§ 瀏覽學位論文書目資料
  
系統識別號 U0002-2606201915463000
DOI 10.6846/TKU.2019.00885
論文名稱(中文) 金融工具未實現損益之資訊內涵:併論外溢效果與投資人特性之影響
論文名稱(英文) The Information Content of Financial Instruments’ Unrealized Gain and Loss: the Influence of Spillover Effect and Investor Characteristics
第三語言論文名稱
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中文) 會計學系碩士班
系所名稱(英文) Department of Accounting
外國學位學校名稱
外國學位學院名稱
外國學位研究所名稱
學年度 107
學期 2
出版年 108
研究生(中文) 葉芷彣
研究生(英文) Chih-Wen Yeh
學號 604600014
學位類別 碩士
語言別 繁體中文
第二語言別
口試日期 2019-06-19
論文頁數 65頁
口試委員 指導教授 - 顏信輝(sinhui@mail.tku.edu.tw)
委員 - 許恩得
委員 - 莊嘉建
關鍵字(中) 價值攸關性
未實現損益
公允價值
外溢效果
投資人特性
關鍵字(英) Value relevance
Unrealized gain and loss
Fair value
Spillover effect
Investor characteristics
第三語言關鍵字
學科別分類
中文摘要
國際財務報導準則(IFRS)對金融工具採用公允價值評價,因此綜合損益表出現公允價值變動之為實現損益,本文探討此項未實現損益之資訊內涵,以及是否對具有財報其他資訊之具外溢效果,此外,也分析法人持股高低與前述兩議題之關係。本文根據2013-2017年金融工具未實現損益數佔本期淨利與其他綜合損益數均達1%以上之893個樣本進行研究,迴歸分析結果發現,綜合損益表之金融工具公允價值未實現損益佔比高低對其價值攸關性沒有影響。而在外溢效果方面,金融工具未實現損益佔比愈高均會降低不包含未實現損益之本期淨利及其他綜合損益之價值攸關性。本文亦發現專業與非專業投資人對本期淨利及其他綜合損益之未實現損益之攸關性判斷均呈顯著差異,專業投資人認為本期淨利之未實現損益較不具價值攸關性,其反而更重視其他綜合損益中的未實現損益數。另外,專業投資人較非專業投資人更重視本期淨利中非金融工具未實現損益之其他資訊。
  透過股票報酬率模型做額外分析,發現當其他綜合損益之未實現損益數佔比愈高時,其未實現損益之評價攸關性愈低。而本期淨利之金融工具未實現損益對其他淨利變動數具有外溢效果。在投資人特性方面,當法人持股比率愈高時,對本期淨利之未實現損益之評價攸關性愈低,但對不包含金融工具未實現損益之其他淨利及其他綜合損益變動數之評價攸關性愈高。
  此外,本文以股價評價模型對2017年與2018年之472筆樣本進行額外分析,比較準則公報之變動(IAS 39改為IFRS 9)對本研究之可能影響。實證結果發現IFRS 9對於本期淨利之相關假說均具顯著增額效果,而對其他綜合損益之相關假說,僅對法人持股比例高低對未實現損益之評價攸關性具顯著增額效果。經Wald test聯合檢測結果發現在IFRS 9之規範下,當本期淨利之未實現損益佔比愈高時,會降低未實現損益之價值攸關性,亦會對非金融工具未實現損益之本期淨利產生外溢效果,專業投資人亦較非專業投資人更重視金融工具未實現損益以外之本期淨利。而當其他綜合損益之未實現損益佔比愈高時,其之價值攸關性會愈低。法人持股比例愈高並未對未實現損益之評價攸關性有顯著差異。
英文摘要
IFRS uses fair value evaluation as the basis for financial instruments. Those unrealized gains and losses are shown in the statement of comprehensive income.This paper examines the value relevance of unrealized gain and loss on financial instruments (URGL) and examines whether the higher ratio of URGL affects the value relevance of information in statement of comprehensive income (i.e., spillover effect of URGL) in Taiwan from 2013 to 2017. Furthermore, we also examine whether the value relevance of URGL is different between proficient investors and non-proficient investors. According to 893 samples, the results indicate that URGL both in net income (NI) and other comprehensive income (OCI) do not have value relevance. Moreover, URGL in NI and in OCI have the spillover effect (i.e. the higher of the ratio of URGL in NI/OCI, the lower of the value relevance of URGL in NI/OCI). Regarding the investor characteristics, the results indicate that proficient investors place less importance on the information of URGL in NI than non-proficient investors. On the contrary, they place more important on the information of URGL in OCI and non-URGL in NI than non-proficient investors. 
On the other hand, using return model for analysis finds that URGL in OCI has value relevance. URGL in NI has spillover effect to changes in NI without URGL. Furthermore, the result showed that the higher of institutional investors’ holding rate, the lower of the value relevance of URGL in NI. However, when the institutional investors’ holding rate is higher, the value relevance of non-URGL in NI and the changes of URGL in OCI are also higher.
Since IFRS 9 has been used in 2018, this paper also examines whether the different rules would affect the results above. According to 472 samples from 2017 to 2018, the results indicate that all hypotheses about NI have incremental effect, but only the value relevance of URGL in OCI under institutional investors’ holding rate has incremental effect. Using Wald test finds that under IFRS 9, the higher ratio of URGL in NI would lower the value relevance of URGL and non-URGL in NI. Proficient investors place more important on the information of non-URGL in NI than non-proficient investors. Besides, the value relevance of URGL in OCI would lower when the ratio of URGL in OCI is getting higher. However, proficient and non-proficient investors do not have difference in the value relevance of URGL in OCI.
第三語言摘要
論文目次
目錄
第一章 緒論	- 1 -
第一節 研究背景與動機	- 1 -
第二節 研究目的	- 4 -
第三節 研究架構	- 5 -
第二章 文獻探討與假說建立	- 7 -
第一節 公允價值會計與資訊內涵	- 7 -
第二節 本期損益、其他綜合損益與資訊內涵	- 13 -
第三節 法人持股比例與財務報表資訊內涵	- 19 -
第四節 假說建立	- 20 -
第三章 研究方法	- 23 -
第一節 樣本選取與資料來源	- 23 -
第二節 實證模型與變數定義	- 26 -
第四章 實證結果與分析	- 31 -
第一節 敘述性統計分析	- 31 -
第二節 相關性分析	- 34 -
第三節 迴歸結果分析	- 37 -
第四節 額外分析	- 41 -
第五章 結論與建議	- 56 -
第一節 研究結論	- 56 -
第二節 研究貢獻與研究限制	- 58 -
參考文獻	- 59 -

表目錄
表3-1 樣本篩選過程	- 24 -
表3-2 產業分布狀況	- 24 -
表4-1 敘述性統計量	- 32 -
表4-2 各變數Pearson相關係數表	- 35 -
表4-3 股價評價模型之實證結果	- 39 -
表4-4 股票報酬率模型之實證結果	- 44 -
表4-5 股價評價模型之實證結果:採用不同公報之影響	- 51 -
表4-6 公報不同實證結果之匯總與分析	- 53 -
表4-7 本研究各研究假說的實證結果彙整	- 55 -

圖目錄
圖1-1 研究架構	- 6 -
圖2-1 綜合損益表之劃分	- 17 -
圖4-1 IAS 39及IFRS 9投資分類之對應	- 46 -
參考文獻
參考文獻
一、	中文文獻
王瑄、葉疏,2015,其他綜合淨利項目及股權交易溢折價之市場效率性探討,證券市場發展季刊,第27卷第3期,1-30。
王漢民、陳俊廷,2010,金融商品公平價值、公司治理機制與公司價值,當代會計,第11卷第S期, 333-370。
王蘭芬、李淑華、許齡丰,2012,負盈餘之資訊內涵-以銷貨為基礎之盈餘評價模型觀點,台灣管理學刊,第12卷第1期,69-98。
江美艷,2010,IFRS下之公允價值衡量,勤業眾信聯合會計師事務所。
江美艷、陳欣怡,2017,107年新挑戰-金融工具 (IFRS 9) 上路,您準備好了嗎,勤業眾信聯合會計師事務所
https://www2.deloitte.com/tw/tc/pages/audit/articles/ready-for-ifrs9.html#
杜孝森、胥傳超,2014,論公允價值計量與盈餘管理-基於REMM理論,商業會計,第1期,72-74。
吳桂燕,2006,新上市時機與異常報酬之關聯性,交大管理學報,第26卷第1期,39-67。
李怡臻,2007,審計失敗對客戶股價及會計師簽證行為影響之研究,淡江大學會計學系碩士班學位論文。
林欣賢,2009,淨利與綜合淨利波動性之風險攸關性與價值攸關性:國內金融保險業之研究,成功大學會計學研究所碩士班學位論文。
林有志、林郁慧,2004,分析師對應計項目持續性認知之研究,會計與公司治理,第1卷第1期,25-45。
林岱融,2007,我國電子業上市公司金融商品公平價值資訊之報導方式對於價值攸關性之影響,輔仁大學會計學系碩士班學位論文。
林秀謙,2011,衍生性金融商品使用程度對會計資訊價值攸關性之影響,雲林科技大學會計系碩士班學位論文。
林蕙真,2012,IFRS 9 Financial Instruments及其與IAS 39之比較,台灣會計教育基金會。
林鎮雄,2014,公允價值、審計品質與企業價值之關聯性研究-以兩岸三地上市櫃公司為例,長榮大學經營管理研究所碩士班學位論文。
林嬋娟、王瑄、葛俊佑,2013,金融商品重分類和歷史盈餘平穩化行為之關聯與市場反應,會計評論,第56期,39-73。
金成隆、鄭丁旺,1999,持續與非持續盈餘反應係數之研究,會計評論,第31期,19-42。
范宏書、陳慶隆,2013,第34號財務會計準則公報對盈餘與權益帳面價值的價質攸關性之影響,管理評論,第32卷第3期,1-24。 
施承和,2016,機構投資人與散戶的投資策略之探討,朝陽科技大學財務金融研究所碩士班學位論文。
洪振虔、吳欽杉、陳安琳,2002,非理性投資行為對新上市股票價格績效之影響, 管理評論,第21卷第2期,53-79。
張仲岳,1998,盈餘持續性與股價之關聯性研究,東吳大學會計新環境國際研討會論文集,909-944。
張仲岳,2001,損益表之分類與獲利能力之預測,當代會計,第2卷第1期,1-16。
張慈韡,2013,投資性不動產之認列與揭露,成功大學財務金融研究所碩士在職專班學位論文。
陳怡臻,2014,其他綜合損益之價值攸關性,逢甲大學會計學系碩士班學位論文。
陳曉蓉、王詠惠,2006,機構投資人持股對股價反映未來盈餘資訊程度之影響-以台灣集團公司與非集團公司為例,會計與公司治理,第3卷第2期,69-100。
梁嘉文,2015,營業淨利、淨利、綜合淨利及其他綜合損益總額於解釋股價報酬有用性之比較-台灣股市之實證研究,高雄應用科技大學財富與稅務管理系碩士在職專班學位論文。
郭素菱,2002,機構投資人與財務報表攸關性之研究,成功大學會計學系碩士班學位論文。
黃力學,2008,財務報導透明度與盈餘管理,成功大學會計學系碩士班學位論文。
黃彥銘,2015,綜合淨利價值攸關性之研究,淡江大學會計學系碩士在職專班學位論文。
傅妤婕,2014,其他綜合損益、期淨利及權益真實價值,成功大學會計學系碩士班學位論文。
馮怡嘉,2006,財會三十四號公報對非專業投資人判斷之影響—以交易目的證券投資為例,淡江大學會計學系碩士班學位論文。
葉月女,2003,我國證券市場三大機構投資人與一般投資人對股市波動性影響之探討,淡江大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
葉金成、李冠豪,2001,盈餘與股價因果關係之實證研究,當代會計,第2卷第1期,18-38。
翟凡瑋,2012,實施公允價值會計與在金融危機下影響台灣銀行績效之關鍵因素,淡江大學會計學系碩士在職專班學位論文。
劉瑀農,2006,財務報導格式對非專業投資人判斷之影響─以綜合淨利資訊為例. 淡江大學會計學系碩士班學位論文。 
蔡秋萍,2006,以機構投資人角度探討公司資訊揭露,臺北大學企業管理學系碩士班學位論文。
顏信輝、張瑀珊、鄭力尹,2016,直接採用IFRS前後財務報表資訊內涵之比較,會計評論,第62期,33-74。
羅夏虹,2000,綜合淨利及其組成項目與股票報酬之關連性,中正大學會計研究所碩士班學位論文。
蘇昱丞,2013,集團企業股價波動外溢效果之研究:以台灣上市公司為例,臺北大學企業管理學系學位論文。
二、	英文文獻
Adam, T. R., & Fernando, C. S. (2006). Hedging, speculation, and shareholder value. Journal of Financial Economics, 81(2), 283-309. 
Appleyard, A. R. (1980). Takeovers: Accounting policy, financial policy and the case against accounting measures of performance. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 7(4), 541-554.
Ball, R., & Brown, P. (1968) An empirical evaluation of accounting income numbers. Journal of Accounting Research, 6(2), 159–178.
Barth, M. E. (1994). Fair value accounting: Evidence from investment securities and the market valuation of banks. Accounting Review, 69(1), 1-25.
Barth, M. E., Beaver, W. H., & Landsman, W. R. (1998). Relative valuation roles of equity book value and net income as a function of financial health. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 25(1), 1-34.
Bartov, E., Radhakrishnan, S., & Krinsky, I. (2000). Investor sophistication and patterns in stock returns after earnings announcements. The Accounting Review, 75(1), 43-63.
Black, Ervin L. and John J. White (2003), “An International Comparison of Income Statement and Balance Sheet Information: Germany, Japan and the US. European Accounting Review, 12(1), 29-46.
Bratten, B., Causholli, M., & Khan, U. (2012). Fair value accounting and the predictive ability of earnings: Evidence from the banking industry. Working paper, University of Kentucky and Columbia Business School.
Cahan, S. F., Courtenay, S. M., Gronnewoller, P. L., & Upton, D. R. (2000). Value relevance of mandated comprehensive income disclosures. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 27(9-10), 1233-1265. 
Chambers, D., Linsmeier, T. J., Shakespeare, C., & Sougiannis, T. (2007). An evaluation of SFAS no. 130 comprehensive income disclosures. Review of Accounting Studies, 12(4), 557-593.
Collins, D. W., Maydew, E. L., & Weiss, I. S. (1997). Changes in the value-relevance of earnings and book values over the past forty years. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24(1), 39-67. 
Cornett, M. M., Rezaee, Z., & Tehranian, H. (1996). An investigation of capital market reactions to pronouncements on fair value accounting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22(1–3), 119-154. 
Dhaliwal, D., Subramanyam, K. R., & Trezevant, R. (1999). Is comprehensive income superior to net income as a measure of firm performance?. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 26(1–3), 43-67. 
Du, N., Stevens, K., & McEnroe, J. (2015). The effects of comprehensive income on investors' judgments. Accounting Research Journal, 28(3), 284-299.
Easton, P. D., Eddey, P. H., & Harris, T. S. (1993). An investigation of revaluations of tangible long-lived assets. Journal of Accounting Research, 31, 1–38.
Easton, P. D., & Zmijewski, M. E. (1989). Cross-sectional variation in the stock market response to accounting earnings announcements. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 11(2), 117-141. 
Eccher, E. A., Ramesh, K., & Thiagarajan, S. R. (1996). Fair value disclosures by bank holding companies. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22(1–3), 79-117. 
Emerson, D. J., Karim, K. E., & Rutledge, R. W. (2010). Fair value accounting: A historical review of the most controversial accounting issue in decades. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 8(4), 77-85. 
Fargher, N., & Zhang, J. Z. (2014). Changes in the measurement of fair value: Implications for accounting earnings. Accounting Forum, 38(3), 184-199.
Feltham, G. A., & Pae, J. (2000). Analysis of the impact of accounting accruals on earnings uncertainty and response coefficients. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 15(3), 199-220. 
Financial Accounting Policy Committee. (1992). Financial Reporting in the 1990s and beyond: An Executive Summary. Financial Analysts Journal, 48(6), 21-23.
Francis, J., & Schipper, K. (1999). Have financial statements lost their relevance? Journal of Accounting Research, 37(2), 319-352. 
Géczy, C. C., Minton, B. A., & Schrand, C. M. (2007). Taking a view: Corporate speculation, governance, and compensation. The Journal of Finance, 62(5), 2405-2443.
Goncharov, I., & Hodgson, A. (2011). Measuring and reporting income in Europe. Journal of International Accounting Research, 10(1), 27-59. 
Harter, Charles, PhD, CPA. (2009). Mark to market accounting: Does it provide information to investors. Journal of Applied Business Research, 25(6), 119-124. 
Hayn, C. (1995). The information content of losses. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 20(2), 125-153. 
Hirst, D., & Hopkins, P. (1998). Comprehensive Income Reporting and Analysts' Valuation Judgments. Journal of Accounting Research, 36, 47-75.
Hodder, L. D., Hopkins, P. E. (2012). Accounting Slacks and Banks’ Response to Proposed Fair Value Accounting for Loans. Working Paper, Indiana University, 1-46. 
International Association of Credit Portfolio Managers (IACPM) (2004). To the International Association of Credit Portfolio Managers General Meeting, New York.
Israeli, D. (2015). Recognition versus disclosure: evidence from fair value of investment property. Review of Accounting Studies, 20(4), 1457-1503.
Jiambalvo, J., Rajgopal, S., & Venkatachalam, M. (2002). Institutional ownership and the extent to which stock prices reflect future earnings. Contemporary Accounting Research, 19(1), 117-145.
Kanagaretnam, K., Mathieu, R., & Shehata, M. (2009). Usefulness of comprehensive income reporting in Canada. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 28(4), 349-365. 
Kaya, C. T., & Türegün, N., PhD. (2014). Fair value accounting under FAS 157 and IFRS 13: Evidence from borsa, istanbul. GSTF Business Review (GBR), 3(2), 7-11. 
Khan, U. (2010). Does fair value accounting contribute to systemic risk in the banking industry?. Columbia Business School Research Paper.
Khurana, I. K., & Kim, M. (2003). Relative value relevance of historical cost vs. fair value: Evidence from bank holding companies. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 22(1), 19-42.
Kisseleva, K., & Lorenz, D. (2016). Are Level 3 fair values reflected in firm value? Evidence from European banks, ESMT Working Paper, No. 16-03.
Kothari, S.P., & Zimmerman, Jerold L. (1995). Price and return models. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 20(1), 155-192.
Kubota, K., Suda, K., & Takehara, H. (2011). Information content of other comprehensive income and net income: Evidence for Japanese firms. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, 18(2), 145-168. 
Laux, C., & Leuz, C. (2010). Did fair-value accounting contribute to the financial crisis? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(1), 93-118. 
Lin H., & Wang C. (2015). The impact of reporting goodwill and impairments on the market's anticipation of future earnings. NTU Management Review, 25(2), 23-52.
Lipe, R. C. (1986). The information contained in the components of earnings. Journal of Accounting Research, 24, 37-64. 
Ljungqvist, A., Nanda, V., & Singh, R. (2006). Hot markets, investor sentiment, and IPO pricing. The Journal of Business, 79(4), 1667-1702.
Maines, L. A., & McDaniel, L. S. (2000). Effects of comprehensive-income characteristics on nonprofessional investors' judgments: The role of financial-statement presentation format. The Accounting Review, 75(2), 179-207. 
Marquardt, C. A., & Wiedman, C. I. (2004). The effect of earnings management on the value relevance of accounting information. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 31(3-4), 297-332.
O'hanlon, J. F., & Pope, P. F. (1999). The value-relevance of uk dirty surplus accounting flows. The British Accounting Review, 31(4), 459-482. 
Ohlson, J. A. (1995). Earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11(2), 661.
Ou, Jane A. and James F. Sepe (2002), Analysts Earnings Forecasts and the Roles of Earnings and Book Value in Equity Valuation. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 29(3-4), 287-316.
Peasnell, K. V. (1982). Some formal connections between economic values and yields and accounting numbers. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 9(3), 361-381. 
Pronobis, P., & Zülch, H. (2011). The predictive power of comprehensive income and its individual components under ifrs. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 4, 72-88.
Ritter, J. R. (1991). The long-run performance of initial public offerings. The Journal of Finance, 46(1), 3-27. 
Serafeim, G. (2010). Essays on fair value reporting (D.B.A.). Available from Accounting, Tax & Banking Collection, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (763600968).
Šodan, S. (2015). The impact of fair value accounting on earnings quality in Eastern European countries. Procedia Economics and Finance, 32, 1769-1786. 
Wallace, M. (2002). Performance reporting under fair value accounting. North American Actuarial Journal, 6(1), 28-61.
Wang, Y., Buijink, W., & Eken, R. (2006). The value relevance of dirty surplus accounting flows in the Netherlands. The International Journal of Accounting, 41(4), 387-405. 
Whelan, C. and McNamara, R. (2004), “The Impact of Earnings Management on the Value-relevance of Financial Statement Information,” Working Paper, 2004, Georgia College & State University, USA, and Bond University, Australia.
Tsuji, C. (2013). Comprehensive Income and Stock Return: Evidence from the Tokyo Stock Exchange. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 3(3), 142-147.
Yeh C., & Yu H. (2014). The value relevance of fair value accounting information during financial crisis. Corporate Management Review, 34(2), 1-26.
論文全文使用權限
校內
校內紙本論文立即公開
同意電子論文全文授權校園內公開
校內電子論文立即公開
校外
同意授權
校外電子論文立即公開

如有問題,歡迎洽詢!
圖書館數位資訊組 (02)2621-5656 轉 2487 或 來信