| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 735.9 KB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Uma das principais diferenças entre a International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement e a International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 9 Financial Instruments consiste na classificação e mensuração dos instrumentos de capital próprio. A IFRS 9 refere que as empresas devem classificar os instrumentos de capital próprio ao Justo Valor através de Lucros ou Prejuízos (JVLP), a não ser que exerçam uma opção inicial irrevocável de mensurar ao Justo Valor através de Outro Rendimento Integral (JVORI) sem a possibilidade de reciclagem. Já a IAS 39, permitia que os Ativos Financeiros Disponíveis para Venda (AFDV) fossem mensurados ao justo valor, sendo as alterações reconhecidas através de outros rendimentos do resultado integral e posteriormente transferidas para os lucros ou prejuízos (reciclagem). Sendo assim, verifica-se que a principal alteração entre as duas normas foi a eliminação da reciclagem. Neste contexto, o estudo tem como principal objetivo perceber se a adoção da IFRS 9 teve impacto na relevância da informação financeira do Resultado Líquido do Período (RLP) em comparação com o Resultado Integral (RI) ou na capacidade de previsão dos Fluxos de Caixa Operacionais (FCO) futuros e do RLP futuro. A análise é efetuada tendo como base uma amostra de empresas do FTSE 100 e do EURO STOXX 50. Os resultados mostram evidência de que a IFRS 9 teve influência na relevância da informação financeira pois, após a sua adoção, o RLP e o RI começaram a apresentar relevância da informação financeira, os investidores deixaram de prestar atenção às variações do justo valor das ações mensuradas ao JVORI e as variações do justo valor das ações mensuradas ao JVLP passaram a ter valor incremental. Os resultados indiciam também que a proibição da reciclagem teve influência na capacidade de previsão dos FCO futuros e na capacidade de previsão do RLP futuro.
One of the main differences between International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement and International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 9 Financial Instruments is the classification and measurement of equity instruments. IFRS 9 states that companies must classify equity instruments at Fair Value through Profit or Loss (FVPL) unless they exercise an initial irrevocable option to measure at Fair Value through Other Comprehensive Income (FVOCI) without the possibility of recycling. The previous standard (IAS 39), on the other hand, allowed Available-for-Sale Financial Assets (AFS) to be measured at fair value, with changes recognized through other comprehensive income and subsequently transferred to profit or loss (recycling). Thus, the main change between the two standards is the elimination of recycling. In this context, the study’s main objective is to understand whether the adoption of IFRS 9 had an impact on the value relevance of Net Income (NI) in comparison with Comprehensive Income (CI) or on the ability to predict future Operating Cash Flows and future NI. The analysis is performed on a sample of companies in the FTSE 100 and EURO STOXX 50. The results show evidence that IFRS 9 had an influence on the value relevance because, after is adoption, NI and CI started to show value relevance, investors stopped paying attention to changes in the fair value of equity instruments measured at FVOCI and changes in the fair value of equity instruments measured at FVPL started to have incremental value. The results also indicate that the elimination of recycling had an influence on the predictive ability of future Operating Cash Flows and the predictive ability of future NI.
One of the main differences between International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement and International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 9 Financial Instruments is the classification and measurement of equity instruments. IFRS 9 states that companies must classify equity instruments at Fair Value through Profit or Loss (FVPL) unless they exercise an initial irrevocable option to measure at Fair Value through Other Comprehensive Income (FVOCI) without the possibility of recycling. The previous standard (IAS 39), on the other hand, allowed Available-for-Sale Financial Assets (AFS) to be measured at fair value, with changes recognized through other comprehensive income and subsequently transferred to profit or loss (recycling). Thus, the main change between the two standards is the elimination of recycling. In this context, the study’s main objective is to understand whether the adoption of IFRS 9 had an impact on the value relevance of Net Income (NI) in comparison with Comprehensive Income (CI) or on the ability to predict future Operating Cash Flows and future NI. The analysis is performed on a sample of companies in the FTSE 100 and EURO STOXX 50. The results show evidence that IFRS 9 had an influence on the value relevance because, after is adoption, NI and CI started to show value relevance, investors stopped paying attention to changes in the fair value of equity instruments measured at FVOCI and changes in the fair value of equity instruments measured at FVPL started to have incremental value. The results also indicate that the elimination of recycling had an influence on the predictive ability of future Operating Cash Flows and the predictive ability of future NI.
Descrição
Mestrado Bolonha em Contabilidade, Fiscalidade e Finanças Empresariais
Palavras-chave
IFRS 9 IAS 39 Relevância da informação financeira Instrumentos de capital próprio Justo Valor Reciclagem Value Relevance Equity Instruments Fair Value Recycling
Contexto Educativo
Citação
Almeida, Leandro Filipe Paulo de (2022). "O impacto da IFRS 9 na relevância da informação financeira". Dissertação de Mestrado. Universidade de Lisboa. Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestão.
Editora
Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestão
