Staff View
Participation in the FASB's standard-setting process and the Big-4 accounting firms' extent and motivations for lobbying using textual analysis

Descriptive

TitleInfo
Title
Participation in the FASB's standard-setting process and the Big-4 accounting firms' extent and motivations for lobbying using textual analysis
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Lysak
NamePart (type = given)
Amy K.
NamePart (type = date)
1977-
DisplayForm
Amy K. Lysak
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
author
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Levine
NamePart (type = given)
Carolyn
DisplayForm
Carolyn Levine
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
chair
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Sarath
NamePart (type = given)
Bharat
DisplayForm
Bharat Sarath
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Gao
NamePart (type = given)
Feng
DisplayForm
Feng Gao
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Balsam
NamePart (type = given)
Steven
DisplayForm
Steven Balsam
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
outside member
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Rutgers University
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
degree grantor
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Graduate School - Newark
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
school
TypeOfResource
Text
Genre (authority = marcgt)
theses
OriginInfo
DateCreated (qualifier = exact)
2017
DateOther (qualifier = exact); (type = degree)
2017-01
CopyrightDate (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2017
Place
PlaceTerm (type = code)
xx
Language
LanguageTerm (authority = ISO639-2b); (type = code)
eng
Abstract (type = abstract)
The abundance of accounting standards issued since the FASB’s inception is staggering. There is an enduring controversy surrounding the FASB’s standard-setting process. Critics suggest that the multitude of accounting standards has made financial reporting more complex and a compliance exercise for preparers (Lev and Rajgopal 2016, Miller & Redding 1988). Others believe the increase in the number of accounting standards enhances the reporting model and eliminates ambiguity and opportunities for manipulation. My dissertation examines the FASB’s standard-setting process and how lobbying by constituents has changed over time. Overall, I find the relative participation has declined for preparers and accounting firms compared to their participation on the first 100 FASB Statements (Tandy and Wilburn 1992). The second part of my research focuses on the extent and motivations of the Big-4 to lobby in the standard-setting process. Using textual analysis, I measure the negative, uncertainty and risk-related language in the Big-4’s comment letters. Based on the notion that auditors prefer well-specified rules to minimize judgment to ultimately reduce audit risk (Miller and Redding 1986, Buckmaster 1988), I develop a proxy for audit risk using a modified rules-based continuum (“RBC”) score (Mergenthaler 2009). I find the Big-4 are generally less negative for more rules-based proposed standards. However, I find the Big-4 generally express increasing uncertainty as proposed standards become more rules-based. Given this, I evaluate the Big-4’s motivation to lobby on behalf of their clients, who may prefer more principles-based standards that allow for flexibility and judgment. I find the Big-4’s negative and uncertainty languages are positively associated to their clients, suggesting that their lobbying efforts are influenced by client preference. Finally, I evaluate whether the Big-4 influence the standard-setting process given the extent and language used in their comment letters. I develop a RBC change score to measure how much more (or less) rules-based a Final Standard is compared to the Exposure Draft. I find as the Big-4’s uncertainty language increases, the changes in rules-based attributes ultimately reflected in the Final Standards increase. I also find that more extensive comment letters are associated to increases in the rules-based attributes of the Final Standard. My results suggest the Big-4’s comment letters may influence the FASB’s decision to include more rules-based attributes in Final Standards.
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
Management
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Accounting--Standards--United States
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Financial risk
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = RULIB)
ETD
Identifier
ETD_7785
PhysicalDescription
Form (authority = gmd)
electronic resource
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Extent
1 online resource (ix, 181 p. : ill.)
Note (type = degree)
Ph.D.
Note (type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references
Note (type = statement of responsibility)
by Amy K. Lysak
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Graduate School - Newark Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore10002600001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier (type = doi)
doi:10.7282/T3MS3W5R
Genre (authority = ExL-Esploro)
ETD doctoral
Back to the top

Rights

RightsDeclaration (ID = rulibRdec0006)
The author owns the copyright to this work.
RightsHolder (type = personal)
Name
FamilyName
Lysak
GivenName
Amy
MiddleName
K.
Role
Copyright Holder
RightsEvent
Type
Permission or license
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2016-12-16 12:31:19
AssociatedEntity
Name
Amy Lysak
Role
Copyright holder
Affiliation
Rutgers University. Graduate School - Newark
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.
Copyright
Status
Copyright protected
Availability
Status
Open
Reason
Permission or license
Back to the top

Technical

RULTechMD (ID = TECHNICAL1)
ContentModel
ETD
OperatingSystem (VERSION = 5.1)
windows xp
CreatingApplication
Version
1.5
DateCreated (point = end); (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2016-12-16T12:26:47
DateCreated (point = end); (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2016-12-16T12:27:15
ApplicationName
Adobe PDF Library 15.0
Back to the top
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024