reported cumulative earnings by delaying income
recognition, speeding up expense recognition,
decreasing asset valuations, and raising liability
valuations.
Hereby, accounting conservatism is divided into
two types: firstly, conditional conservatism requires
immediate recognition of expected economic losses
which is called asymmetric timing of gains and
losses. Recognition of economic income is held
back until it can be proven that the expected gains
are real, [52], [51], [17]. The second type of
conservatism is called, "unconditional
conservatism". This is when assets are understated
and liabilities are overstated, no matter what the
economy does. It doesn't help you make decisions
and isn't very important to contracting, [60].
To date, the literature has identified five key
conservative measures: (1) Basu's (1997), [17],
asymmetric timeliness of earnings measure ("AT"),
(2) Ball and Shivakumar's (2005), [10],
asymmetric-accruals-to-cash flow measure
("AACF"), (3) "the widely recommended market-
to-book ratio measure model (the theoretical frame
developed by Beaver & Ryan" (2000) [21], "used by
a few studies like those of Ahmed & Duellman,
(2007) [3], Jain & Rezaee, (2004) [45], LaFond &
Royohowdhury", (2008) [53] ("MTB"), (4) Penman
and Zhang's (2002), [59], Hidden Reserves
Measure ("HR"), and (5) Givoly and Hayn's (2000),
[36] Negative Accruals ("NA"). The model (Basu,
1997), [17] used in this study was The Basu (1997),
[17], model, which has been widely accepted and
spread among researchers as the most important
measure of accounting conservatism. Many studies
that used the Basu (1997), [17], model within
previous studies will be mentioned and will be
addressed. "The basic idea of this model is that the
market is faster than the accounting system in
responding to good and bad news, as it reaches the
market with multiple sources of information".
Following Basu (1997), [17], studies have stressed
the relevance of conservatism as a key criterion of
accounting quality in an international environment
Ball et al. (2000), [14], Ball et al. (2003), 12],
Watts 2003a and b, [66],[67], Ball et al. (2008),
[11], and Barth et al. (2008), [16]. There are many
opinions on using the Basu model in terms of pros
and cons. Dietrich et al. (2007), [26], show that the
Basu specification produces data compatible with
accounting conservatism even when accounting
conservatism is not present; that is, Basu (1997),
[17] exaggerates the prevalence of accounting
conservatism. Patatoukas and Thomas (2011), [58]
further support the views espoused by Dietrich et
al. (2007) ,[26], by claiming that the scale variable
in Basu's regressions, [17], has a biasing impact on
the Basu estimate. Givoly et al. (2007), [37] argue
that Basu's (1997)/ [17], metric understates
accounting conservatism, in contrast to these
perspectives.
Furthermore, Ball et al. (2011), [13], refute
Patatoukas and Thomas (2010), [58], claims,
appealing that the bias in the Basu estimator is
generated by the connection between predicted
profits and return. To adjust for this, Ball et al.
(2011), [13] recommends using fixed effects in
the Basu (1997) regression, [17]. Basu's (1997),
[17], reverse regression model makes a significant
contribution and has considerable impact. Many
academics utilize this paradigm to analyze and
investigate situations, [10]. Following that, most of
the research utilizes the Basu model to verify
capital market conservatism in many nations and
extends the Basu model to investigate variables
determining conservatism levels [33], [34], [10],
[15]. [20].
The advantages of conservatism are still
debatable; conservatism may avoid disagreements
between management and shareholders by limiting
managers' activities to exaggerating earnings or
assets [4]. Basu (1997), [17], on the other hand,
claims that conservatism is a skewed accounting
system since it acknowledges and evaluates assets
with the lowest values and obligations with the
highest values, and it loses assets quickly and
profits slowly. As a result, low-quality earnings,
and less meaningful reporting follow.
2.2 International Financial Reporting
Standard (IFRS)
Adoption of IFRS has continued to grow since
2005, following the European Union's
implementation of IFRS for listed entities in the EU
jurisdictions", [23]. "The broad acceptance of IFRS
is one of the elements aiding its implementation. In
terms of measurement and assessment of
accounting assets and liabilities, IFRS is considered
to make accounting information more comparable,
relevant, reliable, transparent, and standardized,
resulting in a broader range of acceptability
throughout the globe" [28], [42].
IFRS "promotes openness by improving the
quality of financial data, allowing consumers of
financial statements to make sound financial
decisions". "The International Financial Reporting
Standards (IFRS) also increase accountability by
bridging the information gap between shareholders
and management [6], [46]. Financial statements
from throughout the world may be compared using
IFRS, making it easier for investors to spot
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.153