查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 金融業法定信用損失與IFRS 9預期信用損失之價值攸關性
- 兩稅合一制度下股東可扣抵稅額揭露之價值攸關性
- 我國銀行業金融商品公平價值與特有揭露之價值攸關性研究
- Determinants and Value Relevance of the Valuation Allowance of Deferred Tax Assets: Empirical Evidence in the Taiwan Stock Exchange
- 價值攸關性:權益淨值與內在價值
- 廣告支出價值攸關性之研究
- 人力支出價值攸關性之研究
- 商標權價值估計與價值攸關性之研究:以臺灣上市公司為例
- 會計師任期與財務報表價值攸關性
- 衍生性金融商品使用程度對會計資訊價值攸關性之影響--避險與非避險使用動機之檢測
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 金融業法定信用損失與IFRS 9預期信用損失之價值攸關性=The Value Relevance of Legal Credit Loss and Expected Credit Loss under IFRS 9 in Financial Industry |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 李淑華; 謝佩蓁; 莊安安; 蔡彥卿; | 書刊名 | 會計評論 |
| 卷 期 | 78 2024.01[民113.01] |
| 頁 次 | 頁45-83 |
| 分類號 | 495.4 |
| 關鍵詞 | 備抵損失; 預期信用損失; 價值攸關; IFRS 9; Loss allowance; Expected credit loss; Value relevance; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| DOI | DOI: 10.6552/JOAR.202401_(78).0002 |
| 中文摘要 | 由於我國金融業除須依 IFRS 9 規定提列相關備抵預期信用損失外,尚須 依金管會規定提列備抵呆帳。本文以 2018 年至 2021 年我國上市櫃金融業公司 為樣本,探討依 IFRS 9 與法規提列之備抵損失與預期信用損失是否具價值攸 關。 本文實證結果:(1)總備抵損失與總預期信用損失均具價值攸關;依法規 增列之備抵損失具價值攸關,而依 IFRS 9 衡量備抵損失則不具價值攸關,支 持主管機關監管有效之觀點。(2)依 IFRS 9 提列之壞帳費用低估組中,僅依法 規增列之備抵損失有正向評價係數;而依 IFRS 9 提列之壞帳費用高估組中, 依 IFRS 9 衡量與依法規增列之備抵損失均具價值攸關。(3)投資人視金融業專 家會計師查核後列報之依 IFRS 9 衡量之備抵損失資訊品質較高而給予正向評 價,支持 Oberson (2021)較強的治理機制有助提升金融業資訊品質之觀點。(4) 適用 IFRS 9 期間備抵損失之價值攸關性顯著高於適用 IAS 39 期間之備抵損 失。 |
| 英文摘要 | Since 2018, besides the Financial Supervisory Commission in Taiwan (FSC Taiwan) regulations governing the procedures for evaluating assets and dealing with non- performing/non-accrual loans (hereafter the FSC Taiwan regulations), Taiwanese financial firms are required to disclose any differences in loss allowance based on the provisions for expected credit losses under IFRS 9. The study aims to compare the two systems (i.e. IFRS 9 and the FSC Taiwan regulations) and examine whether total loss allowance and expected credit losses are value-relevant as assessed by the two systems separately. The experimental results reveal several findings. First, the total loss allowance and the total expected credit loss are both value-relevant, but additional loss allowance under ROC regulations is value-relevant while the loss allowance under IFRS 9 is not. Second, for the subsample of underestimated bad debt expenses under IFRS 9, only the coefficient of additional loss allowance under the FSC Taiwan regulations is significantly positive; for the subsample of overestimated bad debt expenses under IFRS 9, both the coefficient of loss allowance under the IFRS 9 and the FSC regulations are significantly positive. Third, investors regard the quality of loss allowance under IFRS 9 audited by specialized auditors as a positive, reliable metric. Fourth, the value relevance of the allowance loss during the IFRS 9 period is significantly higher than that of during the IAS 39 period. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。