scholarly journals Fair value hierarchy in valuation of investment properties: content analysis in Borsa Istanbul

Pressacademia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-96
Author(s):  
Deniz Ozbay
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Fair Value ◽  
Value Hierarchy

scholarly journals Does IFRS 9 Consider Financial Statement Users’ Preferences with Respect to IFRS 13 Fair Value Hierarchy? A Suggestion to Refine the Definition of OCI

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 515
Author(s):  
Felipe M. Herranz Martín ◽  
Beatriz García Osma
Keyword(s):  
Fair Value ◽  
Financial Statement ◽  
Ifrs 9 ◽  
Value Hierarchy ◽  
Definition Of

El uso del valor razonable en los estados financieros de las empresas es un tema de continuo debate tanto en el mundo académico como en el profesional. En este trabajo nos planteamos los siguientes objetivos: (i) analizar la evolución de los objetivos, las prioridades y los enfoques de las normas contables; (ii) identificar los antecedentes más próximos del valor razonable y del modelo mixto actual; (iii) señalar brevemente las técnicas de cálculo del valor razonable ofrecidas por el IFRS 13 con sus niveles jerarquizados; (iv) analizar el uso (o la falta de uso) de las jerarquías de valor razonable en las normas IFRS (particularmente en el IFRS 9); (v) comparar el enfoque del IFRS 9 con las preferencias de los usuarios de los estados financieros respecto a los distintos niveles de cálculo del valor razonable; y (vi) ofrecer una posible solución a largo plazo para conciliar las preferencias de los usuarios con las técnicas ofrecidas por las normas, sugiriendo una posible mejor a la definición de OCI.

KRITIK TERHADAP KLAIM KEANDALAN PADA HIRARKI PENGUKURAN NILAI WAJAR: Sebuah Literature Review

Wahana ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-87
Author(s):  
Nugroho Wisnu Murti ◽  
Indriyana Widyastuti
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Fair Value ◽  
Review Literature ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Fundamental Study ◽  
Professional Assessment ◽  
Value Hierarchy

This article provide consideration for the Indonesian Financial Accounting Standards Board that requires a review of Indonesia's Financial Accounting Standards (PSAK) 68 concerning Measurement of Fair Value. Fair Value has potential misinterpretation definition between price and value. This potential misinterpretation is indicated to be the rationale put forward in the fair value hierarchy which is indicated unfair. This potential based on claims at each level which can be questioned with the existence of aggressive discretionary issues and the analogy of financial statement analysis. However, this problem had been proven getting down by involvement of independent and professional assessment. Therefore, fair value hierarchy has the same potential of reliability by the third party. If each level has the same potential, this hierarchy can be removed to avoid misinterpretation by users of financial statements. The obligation to disclose the basis of valuation is fairer to be implemented than the hierarchy which is have potensial misinterpretation. This opinion was not without foundation, because this article based on a literature review that starts from: 1) study of the relevance of the Indonesian Financial Accounting Standards concerning fair value with the Indonesian Assessment Standards; 2) fundamental study to interpret fair value based on review literature; and 3) study of allegations of the same potential submitted in the direction of fair value as regulated in PSAK 68. Keywords: fair value hierarchy, riliability, agresive discretionary, PSAK 68

Fair value's effects on closed-end funds' discounts and premia: is level 3 the sole perpetrator?

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 1001-1022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Fortin ◽  
Ahmad Hammami ◽  
Michel Magnan
Keyword(s):  
Relevant Information ◽  
Fair Value ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Closed End Funds ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Value Hierarchy ◽  
Valuation Uncertainty ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Level 2

PurposeThis study examines the long-term link between fair valuation uncertainty and discounts/premia in closed-end funds. This study argues that, in exploring the close-end funds puzzle, prior research generally omits to consider the uncertainty surrounding the measurement of funds' financial disclosure, as reflected in the fair value hierarchy, when investment specialty differs across funds.Design/methodology/approachRegressions were employed to explore how the fair value hierarchy affects closed-end funds' discounts/premia when investment specialty differs. The authors also examine the effects pre- and post-2012 to explore if that relationship changes due to the additional disclosure requirements enacted at the end of 2011.FindingsThe authors find that the three levels of the fair value hierarchy have effects that vary according to a fund's specialty. For equity specialized funds, Level 3 significantly increases discounts and decreases premia, suggesting the impact of valuation uncertainty that underlies Level 3 estimates; this relationship disappears (decreases in severity) for premia (discount) experiencing funds post-2012. In contrast, Level 1 and Level 2 do not have any significant effect on discounts or premia except that post-2012, Level 2 begins to display discount decreasing effects. For bond specialized funds, no significant association was noted between premia and any of the fair value levels except that post-2012, Level 3 begins to display premium increasing effects. However, results are different for discounts. The authors note that Level 1 valuations significantly increase discounts, but only post-2012; Level 2 valuations significantly decrease discounts (pre- and post-2012), consistent with such estimates incorporating unique and relevant information; and Level 3 valuations do not have a significant effect on discounts.Originality/valueThe results of this study revisit prior evidence and indicate that results about the effects of fair value measurement and the closed-end funds' puzzle are sensitive to the period length being considered and the investment specialty of the fund. The authors also note that additional disclosure regarding Level 3 valuation inputs decreases market concern for valuation uncertainty and increases the liquidity benefits of investing in Level 3 carrying funds.

scholarly journals Pengaruh Kepemilikan Institusional Terhadap Relevansi Nilai Informasi Hierarki Nilai Wajar

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 3012-3028
Author(s):  
Desni Ramadhani ◽  
Nurzi Sebrina
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sampling Method ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Institutional Ownership ◽  
Fair Value ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
Value Hierarchy ◽  
Positive Effect ◽  
Level 2

The purpose of this research is to examine the relevance of fair value hierarchy information and the effect of institutional ownership on the relevance of fair value hierarchy information. This research is a causal associative research with a quantitative approach. Research conducted on banking companies listed on the Indonesian Stock Exchange period 2015-2018, which were determined by purposive sampling method so that 37 companies were selected as samples. The hypotheses were tests using multiple regression. The results indicate that the fair value level 2 is more relevant than the level 1 and 3, this research proves that the fair value level 2 is relevant for decision making of investor. In subsequent tests, institutional ownership does not have a positive effect on the relevance of fair value level 1, level 2 and level 3.

scholarly journals Fair value hierarchy in financial instrument disclosure. Is there transparency for investors? Evidence from the banking industry

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 23-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrico Laghi ◽  
Sabrina Pucci ◽  
Marco Tutino ◽  
Michele Di Marcantonio
Keyword(s):  
Fair Value ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Financial Instruments ◽  
Financial Instrument ◽  
Sfas 157 ◽  
Ifrs 7 ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Value Hierarchy ◽  
Fair Value Measurements

The debate on fair value accounting is still open although the last 20 years have been spent in looking for solutions by academics, practitioners and institutions. After long and continuous discussion both on the basic concepts and the information level contained in fair value measurements and on the different solutions that are possible to adopt in mark to market measurements, IASB and FASB have recently issued new standards on fair value measurements applying some principles not only to financial instruments but also to property and other investments. To verify if the solutions adopted in these Standards really improve the disclosure level and the “usefulness of data for investors”, this paper analyzes the actual level of transparency and the “usefulness” of the “fair value hierarchy” (which from some points of view synthesized the Board’s way of thinking regarding to fair value) which has already been introduced for financial instruments by IFRS 7, Financial Instruments: Disclosure. The paper presents results of an empirical investigation on a sample of domestic and foreign listed banks that adopted fair value hierarchy in line with SFAS 157 and IFRS 7 recommendations. Research questions can be summarized as follows: (i) does fair value hierarchy improve transparency in financial instrument evaluation in bank annual reports, or can it be considered as a tool for earnings management?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document