لابی‌گری شرکت، دیدگاه و محافظه‌کاری حسابداری

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه حسابداری، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

2 کارشناسی ارشد حسابداری، موسسه آموزش عالی حکیم نظامی قوچان، قوچان، ایران(نویسنده مسئول)

3 استادیار گروه حسابداری، موسسه آموزش عالی حکیم نظامی قوچان، قوچان، ایران

چکیده

هدف این پژوهش بررسی رابطه بین لابی‌گری شرکت و محافظه‌کاری است. همچنین بررسی می‌شود که چگونه دیدگاه (دیدگاه عمومی) شرکت ارتباط بین فعالیت‌های لابی شرکت و محافظه‌کاری حسابداری را شکل می‌دهد. در این راستا از اطلاعات به‌دست‌آمده از 256 شرکت پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران بین سال‌های 1386 تا 1395 استفاده شد. این تحقیق ازلحاظ هدف، از نوع تحقیق‌های کاربردی و ازنظر ماهیت و روش از نوع توصیفی- همبستگی است و در آن از مدل رگرسیون (لجستیک، او. ال. اس) و آزمون علیت برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده‌ها و آزمون فرضیه‌های مطرح‌شده استفاده‌شده است. نتایج پژوهش نشان داد که بین لابی‌گری شرکت و محافظه‌کاری حسابداری رابطه مثبت معناداری وجود دارد. همچنین برای شرکت‌های دارای دیدگاه عمومی بیشتر نیز رابطه معنادار است. شرکت‌های لابی‌گری با سطوح دید (دیدگاه) بالا، محافظه‌کاری بیشتری دارند. شرکت‌های دارای لابی بالاتر، سطوح بالاتری از محافظه‌کاری مشروط را نشان می‌دهند. بین شدت لابی و محافظه‌کاری غیر مشروط حسابداری، رابطه منفی معناداری وجود دارد. افزایش درشدت لابی از سوی شرکت، افزایش‌های بعدی در محافظه‌کاری حسابداری را پیش‌بینی می‌کند. بااین‌حال، افزایش در محافظه‌کاری حسابداری شرکت، افزایش درشدت لابی را نشان نمی‌دهد. بروز لابی‌گری با محافظه‌کاری حسابداری شرکت در سال بعد رابطه معناداری دارد، اما با محافظه‌کاری حسابداری شرکت در قبل، رابطه معناداری ندارد.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Corporate Lobbying, Visibility and accounting conservatism

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahmoud Lari Dashtbayaz 1
  • Shaban Mohammadi 2
  • Nader Naghshbandi 3
1 Assiatant Professor in Accounting, Ferodowsi University of Mahshhad. Iran
2 MSc. Department of Accounting- Hakim Nezami institution of higher education at Quchan , Iran
3 Associate profesor of Accounting, Hakim Nezami institution of higher education at Quchan, Iran
چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between corporate lobbying and conservatism. It is also examined how the public view of the company forms the link between company lobbying activities and accounting conservatism. In this regard, the information obtained from 256 companies accepted in Tehran Stock Exchange between 2007 and 2016 was used. The purpose of this research is the applied research, in terms of nature and method of descriptive-correlation type, in which the logistic regression model (OLS) and causality test were used to analyze the data and test the hypotheses. The results of the study showed that there is a positive significant relationship between corporate lobbying and accounting conservatism. Also, there is a significant relationship between companies with a more general viewpoint. Lobbying companies are more conservative with higher visibility (viewpoints). Higher lobby companies have higher levels of contingent conservatism. There is a negative significant relationship between lobby intensity and non-controversial accounting conservatism. An increase in lobby intensity from the company predicts further increases in accounting conservatism. However, the conservative increase in corporate accounting does not show an increase in the lobby's severity. The occurrence of lobbying with accounting conservatism in the next year has a significant relationship, but with the conservative accounting of the company in the past, there is no significant relationship.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Corporate Lobbying
  • Conditional Conservatism
  • Visibility
  • Political Connection
*       Adhikari, A., Derashid, C., Zhang, H.(2006). Public policy, political connections, and effective tax rates: Longitudinal evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 25: 574-595.
*       Aggarwal, R. K., Meschke, F., Wang, T. Y. (2012). Corporate political donations: Investment or agency? Business and Politics, 14(1): 1-10.
*       Agrawal, A., Knoeber, C. R. (2001). Do some outside directors play a political role? Journal of Law and Economics, 44: 179-198.
*       Ahmed, A., Duellman, S. (2007). Accounting conservatism and board of director characteristics: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 43(2-3): 411-437.
*       Anderson, T. W., Hsiao, C. (1982). Formulation and estimation of dynamic models using panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 18: 47-82.
*       André, P., Filip, A. Paugam, L. (2015). The effect of mandatory IFRS adoption on conditional conservatism in Europe. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 42: 482 514.
*       Ball, R., Kothari, S. P., Nikolaev, V. (2013). On estimating conditional conservatism. The Accounting Review, 88(3): 755-787.
*       Ball, R., Robin, A., Wu, J. S. (2003). Incentives versus standards: Properties of accounting income in four East Asian countries. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 36: 235-270.
*       Ball, R., Shivakumar, L. (2005). Earnings quality in UK private firms: Comparative loss recognition timeliness. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39: 83-128.
*       Bartel, A. P., Thomas, L. G. (1987). Predation through regulation: The wag and profit effects of the occupational safety and health administration and the environmental protection agency. Journal of Law and Economics, 20: 239-264.
*       Barth, M. E., Beaver, W. H., Landsman, W. R. (1998). Relative valuation roles of equity book value and net income as a function of financial health. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 25: 1-34.
*       Bar-Yosef, S., Callen, J. L., Livnat, J. (1987). Autoregressive modeling of earnings investment causality. Journal of Finance, 42: 11-28.
*       Basu, S. (1997). The conservatism principle and the asymmetric timeliness of earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24: 3-37.
*       Baysinger, B. D. (1984). Domain maintenance as an objective of business political activity: An expanded typology. Academy of Management Review, 9(2): 248-258.
*       Baysinger, B. D., Woodman, R. (1982). Dimensions of the public affairs/government relations function in major American corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 3: 27-41.
*       Beaver, W. H., Ryan, S. G.(2005). Conditional and unconditional conservatism: Concepts and modeling. Review of Accounting Studies, 10(2&3): 269-309.
*       Bebchuk, L. A., Jackson, R. J. (2013). Shining light on corporate political spending. The Georgetown Law Journal, 101: 923-967.
*       Bertrand, M., Bombardini, M., Trebbi, F. (2011). Is it whom you know or what you know? An empirical assessment of the lobbying process. Working paper, National Bureau of Economic Research.
*       Bombardini, M., Trebbi, F. (2011). Votes or money? Theory and evidence from the US congress. Journal of Public Economics, 95: 587-611.
*       Brasher, H., Lowery, D. (2006). The corporate context of lobbying activity. Business and Politics, 8: 1-23.
*       Burnett, B., Chen, H., Gunny, K. (2014). Auditor-provided lobbying service and audit quality. Working paper, University of Colorado at Denver.
*       Cahan, S. F., 1992. The effect of antitrust investigations on discretionary accruals: A refined test of the political-cost hypothesis. The Accounting Review, 67(1): 77-95.
*       Callen, J. L., Guan Y., Qiu, J. (2010). The market for corporate control and accounting conservatism. Working paper, University of Toronto.
*       Cano-Rodríguez, M., Núñez-Nickel, M. (2015). Aggregation bias in estimates of conditional conservatism: Theory and evidence. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 42: 51-78.
*       Carroll, A. B., Buchholtz, A. K. (2008). Business & society – Ethics and stakeholder management, 7th Edition. Cengage Learning.
*       Chan, L. H., Chen, T., Janakiraman, S. N., Radhakrishnan, S. (2012). Reexamining the relationship between audit and nonaudit fees: Dealing with weak instruments in two-stage least squares estimation. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 27: 299-324.
*       Chaney, P. K., Faccio, M., Parsley, D. (2011). The quality of accounting information in politically connected firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 51: 58-76.
*       Chen, C. J., Ding, Y., Kim, C. F.  (2010). High-level politically connected firms, corruption, and analyst forecast accuracy around the world. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1505-1524.
*       Chen, H., Parsley, D., Yang, Y. (2015). Corporate lobbying and financial performance. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 42(3-4): 444-481.
*       Coates, J. (2012). Corporate politics, governance, and value before and after Citizens United. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 9: 657-696.
*       Correia, M. M. (2012). Political connections, SEC enforcement, and accounting quality. Working paper, London Business School.
*       Cull, R., Xu, L. C. (2005). Institutions, ownership and finance: The determinants of profit reinvestment among Chinese firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 77: 117-146.
*       Dean, T. J., Vryza, M., Fryxell, G. E. (1998). Do corporate PACs restrict competition? An empirical examination of industry PAC contributions and entry. Business and Society, 37(2): 135-156.
*       Dhaliwal, D., Huang, S., Khurana, I. K., Pereira, R. (2011). Product market competition and accounting conservatism. Working paper, University of Arizona.
*       Drutman, L. (2012). The business of America is lobbying: Explaining the growth of corporate political activity in Washington, DC. Working paper.
*       Drutman, L. (2015). The business of America is lobbying: How corporations became politicized and politics became more corporate. Oxford University Press.
*       Dyck, A., Zingales, L. (2004). Private benefits of control: An international comparison. The Journal of Finance, 59(2): 537-600.
*       Faccio, M. (2002). Politically connected firms: Can they squeeze the state? Unpublished working paper, Purdue University.
*       Faccio, M. (2006). Politically connected firms. American Economic Review, 96: 369-386.
*       Faccio, M. (2010). Differences between politically connected and nonconnected firms: A cross-country analysis. Financial Management, 39: 905-928.
*       Faccio, M., Masulis, R. W., McConnell, J. J. (2006). Political connections and corporate bailouts. Journal of Finance, 61: 2597-2635.
*       Goldman, E., Rocholl, J., So, J. (2013). Political connected boards of directors and the allocation of procurement contracts. Review of Finance, 17(5): 1617-1648.
*       Gow, I. D., Ormazabal, G., Taylor, D. J. ( 2010). Correcting for cross-sectional and time-series dependence in accounting research. The Accounting Review, 85: 483-512.
*       Granger, C. W. J.( 1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral models. Econometrica, 37: 424-438.
*       Greenwood, R., Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1): 27-48.
*       Grier, K. B., Michael, C. M., Roberts, B. E. (1994). The determinants of industry political activity, 1978-1986. American Political Science Review, 88: 911-926.
*       Grossman, G. M., Helpman, E. (1994). Protection for sale. American Economic Review, 84: 833-850.
*       Grossman, G. M., Helpman, E. (2002). Integration versus outsourcing in industry equilibrium. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117: 85-120.
*       Guedhami, O., Pittman, J. A., Saffar, W. (2014). Auditor choice in politically connected firms. Journal of Accounting Research, 52(1): 107-162.
*       Hall, S. C. (1993). Political scrutiny and earnings management in the oil refining industry. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 12: 325-351.
*       Hill, M. D., Kelly, G. W., Lockhart, G. B., Van Ness, R. A. (2013). Determinants and effects of corporate lobbying. Financial Management, 42(4): 931-957.
*       Johnson, S., Mitton, T. (2003). Cronyism and capital controls: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Financial Economics, 67: 351-382.
*       Jones, J. (1991). Earnings management during import relief investigations. Journal of Accounting Research, 29: 193-228.
*       Khan, M., Watts, R. L. (2009). Estimation and empirical properties of a firm-year measure of accounting conservatism. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 48: 132-150.
*       Khwaja, A. I., Mian, A. (2005). Do lenders favor politically connected firms? Rent provision in an emerging financial market. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120: 1371-1411.
*       Kim, C., Yang, Z., Zhou, O. (2013). Politically connected boards and audit pricing: U.S. Evidence. Working paper. City University of Hong Kong.
*       King, B. G. (2008). A political mediation model of corporate response to social movement activism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53: 395-421.
*       King, B. G., Soule, S. A. (2007). Social movements as extra-institutional entrepreneurs: The effect of protests on stock price returns. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52: 413-442.Kostova, T.,
*       Roth, K., Dacin, M. T. (2008). Institutional theory in the study of multinational corporations:A critique and new directions. Academy of Management Review, 33: 994-1006.
*       Kothari, S. P., Ramanna, K., Skinner, D. J. (2010). Implications for GAAP from an analysis of positive research in accounting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50: 246-286.
*       LaFond, R., Roychowdhury, S. (2008). Managerial ownership and accounting conservatism. Journal of Accounting Research, 46: 101-135.
*       LaFond, R., Watts, R. L. (2008). The information role of conservatism. The Accounting Review, 83: 447-478.
*       Lara, J. M. G., Osma, B. G., Penalva, F. (2009). The economic determinants of conditional conservatism. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 36(3&4): 336-372.
*       Lennox, C. S., Park, C. W.(2006). The informativeness of earnings and management’s issuance of earnings forecasts. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42: 439-458.
*       Lenway, S., Jacobson, C. K., Goldstein, J. (1990). To lobby or to petition: The political environment of U.S. trade policy. Journal of Management, 16: 119-134.
*       Lev, B., Petrovits, C., Radhakrishnan, S. (2010). Is doing good good for you? How corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth. Strategic Management Journal, 31(2): 182-200.
*       Li, K., Prabhala, N. (2007). Self-selection models in corporate finance. In B.E. Eckso (Ed.), Handbook of corporate finance: Empirical corporate finance (pp. 37-86). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science B.V.
*       Li, X. (2015). Accounting conservatism and the cost of capital: An international analysis. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 42: 555-582.
*       Mahood, H. R. (1990). Interest group politics in America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
*       Martin, G. W., Thomas, W. B., Wieland, M. M. (2016). S&P 500 membership and managers’ supply of conservative financial reports. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 43: 543-571.
*       Morck, R., Sepanski, J., Yeung, B. (2001). Habitual and occasional lobbyers in the US steel industry: An EM algorithm pooling approach. Economic Inquiry, 39: 365-379.
*       Kong,X., Radhakrishnan,S., Tsang.,A.(2017). Corporate Lobbying, Visibility and Accounting Conservatism, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Vol. 44, Issue 5-6, pp. 527-557.
*       Petersen, M. A. (2009). Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Review of Financial Studies, 22: 435-480.
*       Pope, P. F., Walker, M. (2003). Ex-ante and ex-post accounting conservatism, asset recognition and asymmetric earnings timeliness. Lancaster University and University of Manchester.
*       Ramanna, K., Roychowdhury, S. (2010). Elections and discretional accruals: Evidence from 2004. Journal of Accounting Research, 48: 445-475.
*       Ryan, S. G. (2006). Identifying conditional conservatism. European Accounting Review, 15: 511-525.
*       Schuler, D. A. (1996). Corporate political strategy and foreign competition: The case of the steel industry. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 720-737.
*       Smith, J. (2016). U.S. political corruption and firm financial policies. Journal of Financial Economics, 121(2): 350-367.
*       Watts, R. L.(1977). Corporate financial statements: A product of the market and political processes. Australian Journal of Management, 2: 53-75.
*       Watts, R. L. (2003a). Conservatism in accounting, Part I: Explanations and implications. Accounting Horizons, 17: 207-221.
*       Watts, R. L. (2003b). Conservatism in accounting, Part II: evidence and research opportunities. Accounting Horizons, 17: 287-301.
*       Watts, R. L., Zimmerman, J. L. (1978). Towards a positive theory of the determination of accounting standards. The Accounting Review, 53: 112-134.
*       Yu, F., Yu, X. (2011). Corporate lobbying and fraud detection. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46(6): 1865-1891.