ฉันDiscussion of
Firms’ Voluntary Recognition of
Stock-Based Compensation Expense
C AT H E R I N E SCHRAND∗
1. Introduction
More than 100 firms voluntarily elected to expense stock options primarily
in the summer and fall of 2002. The study by Aboody, Barth, and Kasznik
(hereafter, ABK) examines the determinants of the election decision and
the market reactions to these elections. Before discussing the study, it is
important to note other actions that were concurrent with the decisions to
expense and that had an impact on the corporate climate in the U.S. at the
time of the elections (see table 1).
Table 1 reveals several important patterns. First, actions by Congress and
the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) may have led firms to
believe that expensing would become mandatory. The ABK study generally
treats the election to expense options as a voluntary accounting change.
It may be more akin to early adoption of a mandatory change, even for
firms that the study defines as early announcers (announced before July 31,
2002). Second, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the NASDAQ and New York Stock
Exchange (NYSE) rules, the financial statement certification requirements,
and the Conference Board actions are all responses to increasing demands
for improved corporate governance. Excessive compensation was in the
limelight.
∗University of Pennsylvania. The author acknowledges the many useful comments from
participants at the Journal of Accounting Research conference. Many of the conference comments
are reflected in this discussion.
151
Copyright Cรักแปล
ฉันDiscussion ofFirms’ Voluntary Recognition ofStock-Based Compensation ExpenseC AT H E R I N E SCHRAND∗1. IntroductionMore than 100 firms voluntarily elected to expense stock options primarilyin the summer and fall of 2002. The study by Aboody, Barth, and Kasznik(hereafter, ABK) examines the determinants of the election decision andthe market reactions to these elections. Before discussing the study, it isimportant to note other actions that were concurrent with the decisions toexpense and that had an impact on the corporate climate in the U.S. at thetime of the elections (see table 1).Table 1 reveals several important patterns. First, actions by Congress andthe International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) may have led firms tobelieve that expensing would become mandatory. The ABK study generallytreats the election to expense options as a voluntary accounting change.It may be more akin to early adoption of a mandatory change, even forfirms that the study defines as early announcers (announced before July 31,2002). Second, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the NASDAQ and New York StockExchange (NYSE) rules, the financial statement certification requirements,and the Conference Board actions are all responses to increasing demandsfor improved corporate governance. Excessive compensation was in thelimelight.∗University of Pennsylvania. The author acknowledges the many useful comments fromparticipants at the Journal of Accounting Research conference. Many of the conference commentsare reflected in this discussion.151Copyright Cรักแปล
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..