Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (26)
- Conference Proceeding (5)
- Book (3)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Course Material (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (37) (remove)
Keywords
- IFRS (2)
- Accounting (1)
- Case Study (1)
- Credit rating agencies (CRAs) (1)
- Croatia (1)
- EU-Regulation (1)
- Financial Reporting (1)
- Financial reporting (1)
- Germany (1)
- Leasing (1)
- Lufthansa (1)
- Management (1)
- SMEs (1)
- brand equity (1)
- brand valuation (1)
- capital markets (1)
- consumer behaviour (1)
- corporate finance (1)
- eye-tracking (1)
- financial statements (1)
- impairment test (1)
- marketing (1)
- ratings (1)
- regulation (1)
- sustainability (1)
- visual attention (1)
- visual merchandising (1)
Institute
As of the reporting year 2017, extended non-financial reporting requirements will apply to certain large companies within the EU on the basis of the EU-Directive 2014/95/EU. The aim is to provide an overview of selected regulations for the new non-financial statements. This includes the analysis of the German Sustainability Code as well as the German Accounting Standard No. 20. The analysis shows a tightening of disclosure on non-financial reporting and an increased focus of disclosures on non-financial concepts, objectives and measures. Hence, the risk management of a preparer gains in importance with regard to non-financial aspects of the business activity.
The market for external ratings is dominated worldwide as well as in the European Union (EU) by three major credit rating agencies (CRAs). These “Big Three” are Standard & Poor's (S&P), Moody's and Fitch Ratings. Due to the oligopolistic market structure and possible involvement in the 2008 financial crisis, the rating agencies have constantly come under criticism. This was associated with stricter regulatory requirements to ease the situation. The EU-Regulation on credit rating agencies („CRA-Regulation“) coming into force 2009 and its amendments in 2011 and in 2013 have mainly governed such regulation. The aim of the article is to analyse potential regulatory impact on the still inherent oligopolistic situation on the EU rating market in the context of the CRA-Regulation. Selected key figures are used to observe over a defined period of time if and how the dominance has changed. The motivation for this article is the observation, that political and private efforts to establish a European rating agency as a counterweight to the three major agencies and other approaches to increase competition in the rating market, followed, which has not been resounding to date. In summary, it is shown that new agencies have a potential impact on the EU rating market and that the three major rating agencies still dominate the market but within a changed environment.
The way in which brands are economically represented in the context of financial reporting is controversial in theory and practice. This holds especially against the background of the ever- increasing importance of intangible assets. Brands and the economic success associated with them are thus regarded as a key variable for overall corporate success: cash flows can be accelerated and expanded through the use of brand-strategic options, while existing risks may be mitigated. In addition to a large number of theoretical definitions, the determination of brand value from both a marketing and an accounting perspective is also characterized by a complex interaction of numerous influencing factors. This is where the International Accounting Standards IAS 38: "Intangible Assets" (isolated acquisition of a brand) and IFRS 3: "Business Combinations" (acquisition of a brand as part of a business combination) take effect: These are intended to ensure a comparable and reliable "true and fair view" for the presentation of intangible assets in international accounting. In addition to various recognition criteria, the accounting regulation here also includes the accounting valuation of intangible assets and thus also of brands. In principle, valuation in accordance with IAS 38 is based on acquisition costs. The determination of the operating life for impact evaluation is highly controversial both in literature and in practice. Under IFRS 3, acquisition costs are to be replaced by the fair value. Regardless of the method used, possible subjectivity is one of the central issues. The current discussion approach of the International Accounting Standards Board also clearly shows the need for simplification and concretization that still exists for practice: In particular, the accounting distinction between goodwill and intangible assets is the subject of discussions with the Global Preparers Forum, among others. The interests of users, preparers and auditors of corporate financial reporting must be taken into account equally. In particular, the prohibition on recognizing self-created brands in the balance sheet makes it difficult to assess their value. Furthermore, it creates a weak point in the presentation of the true and fair view of a company's financial position and financial performance that is generally required. Regardless of the previous, the current rules provide preparers and users with a basic overview of existing intangible assets. Irrespective of how valuation is determined individually, the IASB's rules thus help to create a fundamental structure. In which approach the future discussion will result in remains open.