Connection between commonly used financial ratios and misrepresentation of financial statements of collapsed corporations

This paper unravels dynamic and intriguing shifts in the use of financial ratios in signaling corporate collapse. An empirical examination of the anecdotal evidences from notable recent corporate collapses coupled with the short-lived usefulness of financial ratios in various prediction models suggest that companies(1) that deliberately misrepresent their financial statements may have taken cues from the ratios that are commonly investigated. This proposition is supported by an extensive examination of over 50 studies conducted between 1968 and 2002. The erosion in the reliability of numbers in financial statements has led to significant distortions in the predictive power of financial ratios when used in signaling corporate collapse. Recent collapses such as Parmalat in Europe, Enron and WorldCom in the U.S. and HIH in Australia, present yet another reminder that financial statement items are being misrepresented. These are all large corporations with well-established household names, and are for sure closely monitored by financial communities around the globe. Nevertheless, a common thread seems to link the collapse of these companies: none of these collapses were foreseen by credit rating agencies or foretold by the widely accepted bankruptcy prediction models. Why? This paper attempts to use some anecdotal evidence in order to provide logical explanations to the existence of such a common thread. It argues that there appears to be anecdotal evidence to suggest that directors of publicly listed companies that have collapsed may have deliberately misrepresented financial statement items.

An essay about the effect of vague accounting standards on the decision making process of auditors

Vague words and expressions are present throughout the standards that comprise the accounting and auditing professions. Vagueness is considered to be a significant source of inexactness in many accounting decision problems and many authors have argued that the neglect of this issue may cause accounting information to be less useful. On the other hand, we can assume that the use of vague terms in accounting standards is inherent to principle based standards (different from rule based standards) and that to avoid vague terms, standard setters would have to incur excessive transaction costs. Auditors are required to exercise their own professional judgment throughout the audit process and it has been argued that the inherent vagueness in accounting standards may influence their decision making processes. The main objective of this paper is to analyze the decision making process of auditors and to investigate whether vague accounting standards create a problem for the decision making process of auditors, or lead to a better outcome. This paper makes the argument that vague standards prompt the use of System 2 type processing by auditors, allowing more comprehensive analytical thinking; therefore, reducing the biases associated with System 1 heuristic processing. If our argument is valid, the repercussions of vague accounting standards are not as negative as presented in previous literature, instead they are positive.