scholarly journals Determinantes da divulgação de informações de risco de mercado por empresas não financeiras

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 729-756 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedito Manoel do Nascimento Costa ◽  
Paulo Henrique Leal ◽  
Vera Maria Rodrigues Ponte

Resumo Neste estudo teve-se como objetivo identificar os fatores determinantes do nível de observância de empresas não financeiras às exigências de divulgação definidas no CPC 40 (R1). Nesse sentido, foram analisadas as notas explicativas das 113 empresas não financeiras listadas no segmento Novo Mercado da BM&FBovespa, referentes ao exercício social de 2013. Trata-se de estudo descritivo com abordagem qualitativa e quantitativa. Preliminarmente, por meio de pesquisa documental, foram identificadas as informações de riscos de mercado divulgadas, utilizando-se check-list desenvolvido a partir de disposições constantes do Pronunciamento Técnico CPC 40 (R1) – Instrumentos Financeiros: Evidenciação, verificando-se que o número de divulgações de riscos de mercado das empresas é inferior a 50% do requerido pelo normativo contábil. Em seguida, foram realizadas análises estatísticas de correlação e regressão linear com o intuito de verificar os fatores das empresas associados à divulgação de seus riscos de mercado. Com base nos resultados obtidos, verificou-se que os fatores “nível de risco”, “tamanho” e “setor de atuação” são significativos para explicar o cumprimento das empresas não financeiras às exigências definidas no CPC 40 (R1). Além disso, os resultados fornecem suporte para a aceitação da hipótese, mostrando que empresas com maior nível de risco divulgam mais informações sobre risco de mercado.Palavras-chave: Divulgação. Informações. Risco de mercado. CPC 40 (R1). Empresas não financeiras. Abstract This study aimed to identify the determinants of the level of observance by non-financial companies to the disclosure requirements set out in CPC 40 (R1). That sense, it was analyzed the explanatory notes to the 113 non-financial companies listed on the New Market segment of the BM&FBovespa relative the social year 2013. It is a descriptive study with qualitative and quantitative approach. Preliminarily, through documentary research,  the disclosure of market risk information  were identified, using check-list developed from the provisions of CPC 40 (R1) – Financial Instruments: Disclosure, verifying that the number of market risk disclosures in the company is less than 50% of required by regulatory accounting. Then, statistical analyzes were performed correlation and linear regression in order to identify factors associated companies to the disclosure of their market risks. Based on the results obtained, it was found that the factors “level of risk”, “size” and “Sector of activity” this are significant to explain the performance of non-financial firms with the requirements set out in CPC 40 (R1). Furthermore, the results provide support for acceptance of the hypothesis by showing that companies with the highest risk level disclosure more information about market risk.Keywords: Disclosure. Information. Market risk. CPC 40 (R1). Non-financial companies.

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 645-658 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khamis Hamed Al-Yahyaee ◽  
Ahmed Khamis Al-Hadi ◽  
Syed Mujahid Hussain

2002 ◽  
Vol 77 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Linsmeier ◽  
Daniel B. Thornton ◽  
Mohan Venkatachalam ◽  
Michael Welker

We hypothesize that firms' 10-K market risk disclosures, recently mandated by SEC Financial Reporting Release No. 48 (FRR No. 48), reduce investors' uncertainty and diversity of opinion about the implications, for firm value, of changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, and commodity prices. We argue that this reduced uncertainty and diversity of opinion should dampen trading volume sensitivity to changes in these underlying market rates or prices. Consistent with this hypothesis, we find that after firms disclose FRR No. 48-mandated information about their exposures to interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, and energy prices, trading volume sensitivity to changes in these underlying market rates and prices declines, even after controlling for other factors associated with trading volume. The observed declines in trading volume sensitivity are consistent with FRR No. 48 market risk disclosures providing useful information to investors.


1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren T. Roulstone

This study compares the disclosures about derivatives and market risk made by 25 SEC registrants in the years before (1996) and after (1997) the adoption of Financial Reporting Release No. 48 (SEC 1997) (FRR No. 48). FRR No. 48 requires firms to disclose how they account for derivatives and provide quantitative and qualitative disclosures about exposure to market risk. Market risk disclosures, encouraged but not required under FAS No. 119, improved greatly under FRR No. 48 but varied widely in detail and clarity. The majority of registrants provided quantitative and qualitative disclosures of market risk; however, only about half of these firms discussed the details and limitations of their risk measurement models and disclosures. Further, certain required or strongly recommended contextual disclosures were almost completely absent. Firms appear to prefer relatively complicated but more discreet disclosure formats to simpler but more revealing disclosure formats. Overall, while registrants greatly increased their disclosures about market risk, the disclosures leave room for improvement in future filings. These findings have significance for disclosure choice in general and the adoption of FAS No. 133 in particular.


2001 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 62-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Hodder ◽  
Mary Lea McAnally

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document