclusion (cont d) - Other differences - Investment property (d7) Assets Profit Impairment and capitalization (d2, d3, d5) Profit Pension and other benefits (d13) Liabilities OCI Non-controlling interest (d16) Liabilities Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

90 Conclusion (cont d) - Little impact - Revenues (d1) Fair value accounting for PPE and intangibles (d4, d6) Asset retirement obligation (d8) Foreign currency translation (d11) Leases (d12) Share-based compensation (d14) Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

91 Conclusion (cont d) - Impact on cash flow - Accounting Not supposed to change cash flows OK overall Operating cash flows in IFRS = not significantly different from those in GAAP BUT differences are observed Scope of consolidation Reclassifications Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

92 Conclusion (cont d) - Limitations - Research in progress Preliminary results Lack of uniformity in the transition notes Earnings management Current year in GAAP VS retreated year in IFRS Misrepresentation of ongoing accounting One-time adjustments according to IFRS 1 Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

93 Conclusion (cont d) - Future research - Industry effects Timing of adoption Effects on early vs mandatory adopters Study the transition notes Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

94 Advices to analysts Risk assessment = more difficult in IFRS Especially around the transition date Accounting differences available for the prior year (2010) But invisible for the current year (2011 and after) One-time adjustments vs ongoing More volatility in IFRS figures Earnings management Cash flows Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

95 Merci! Thanks for your attention! Michel Blanchette Michel Blanchette igf*fmi November

96 references_igf12.doc Michel Blanchette 27 November 2012 References Ball, R. (2006) International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS): pros and cons for investors. Accounting and Business Research, International Accounting Policy Forum: Barth, M.E., Landsman, W.R., and M.H. Lang. (2008) International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality. Journal of Accounting Research 46, no. 3: Blanchette, M. and A. Desfleurs. (2011) Critical Perspectives on the Implementation of IFRS in Canada. Journal of Global Business Administration, vol. 3 no. 1: Blanchette, M., F.E. Racicot and J.Y. Girard. (2011) The Effects of IFRS on Financial Ratios: Early Evidence in Canada. Research report sponsored by CGA Canada: 57 pages. Chartered Accountants of Canada. (2012) IFRSs Resources. the standards/ifrs/ifrs resources/index.aspx Christensen, H.B., Lee, E., and M. Walker. (2008) Incentives or Standards: What Determines Accounting Quality Changes Around IFRS Adoption? AAA 2008 Financial Accounting and Reporting Section (FARS) Paper. (accessed 5 October 2010) Jeanjean, T., and H. Stolowy. (2008) Do accounting standards matter? An exploratory analysis of earnings management before and after IFRS adoption. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 27: KPMG and I.v. Keitz. (2006) The Application of IFRS: Choices in Practice. KPMG International Financial Reporting Group: December. Lantto, A. M. and P. Sahlström P. (2009) Impact of International Financial Reporting Standard Adoption on Key Financial Ratios. Accounting and Finance 49: Statistics Canada. (2012) North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Canada (accessed 6 February 2012) TSX inc. (2011) 2011 TMX Group FactBook. TMX Datalinx.