34 /274
公司盈餘平穩化行為與盈餘資訊性之關係－合格境外機構投資者角色之檢測
34
Futures Bureau of Taiwan in its ongoing initiative against listed firms’ strategic earnings
reporting. Moreover, although Tucker and Zarowin (2006) provide positive association
between income smoothing and earnings informativeness, this relationship, to some extent is
conditioned on the firm’s ownership characteristics, e.g., QFIIs’ ownership. Thus, the
argument that managers’ income smoothing behavior is to communicate private information
about future earnings is contingent and reflects differential facets of a firm’s ownership
characteristics. It implies that appropriate supervision of managers’ discretionary accounting
choices is necessary. This finding also provides evidence for the Financial Accounting
Standards Board in Taiwan which could be used for their proposed changes designed to set
into action a more principle-based rather than rule-based approach to standards setting.
The findings are subject to a number of limitations and should be interpreted with
caution. First, our analysis is based on the stylized cross-sectional Jones model (Kothari et al.
(2005)) to calculate the discretionary accruals, which in turn, are to measure the income
smoothing proxy and therefore, the usual caution with joint model fitting and QFIIs’
ownership effect should be employed in interpreting the results. Second, there is a lack of
sufficient samples for some industries to estimate the regression coefficients of the Jones
model which may lead to possible bias in the measurement of regression coefficients which,
therefore, unavoidably limits the generalization of this study. Finally, the measurement of
income smoothing requires that the listed firms should have at least five consecutive years of
data, and thus, survivorship bias remains a concern.