IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v63y2017i11p3654-3671.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Restructuring Charges, FAS 146, and the Accrual Anomaly

Author

Listed:
  • Sanjeev Bhojraj

    (Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853)

  • Partha Sengupta

    (Enterprise Risk Analysis Division, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Washington, DC 20219)

  • Suning Zhang

    (Henry B. Tippie College of Business, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242)

Abstract

In this study, we examine the role of restructuring charges in the existence and subsequent weakening of the widely documented accrual anomaly. We find that prior to 2003, the significant positive abnormal hedge returns experienced by accrual based strategies were influenced by a subset of firms with high restructuring charges. After 2003, with the introduction of the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 146 changing the accounting for restructuring charges, restructuring firms no longer experience significant abnormal returns, thereby weakening the accrual anomaly. Our results suggest that the regulatory changes have had an effect on impairing the role of restructuring charges in the accrual anomaly by improving the market’s ability to correctly assess the valuation implications of restructuring charges in the low accruals portfolios.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanjeev Bhojraj & Partha Sengupta & Suning Zhang, 2017. "Restructuring Charges, FAS 146, and the Accrual Anomaly," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3654-3671, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:63:y:2017:i:11:p:3654-3671
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2533
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2533
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2533?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fama, Eugene F., 1998. "Market efficiency, long-term returns, and behavioral finance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 283-306, September.
    2. Frederic S. Mishkin, 1983. "A Rational Expectations Approach to Macroeconometrics: Testing Policy Ineffectiveness and Efficient-Markets Models," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number mish83-1, March.
    3. Richardson, Scott A. & Sloan, Richard G. & Soliman, Mark T. & Tuna, Irem, 2005. "Accrual reliability, earnings persistence and stock prices," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 437-485, September.
    4. Arthur Kraft & Andrew J. Leone & Charles E. Wasley, 2007. "Regression‐Based Tests of the Market Pricing of Accounting Numbers: The Mishkin Test and Ordinary Least Squares," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 1081-1114, December.
    5. Brav, Alon & Geczy, Christopher & Gompers, Paul A., 2000. "Is the abnormal return following equity issuances anomalous?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 209-249, May.
    6. Hirshleifer, David & Teoh, Siew Hong, 2003. "Limited attention, information disclosure, and financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 337-386, December.
    7. Frederic S. Mishkin, 1983. "Introduction to "A Rational Expectations Approach to Macroeconometrics: Testing Policy Ineffectiveness and Efficient-Markets Models"," NBER Chapters, in: A Rational Expectations Approach to Macroeconometrics: Testing Policy Ineffectiveness and Efficient-Markets Models, pages 1-6, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Gu, Zhaoyang & Chen, Ting, 2004. "Analysts' treatment of nonrecurring items in street earnings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 129-170, December.
    9. Partha S. Mohanram, 2014. "Analysts' Cash Flow Forecasts and the Decline of the Accruals Anomaly," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 1143-1170, December.
    10. Daniel A. Bens & Rick Johnston, 2009. "Accounting Discretion: Use or Abuse? An Analysis of Restructuring Charges Surrounding Regulator Action," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 673-699, September.
    11. Loughran, Tim & Ritter, Jay R., 2000. "Uniformly least powerful tests of market efficiency," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 361-389, March.
    12. Jeremiah Green & John R. M. Hand & Mark T. Soliman, 2011. "Going, Going, Gone? The Apparent Demise of the Accruals Anomaly," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 797-816, May.
    13. Collins, Daniel W. & Hribar, Paul, 2000. "Earnings-based and accrual-based market anomalies: one effect or two?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 101-123, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ravi Dharwadkar & David Harris & Linna Shi & Nan Zhou, 2020. "The initiation of audit committee interlocks and the contagion of accounting policy choices: evidence from special items," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 120-158, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gray, Philip & Liao, Iris Siyu & Strydom, Maria, 2018. "The profitability of trading NOA and accruals: One effect or two?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 211-224.
    2. Dana Hollie & Philip B. Shane & Qiuhong Zhao & Steven Cahan, 2017. "The role of financial analysts in stock market efficiency with respect to annual earnings and its cash and accrual components," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 57(1), pages 199-237, March.
    3. Strydom, Maria & Skully, Michael & Veeraraghavan, Madhu, 2014. "Is the accrual anomaly robust to firm-level analysis?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 157-165.
    4. Yong-Chul Shin & Kun Yu & Neil Fargher, 2016. "Do investors misprice components of net periodic pension cost?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 56(3), pages 845-878, September.
    5. Venter, Elmar R. & Cahan, Steven F. & Emanuel, David, 2013. "Mandatory Earnings Disaggregation and the Persistence and Pricing of Earnings Components," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 26-53.
    6. Ming‐Chang Wang & Yu‐Jia Ding, 2021. "Does the quarterly accrual anomaly exist in Taiwan's stock market? Evidence from Manager's earnings management," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 688-701, April.
    7. LaFond, Ryan, 2005. "Is the Accrual Anomaly a Global Anomaly?," Working papers 27856, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    8. Bin Miao & Siew Hong Teoh & Zinan Zhu, 2016. "Limited attention, statement of cash flow disclosure, and the valuation of accruals," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 473-515, June.
    9. Kim, Jung Hoon & Lin, Steve, 2019. "Accrual anomaly and mandatory adoption of IFRS: Evidence from Germany," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    10. Sanjay Sehgal & Srividya Subramaniam & Florent Deisting, 2012. "Accruals and Cash Flows Anomalies: Evidence From Indian Stock Market," Post-Print hal-01881919, HAL.
    11. Lu, Hsueh-Tien, 2018. "Voluntary disclosure and the pricing of earnings components," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 64-73.
    12. Santanu Mitra & Mahmud Hossain, 2011. "Corporate governance attributes and remediation of internal control material weaknesses reported under SOX Section 404," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 10(1), pages 5 - 29, February.
    13. Tatiana Fedyk & Zvi Singer & Theodore Sougiannis, 2020. "The Accrual Anomaly: Accrual Originations, Accrual Reversals, and Resolution of Uncertainty," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 885-916, June.
    14. repec:rim:rimwps:46-07 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Hsien-Li Lee & Hua Lee, 2015. "Effect of information disclosure and transparency ranking system on mispricing of accruals of Taiwanese firms," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 445-471, April.
    16. Lewellen, Jonathan, 2010. "Accounting anomalies and fundamental analysis: An alternative view," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 455-466, December.
    17. Diana MURESAN, 2015. "The Mishkin Test: An Analysis Of Model Extensions," SEA - Practical Application of Science, Romanian Foundation for Business Intelligence, Editorial Department, issue 7, pages 393-400, April.
    18. Shi, Linna & Zhang, Huai & Guo, Jun, 2014. "Analyst cash flow forecasts and pricing of accruals," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 95-105.
    19. Kothari, S.P. & Loutskina, E. & Nikolaev, V., 2006. "Agency Theory of Overvalued Equity as an Explanation for the Accrual Anomaly," Discussion Paper 2006-103, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    20. Brett Govendir & Peter Wells, 2014. "The influence of the accruals generating process on earnings persistence," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 39(4), pages 593-614, November.
    21. Theodosia Konstantinidi & Arthur Kraft & Peter F. Pope, 2016. "Asymmetric Persistence and the Market Pricing of Accruals and Cash Flows," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 52(1), pages 140-165, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:63:y:2017:i:11:p:3654-3671. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.