IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/bubdp1/4230.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing the value revelance of R&D reporting in Germany: standard and selection effects

Author

Listed:
  • Ramb, Fred
  • Reitzig, Markus

Abstract

On the basis of accounting and market data for firms and groups listed on German stock exchanges between 1997 and 2003, we show that the value relevance of R&D information under German accounting standards can be superior to that provided by US-GAAP and IAS. The results, obtained while dynamically controlling for partial freedom of firms to choose a standard in a modified Q model, show that the risk of IAS/US-GAAP misinforming investors during "bear market" periods is more relevant than their comparative advantage over the prudence principle of the German Commercial Code in "bull market" periods. Using the approach chosen for this study, it is possible not only to draw a clear dividing line between standard and selection effects but also to disentangle them along theoretical lines more clearly than in earlier studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramb, Fred & Reitzig, Markus, 2005. "Comparing the value revelance of R&D reporting in Germany: standard and selection effects," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2005,36, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:bubdp1:4230
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/19621/1/200536dkp.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cockburn, Iain & Griliches, Zvi, 1988. "Industry Effects and Appropriability Measures in the Stock Market's Valuation of R&D and Patents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(2), pages 419-423, May.
    2. Christiano, Lawrence J. & Eichenbaum, Martin & Evans, Charles L., 1999. "Monetary policy shocks: What have we learned and to what end?," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 65-148, Elsevier.
    3. Christian Leuz, 2003. "IAS Versus U.S. GAAP: Information Asymmetry–Based Evidence from Germany's New Market," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 445-472, June.
    4. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Market Value, R&D, and Patents," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 249-252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Jaffee, Adam & Trajtenberg, Manuel, 2000. "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1rh8k6z2, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    6. Fields, Thomas D. & Lys, Thomas Z. & Vincent, Linda, 2001. "Empirical research on accounting choice," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 255-307, September.
    7. Kothari, S. P. & Zimmerman, Jerold L., 1995. "Price and return models," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 155-192, September.
    8. Christian Leuz, 2003. "IAS Versus U.S. GAAP: Information Asymmetry–Based Evidence from Germany's New Market," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 445-472, June.
    9. William C. Brainard & James Tobin, 1968. "Pitfalls in Financial Model-Building," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 244, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    10. Louis K. C. Chan & Josef Lakonishok & Theodore Sougiannis, 2001. "The Stock Market Valuation of Research and Development Expenditures," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(6), pages 2431-2456, December.
    11. Lev, Baruch & Sougiannis, Theodore, 1996. "The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 107-138, February.
    12. Christian Leuz, 2003. "IAS Versus U.S. GAAP: Information Asymmetry–Based Evidence from Germany's New Market," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 445-472, June.
    13. Lev, B & Zarowin, P, 1999. "The boundaries of financial reporting and how to extend them," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 353-385.
    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. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2641 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jean-François Casta & Olivier J. Ramond & Lionel Escaffre, 2008. "Economic Properties of Recognized Intangibles under Domestic Accounting Standards: Evidence from European Capital Markets," Post-Print halshs-00681592, HAL.
    3. Fred Ramb & Markus Reitzig, 2005. "Who do you trust while Shares are on a Roler-Coaster Ride? Balance Sheet and Patent Data as Sources of Investor Information During Volatile Market Times," DRUID Working Papers 05-15, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.

    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. Fred Ramb & Markus Reitzig, 2005. "Who do you trust while Shares are on a Roler-Coaster Ride? Balance Sheet and Patent Data as Sources of Investor Information During Volatile Market Times," DRUID Working Papers 05-15, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    2. Reitzig, Markus & Ramb, Fred, 2004. "Who do you trust while bubbles grow and blow? A comparative analysis of the explanatory power of accounting and patent information for the market values of German firms," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2004,17, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    3. Villalonga, Belen, 2004. "Intangible resources, Tobin's q, and sustainability of performance differences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 205-230, June.
    4. Saida Dammak, 2014. "An Analysis of the Relationship between the Voluntary Disclosure of the Intellectual Capital and the Firm Value," International Journal of Management Sciences, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 4(11), pages 546-566.
    5. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Oriani, Raffaele, 2006. "Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany, and Italy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 971-993, September.
    6. Efstathios G. Parcharidis & Nikos C. Varsakelis, 2010. "R&D and Tobin's q in an emerging financial market: the case of the Athens Stock Exchange," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(5), pages 353-361.
    7. Luisito Bertinelli & Arnaud Bourgain & Florian Léon, 2020. "Corruption and tax compliance: evidence from small retailers in Bamako, Mali," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5), pages 366-370, March.
    8. Hussinger, Katrin & Pacher, Sebastian, 2019. "Information ambiguity, patents and the market value of innovative assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 665-675.
    9. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:15:y:2006:i:13:p:1-10 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Ewens, Michael & Peters, Ryan & Wang, Sean, 2019. "Measuring Intangible Capital with Market Prices," SocArXiv kvp2f, Center for Open Science.
    11. Callen, Jeffrey L. & Morel, Mindy, 2005. "The valuation relevance of R&D expenditures: Time series evidence," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 304-325.
    12. Lionel Nesta & Pier-Paolo Saviotti, 2003. "Intangible Assests and Market Value: Evidence from Biotechnology Firms," SPRU Working Paper Series 87, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    13. Dennis Oswald & Paul Zarowin, 2007. "Capitalization of R&D and the Informativeness of Stock Prices," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 703-726.
    14. Sunil Kanwar, 2014. "The Market Valuation of Innovation: The Case of Indian Manufacturing," Working Papers id:5911, eSocialSciences.
    15. Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Wang, Chong & Wu, Chaopeng, 2013. "Banking systems, innovations, intellectual property protections, and financial markets: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2390-2396.
    16. Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Improving patent valuations for management purposes--validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 939-957, September.
    17. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2006. "R&D, productivity and market value," IFS Working Papers W06/23, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    18. Hirschey, Mark & Richardson, Vernon J., 2004. "Are scientific indicators of patent quality useful to investors?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 91-107, January.
    19. Niket Jindal & Leigh McAlister, 2015. "The Impacts of Advertising Assets and R&D Assets on Reducing Bankruptcy Risk," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 555-572, July.
    20. Anis Jarboui & Ahmed Abdelmoula, 2007. "Opportunisme Managerial, Valorisation Boursiere Et Modes De Comptabilisation Des Depenses Immaterielles Dans Les Pays Emergents," Post-Print halshs-00522296, HAL.
    21. Morales, Rosa & Radoniqi, Fatos, 2017. "Intangibles and the Market Value of Biopharmaceutical Startups," MPRA Paper 88580, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Accounting standards; standard selection; R&D; value relevance; Germany;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • M40 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:bubdp1:4230. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dbbgvde.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.