進階搜尋


   電子論文尚未授權公開,紙本請查館藏目錄
(※如查詢不到或館藏狀況顯示「閉架不公開」,表示該本論文不在書庫,無法取用。)
系統識別號 U0026-1907201620351900
論文名稱(中文) SFAS 151號公報對公司成本結構決策的影響
論文名稱(英文) The Impact of SFAS No.151 on the Cost Structure Decisions
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 會計學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Accountancy
學年度 104
學期 2
出版年 105
研究生(中文) 戴瑋瑩
研究生(英文) Wei-Ying Tai
學號 R16034143
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 82頁
口試委員 指導教授-楊朝旭
口試委員-蔡柳卿
口試委員-黃炳勳
口試委員-陳家慧
中文關鍵字 美國財務會計準則第151號公報  成本結構  成本僵固性 
英文關鍵字 SFAS No.151  Cost structure  Cost stickiness 
學科別分類
中文摘要 2004年11月,美國財務會計準則(Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, SFAS)第151號公報「Inventory Costs」發佈,作為對會計研究公報(Accounting Research Bulletins, ARB)第43號第4章「Inventory Pricing」之修正。該公報規定: 固定製造費用分攤率的計算,應以正常產能作為分攤基礎; 另外,當公司之實際產量低於正常產能時,未分攤的固定製造費用必須認列為當期的閒置產能費用,不能認列為存貨成本的一部分。
本研究之目的,在於探討財務會計準則第151號公報的實施對企業成本結構決策的影響。研究之樣本期間為2000年至2015年,排除灰色地帶2005年至2010年,並以北美Compustat資料庫中之製造業樣本作為分析對象。研究發現,在財務會計準則第151號公報實施之後,美國製造業管理者確實透過成本結構的調整來避免報導閒置產能費用(成本僵固性下降)。本研究也進一步指出,相較於擁有低固定資產之企業,財務會計準則第151號公報的實施對擁有高固定資產企業之成本僵固性有更負面的影響,而該影響又會隨著公司銷售成長的增加而減緩。然而,不論是全樣本抑或是高固定資產樣本,本篇研究中都沒有發現任何證據顯示此號公報對其成本黏性造成影響。
英文摘要 The objective of this study is to explore whether SFAS No.151 has an impact on firms’ cost structure decisions, characterized in terms of cost rigidity and cost stickiness. Issued in November 2004, SFAS No.151, “Inventory Costs,” has amended the guidance in ARB No.43, Chapter 4, “Inventory Pricing,” to clarify the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs, and wasted materials. SFAS No.151 requires firms to use normal capacity as the allocation base for fixed manufacturing overhead and to recognize those unused capacity as expenses in the income statement, accelerating the recognition of fixed production overheads as expenses in the income statement.
In order to investigate the issue underlying SFAS No.151, all manufacturing firms listed in the U.S. (SIC Codes 2000-3999) from the Compustat North America database during the sample period of year 2000 to 2015 (excluding the grey area from year 2005 to 2010 so as to prevent bias observations) are include as observations. The empirical results suggest that the enforcement of SFAS No.151 does affect firms’ cost structure decisions in a long run. In other words, the influence of SFAS No.151 on cost rigidity is negative on average, and such effect is more pronounced for firms with higher PPE, and diminishes with the increase in a firm’s sales growth rate. However, I find no evidence that the enforcement of SFAS No.151 affects cost stickiness neither on average nor for the firms with higher PPE, which may result from the estimated stickiness based on a short-term measurement thus may not capture the long-term structural adjusting effect. Additional tests indicate that the main results of SFAS No.151 on cost rigidity are robust with regard to controlling for an even longer-term structural change and considering the potential effect of the shrink demand in markets after financial crisis.
論文目次 1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 The Background and Motivation of this Study 1
1.2 The Purpose of this Study 5
1.3 The Framework of this Study 6
2. LITERATURES REVIEW 8
2.1 The Background of SFAS No.151 8
2.2 Empirical Evidence 10
2.2.1 Empirical Evidence of Cost Structure 10
2.2.2 Empirical Evidence of Cost Stickiness 12
3. HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT 16
3.1 SFAS No.151 and Cost Rigidity 16
3.2 SFAS No.151, Cost Rigidity, and Property, Plant and Equipment 17
3.3 SFAS No.151, Cost Rigidity, and Sales Growth Opportunities 17
3.4 SFAS No.151 and Cost Stickiness 18
3.5 SFAS No.151, Cost Stickiness, and Property, Plant and Equipment 19
3.6 SFAS No.151, Cost Stickiness, and Growth Opportunities 20
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 21
4.1 Research Models 21
4.1.1 Measuring Cost Rigidity 21
4.1.2 Measuring Cost Stickiness 24
4.1.3 Regression Model for Hypothesis 1 25
4.1.4 Regression Model for Hypothesis 2 26
4.1.5 Regression Model for Hypothesis 3 27
4.1.6 Regression Model for Hypothesis 4 28
4.1.7 Regression Model for Hypothesis 5 30
4.1.8 Regression Model for Hypothesis 6 31
4.2 Control Variables 32
4.2.1 Control Variables for H1 to H3 32
4.2.2 Control Variables for H4 to H6 33
4.3 Sample Selection 38
5. EMPIRICAL RESULTS 40
5.1 Empirical Results of Hypothesis 1 to Hypothesis 3 40
5.1.1 Descriptive Statistics of Hypothesis 1 to Hypothesis 3 40
5.1.2 Correlation Analysis of Hypothesis 1 to Hypothesis 3 43
5.1.3 Regression Results of Hypothesis 1 to Hypothesis 3 45
1. Regression Results of Hypothesis 1 45
2. Regression Results of Hypothesis 2 46
3. Regression Results of Hypothesis 3 49
5.2 Empirical Results of Hypothesis 4 to Hypothesis 6 51
5.2.1 Descriptive Statistics of Hypothesis 4 to Hypothesis 6 51
5.2.2 Correlation Analysis of Hypothesis 4 to Hypothesis 6 54
5.2.3 Regression Results of Hypothesis 4 to Hypothesis 6 56
1. Regression Results of Hypothesis 4 56
2. Regression Results of Hypothesis 5 58
3. Regression Results of Hypothesis 6 60
5.3 Additional Test 62
5.3.1 Measuring Cost Rigidity by Using Windows of Ten Years 62
5.3.2 Considering the Potential Influence of Shrink Demand after Financial Crisis 67
6. CONCLUSIONS 72
6.1 The Conclusions of this Study 72
6.2 The Contributions of this Study 74
6.3 The Limitations and Future Research of this Study 74
REFERENCES 76
參考文獻 Aboody, D., Barth, M. E., & Kasznik, R. (2004). SFAS No. 123 stock-based compensation expense and equity market values. The Accounting Review, 79(2), 251-275.
Aboody, D., Levi, S., & Weiss, D. (2014). Operating Leverage and Future Earnings.
Anderson, M., Banker, R., Janakiraman, S. (2003). Are selling, general and administrative costs "sticky?” Journal of Accounting Research, 41, 47-63.
Banker, R. D., Ciftci, M., & Mashruwala, R. (2008). Managerial optimism, prior period sales changes, and sticky cost behavior. Prior Period Sales Changes, and Sticky Cost Behavior (November 12, 2008).
Banker, R. D., Byzalov, D., & Plehn-Dujowich, J. M. (2013). Demand uncertainty and cost behavior. The Accounting Review, 89(3), 839-865.
Banker, R. D., Byzalov, D., Ciftci, M., & Mashruwala, R. (2014). The moderating effect of prior sales changes on asymmetric cost behavior. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 26(2), 221-242.
Banker, R. D., & Byzalov, D. (2014). Asymmetric cost behavior. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 26(2), 43-79.
Banker, R.D., Byzalov, D., Plehn-Dujowich, J. (2014). Sticky cost behavior: Theory and evidence. The Accounting Review, 89(3), 839-865.
Balakrishnan, R., K. Sivaramakrishnan, and G. Sprinkle. (2008). Managerial Accounting. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Balakrishnan, R., Labro, E., & Soderstrom, N. S. (2014). Cost structure and sticky costs. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 26(2), 91-116.
Balakrishnan, R., Petersen, M., Soderstrom, N. S. (2014). Does capacity utilization affect the “stickiness” of cost? Journal of Accounting, Audit and Finance, 19, 283-299.
Brüggen, A., Krishnan, R., & Sedatole, K. L. (2011). Drivers and Consequences of Short‐Term Production Decisions: Evidence from the Auto Industry. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28(1), 83-123.
Chung, K. H., & Pruitt, S. W. (1994). A simple approximation of Tobin’s q. Financial management, 70-74.
Chen, C. X., Lu, H., & Sougiannis, T. (2012). The Agency Problem, Corporate Governance, and the Asymmetrical Behavior of Selling, General, and Administrative Costs. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29(1), 252-282.
Charles T. Horngren, Srikant M. Datar, and Madhav V. Rajan. (2015). Cost Accounting: A Managerial Emphasis, 15th ed. Pearson.
Connolly, R. A., & Hirschey, M. (2005). Firm size and the effect of R&D on Tobin’s q. R&d Management, 35(2), 217-223.
Cooper, R., and Kaplan, R. S. (1998). The Design of Cost Management Systems: Text, Cases, and Readings. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Cooper, R., and Kaplan, R. S. (1999). The design of cost management systems: text and cases.
Cooper, R. W., & Haltiwanger, J. C. (2006). On the nature of capital adjustment costs. The Review of Economic Studies, 73(3), 611-633.
Dechow, P. M. (1994). Accounting earnings and cash flows as measures of firm performance: The role of accounting accruals. Journal of accounting and economics, 18(1), 3-42.
Dechow, P. M., & Dichev, I. D. (2002). The quality of accruals and earnings: The role of accrual estimation errors. The accounting review, 77(s-1), 35-59.
De Medeiros, Otavio Ribeiro, and Patricia De Souza Costa. (2004). Cost stickiness in Brazilian firms. Available at SSRN 632365.
Dierynck, B., Landsman, W. R., & Renders, A. (2012). Do managerial incentives drive cost behavior? Evidence about the role of the zero earnings benchmark for labor cost behavior in private Belgian firms. The Accounting Review, 87(4), 1219-1246.
Eugene Pilotte. (1992). Growth Opportunities and the Stock Price Response to New Financing. The Journal of Business, 65 (3), pp. 371-394
Galdi, Fernando Caio and Johnson, E Scott and Myers, Linda A. (2016). Accounting for Inventory Costs and Real Earnings Management Behavior.
Garrison, R. H., Noreen, E. W., Brewer, P. C. (2012). Managerial Accounting, 14th ed. McGraw Hill, New York.
Gaver, J. J., Gaver, K. M., & Austin, J. R. (1995). Additional evidence on bonus plans and income management. Journal of accounting and Economics, 19(1), 3-28.
Gordon Shillinglaw and Kathleen T. McGahran. (1993). Accounting: A Management Approach, 9th ed.
Grunewald, Adolph E. and Erwin E. Nemmers, (1970). Basic Managerial Finance. New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Healy, P. M. (1985). The effect of bonus schemes on accounting decisions. Journal of accounting and economics, 7(1), 85-107.
Holthausen, R. W., Larcker, D. F., & Sloan, R. G. (1995). Annual bonus schemes and the manipulation of earnings. Journal of accounting and economics, 19(1), 29-74.
Horngren, C. T., Sundem, G. L., Schwartzberg, J. O., Burgstahler, D. (2013). Introduction to Management Accounting, 16th ed. Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Huffman, S. P. (1989). The impact of the degrees of operating and financial leverage on the systematic risk of common stocks: another look. Quarterly journal of business and economics, 83-100.
Ishii, J. (2011). Useful excess capacity? An empirical study of US oil & gas drilling. Amherst College Working Paper.
Ittner, C., Larcker, D. F., & Meyer, M. (1997). Performance, compensation, and the Balanced Scorecard. Unpublished, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.
Jeong-Ho, Koo and Tae-Young, Paik. (2014). Relationship between Agency Problem and Cost Stickiness: A Direct Test. Proceedings of 29th International Business Research Conference 24 - 25 November 2014 ISBN: 978-1-922069-64-1.
Kahl, M., Lunn, J., & Nilsson, M. (2013). Operating leverage and corporate financial policies. In AFA 2012 Chicago Meetings Paper.
Kama, I., & Weiss, D. (2010). Do managers' deliberate decisions induce sticky costs? Tel Aviv University, Faculty of Management, The Leon Recanati Graduate School of Business Administration.
Kama, I., & Weiss, D. (2013). Do earnings targets and managerial incentives affect sticky costs? Journal of Accounting Research, 51(1), 201-224.
Kenneth J. Martin. (1996). The Method of Payment in Corporate Acquisitions, Investment Opportunities, and Management Ownership. The Journal of Finance, 51 (4), pp. 1227-1246.
Koo, J. H., Song, S. A., & Paik, T. Y. (2015). Earning Management and Cost Stickiness. Advanced Science and Technology Letters, 84, 40-44.
Lang, L., Ofek, E., & Stulz, R. (1996). Leverage, investment, and firm growth. Journal of financial Economics, 40(1), 3-29.
Lanen, W. N., Anderson, S., Maher, M. 2013. Fundamentals of Cost Accounting. McGraw Hill Irwin, New York.
Lee, S., & Park, S. B. (2014). A Study on the Association between Operating Leverage and Risk: The Case of the Airline Industry. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 6(3), 120.
Lev, B. (1974). On the association between operating leverage and risk. Journal of financial and quantitative analysis, 9(04), 627-641.
Malcom, R. E. (1991). Overhead control implications of activity costing. Accounting Horizons, 5(4), 69.
Mandelker, G. N., & Rhee, S. G. (1984). The impact of the degrees of operating and financial leverage on systematic risk of common stock. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 19(1), 45-57.
Martin, K. J. (1996). The method of payment in corporate acquisitions, investment opportunities, and management ownership. The Journal of finance, 51(4), 1227-1246.
Murphy, K. J. (2000). Performance standards in incentive contracts. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 30(3), 245-278.
Noreen, E. (1991). Conditions under which activity-based cost systems provide relevant costs. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 3(4), 159-168.
Noreen, E., and Soderstrom, N. (1994). Are overhead costs strictly proportional to activity?: Evidence from hospital departments. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 17(1), 255-278.
Noreen, E., & Soderstrom, N. (1997). The accuracy of proportional cost models: evidence from hospital service departments. Review of Accounting Studies, 2(1), 89-114.
Pervan, M., & Pervan, I. (2011). Analysis of sticky costs: Croatian Evidence. Research Paper.
Pilotte, E. (1992). Growth opportunities and the stock price response to new financing. Journal of Business, 371-394.
Stickney, C. P., and P. Brown. (1999). Financial Reporting and Statement Analysis: A Strategic Perspective (4th ed.). Orlando, FL: Dryden.
Van Horne James, C. (1977). Financial Management & Policy. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Weiss, D. (2010). Cost behavior and analysts' earnings forecasts. The Accounting Review, 85(4), 1441-1471.
Yasukata, K. (2011). Are'Sticky Costs' the Result of Deliberate Decision of Managers? Available at SSRN 1444746.
Young, C. S., Peng, C. W., Chien, C. C., and Tsai, L. C. (2013). Does SFAS No. 151 Trigger More Overproduction? Journal of Management Accounting Research, 26(1), 121-143.
Yu-Chih Lin, Chung-Jen Fu, Shaw-Ping Chen. (2011). An Empirical Study on Cost Stickiness. Journal of Contemporary Accounting, Vol. 12 No. 2, 191-220.
Zhang, X. (2006). Information uncertainty and stock returns. The Journal of Finance, 61(1), 105-137.
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2021-06-30起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw