R&D profitability, intensity and market-to-book: evidence from Australia
AbstractPurpose – The purpose of this paper is to assess the financial disclosure vis-á-vis economic reality of research and development (R&D) expensed by Australian firms under the pre-2005 Australian generally accepted accounting principles (A-GAAP) regime via the lens of market-to-book. Design/methodology/approach – The authors estimated firms' R&D profit rate, measured R&D revenue intensity and modelled the impacts of these and related economic factors, via economic and financial disclosure channels, on market-to-book using data for 1988-2004. Findings – R&D, on average, was profit neutral and had undetectable impacts on market-to-book whether via equity valuation or financial disclosure. Research limitations/implications – Market-to-book's information content is best viewed as conditional on the reference disclosure regime. Australian firms' typically at best minimal R&D profitability is an international anomaly. Data limitations in terms of the generating process and availability mean that R&D's impact on market-to-book via financial reporting is not definitively determined. Practical implications – Restrictive rules on the capitalization of intangible asset-related expenditures under A-GAAP apparently did not adversely impact market-to-book's economic information. AIFRS's more permissive rule risks compromising market-to-book's reliability in such a role. Originality/value – For Australia, the paper is anticipated to be the first to estimate the profit rate of R&D, measure the intensity of R&D, and model R&D's influence on the market-to-book ratio. It develops a framework for the economic and financial reporting impacts of investments on a key indicator of firms' financial standing and contributes to the debate on identifiable intangibles' disclosure.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Emerald Group Publishing in its journal Accounting Research Journal.
Volume (Year): 24 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (September)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com
Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- J. A. Hausman, 1976.
"Specification Tests in Econometrics,"
185, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1993. "Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 3-56, February.
- White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-38, May.
- Tobin, James, 1969. "A General Equilibrium Approach to Monetary Theory," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 15-29, February.
- Yuan Ding & Hervé Stolowy & Michel Tenenhaus, 2007. "R&D productivity: an exploratory international study," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 6(1), pages 86-101, February.
- Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1992. " The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(2), pages 427-65, June.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Louise Lister).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.