Download pdf
The Differences in Accounting Quality between Chinese Companies and American Companies Listed in the United States
- 1 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
- 2 University of New South Wales
- 3 University of Southern California
- 4 Brandeis University
- 5 Shanghai Mingsui Creative School
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
This research paper investigates the difference between Chinese listed companies in the US and US companies regarding the quality of accounting information from companies’ annual reports. After a careful review of literature, researchers decided to apply classic M-score model for information processing and one sample t-test to determine the relationship between accounting quality and the country of the company. There are two hypotheses, and the first one is that the difference between the mean M-score of U.S. listed Chinese companies and the mean M-score of U.S. companies is not significant. The second one is the difference between the mean M-score of U.S. listed Chinese companies, and the mean M-score of U.S. companies is significant. This research result turned out to support the first hypothesis, indicating that the difference between the accounting qualities of the two types of companies is not significant.
Keywords
disclosure quality, financial reporting quality, quality measures, investors’ perceptions
[1]. Liu, Huadong. “Analysis of the Differences and Linkage between Chinese and American Stock Markets.” American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, vol. 8, no. 3, 8 Mar. 2018, www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=83326, 10.4236/ajibm.2018.83047.
[2]. Lu, Hai. “Information Quality in China’s Capital Market and the Information Transparency Index White Paper.” Pku.edu.cn, 2020, news.pku.edu.cn/wyyd/dslt/5bafd6243bf94fcda1d18db4f215d9c0.htm. Accessed 28 Sept. 2022.
[3]. Dechow, P., Ge, W., & Schrand, C. (2010). Understanding Earnings Quality: A review of the proxies, their determinants and their consequences. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50(2-3), 344–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2010.09.001.
[4]. Ball, R., & Shivakumar, L. (2005). Earnings quality in UK private firms: Comparative loss recognition timeliness. Journal of Accounting and Economics.
[5]. Basu, S. (2005). Discussion of ‘Conditional and unconditional conservatism: Concepts and modeling’. Review of Accounting Studies, 10(2/3), 311−321.
[6]. Francis, J., & Wang, D. (2008). The joint effect of investor protection and Big 4 audits on earnings quality around the world. Contemporary Accounting Research, 25(1), 157−191.
[7]. Diamond D., and R. Verrecchia. 1991. Disclosure, liquidity and the cost of equity capital. The Journal of Finance.
[8]. Clarkson, P., Guedes, J., & Thompson, R. (1996). On the diversification, Observability, and measurement of Estimation Risk. jstor. Retrieved November 27, 2022, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2331387.
[9]. Botosan, C. A. (1997). Disclosure Level and the Cost of Equity Capital. The Accounting Review, 72(3), 323–349. http://www.jstor.org/stable/248475
[10]. Graham JR, Harvey CR, Rajgopal S (2005) The economic implications of corporate financial reporting. J Account Econ 40(1–3):3–73.
[11]. Brown, S., Hillegeist, S.A., 2007. How disclosure quality affects the level information asymmetry. Review of Accounting Studies 12, 443–477.
[12]. Cohen, D.A., 2008. Does information risk really matter? An analysis of the determinants and economic consequences of financial reporting quality. Asia Pacific Journal of Accounting and Economics 15, 69–90.
[13]. Nikolaev, V. V. (2014, August 23). Identifying accounting quality. SSRN. Retrieved November 27, 2022, from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2484958.
[14]. Beneish’s M-Score | Accounting Ratio | GMT Research. Gmtresearch.com. (1999). Retrieved 22 September 2022, from https://www.gmtresearch.com/en/accounting-ratio/beneishs-m-score/.
[15]. D. Beneish, M. (1999). The Detection of Earnings Manipulation. Retrieved 27 September 2022, from https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.195.3676&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
[16]. University, I. (2022). Kelley professor’s M-Score model remains most viable means of predicting corporate fraud. Kelley School of Business. Retrieved 27 September 2022, fromhttps://blog.kelley.iu.edu/2022/02/17/kelley-professors-m-score-model-remains-most-viable-means-of-predicting-corporate-fraud/.
[17]. Yeh, D., Sha, S., Zhou, J., Ni, S., & Qu, P. (2022). The HFCAA and consequences for US-listed China-based companies | White & Case LLP. Whitecase.com. Retrieved 28 September 2022, from https://www.whitecase.com/insight-our-thinking/hfcaa-and-consequences-us-listed-china-based-companies.
Cite this article
Wang,J.;Lin,Y.;Liu,Y.;Zhang,F.;Li,Y. (2023). The Differences in Accounting Quality between Chinese Companies and American Companies Listed in the United States. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,18,55-67.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Management Research and Economic Development
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).