research on accounting conservatism

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, accounting conservatism: a review of the literature.

Journal of Accounting Literature

ISSN : 0737-4607

Article publication date: 27 February 2015

Issue publication date: 28 February 2015

We review and analyze the accounting literature that examines the effects of accounting conservatism on financial statements and financial statement users. We begin by analyzing how conservatism affects the reported numbers on the financial statements. These studies primarily evaluate how conservatism affects earnings quality, including earnings persistence and the presence of earnings management. Next, we assess the effect of accounting conservatism on the users of the financial statements. We identify three primary users of the financial statements: (1) equity market users (2) debt market users and (3) corporate governance users. Within each of these categories, we analyze the findings of prior research and explore unanswered research questions. By analyzing the effects of accounting conservatism from a diverse range of research topics, we inform the discussion on the costs and benefits of accounting conservatism.

• Accounting conservatism
• Earnings quality
• Market returns
• Contracting

Ruch, G.W. and Taylor, G. (2015), "Accounting conservatism: A review of the literature", Journal of Accounting Literature , Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 17-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acclit.2015.02.001

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2015, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

• Social and Political Philosophy
• Conservatism

Conservatism in Accounting - Part I: Explanations and Implications

• Accounting Horizons 17(3)

• Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

No full-text available

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

• Linda A. Myers
• Dang Ngoc Hung

• Farouk Tamam

• نسمة أحمد عبده حسین الشایب
• Tanti Anita

• Souad Chaieb

• Shou-Min Tsao
• Che-Hung Lin
• Silvia Pereira da Rocha
• Francisco Antonio Bezerra

• Mário Nuno Mata

• Inmaculada Díaz-Sánchez

• Manuel Illueca-Muñoz

• Fatma Bneijara

• João de Araújo Guimarães Neto

• Linda Agustina
• Putri Apriliyani
• Kuat Waluyo Jati
• Andreia Vergineli Tricarico
• Priscyla de Moura Lopes Furtado
• José Augusto Veiga da Costa Marques
• Thiago de Abreu Costa
• APRIALDANO ARJUNA JAYA
• Maria Maria
• Alexander Wenning
• DISCRETE DYN NAT SOC
• Haomiao Zhai
• Ratna Puji Astuti
• Agus Kuntoro

• Gopal V. Krishnan
• James J. Cordeiro
• Rev Quant Finance Account

• Ruibin Zhang

• Jenni Dwi Maretta
• Yuni Cristiyani
• Br Surbakti

• REV ACCOUNT STUD
• Johnathon Cziffra
• Steve Fortin

• Yahya Kamyabi
• Amir Javady

• Eliane Carolina Quaglio Arjonas

• Eric Barreto de Oliveira

• Ahmet KARAHAN
• Ferhat YILMAZ

• Ariel Markelevich
• Irene Guannan Wang

• Wan Rabia’tul A’dawiyah Wan Abdullah

• Jo-Ting Wei

• Sungworn Ngudgratoke

• Narita Narita
• Salma Taqwa
• Suci Kurnia Putri
• Wira Lestari

• Jerry Zimmerman

• Jerold B. Warner
• J ACCOUNT ECON
• Robert W. Holthausen
• S.P. Kothari

• G.E.M. De Ste Croix
• Carl Thomas Devine

• John Chadwick
• Robert R. Sterling

• G. J. Benston
• Young K. Kwon
• D. Paul Newman
• Yoon S. Suh

• Theodore Sougiannis
• David A. Guenther

• Robert L. Kellogg

• Adam V. Reed
• R Blumenstein
• F E R Inside
• Mcgraw-Hill
• J W Rockness
• H O Rockness
• S H Ivancevich
• G J Benston
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Global Board Reform and Accounting Conservatism

56 Pages Posted: 17 Aug 2024

Chenghao Huang

Nanchang University

Southwestern University of Finance and Economics (SWUFE) - School of Accountancy

Siyang Tian

University of Sussex

Southwestern University of Finance and Economics (SWUFE) - School of Accounting

We investigate the impact of board governance on accounting conservatism through the staggered implementation of board reforms in 41 economies. Our results reveal a significant increase in accounting conservatism in countries with reforms involving board independence and audit committee and auditor independence. In contrast to a comply-or-explain approach, a rule-based approach with less uncertainty regarding firm compliance promotes accounting conservatism. Additional analyses indicate that the effects of the reform on accounting conservatism are more evident in: (1) firms with more severe agency problems; (2) countries with weak investor protection; and (3) countries with less sophisticated financial and accounting systems. A subsequent investigation confirms that improved board oversight could be the mechanism behind the reform’s effect. Overall, our findings suggest that accounting conservatism serves as a preferred monitoring mechanism for firms that enhance corporate governance following the board reform.

Keywords: Board reforms, Accounting conservatism, Corporate governance, Institutional envi- ronment, Cross-country study

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Nanchang University ( email )

999 Xuefu Avenue Hong Gu Tan New District Nanchang, 330031 China

Yang Liu (Contact Author)

Southwestern university of finance and economics (swufe) - school of accountancy ( email ).

55 Guanghuacun St Sichuan, 610072 China

University of Sussex ( email )

Sussex House Falmer Brighton, BNI 9RH United Kingdom

Southwestern University of Finance and Economics (SWUFE) - School of Accounting ( email )

Chengdu China

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, financial accounting ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Accounting, Corporate Governance, Law & Institutions eJournal

Corporate governance & accounting ejournal, international accounting ejournal, corporate governance: internal governance, organization & processes ejournal.

Advertisement

Accounting conservatism and corporate governance

• Published: 30 November 2007
• Volume 14 , pages 161–201, ( 2009 )

Cite this article

• Juan Manuel García Lara 1 ,
• Beatriz García Osma 2 &
• Fernando Penalva 3  

11k Accesses

322 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

We predict that firms with stronger corporate governance will exhibit a higher degree of accounting conservatism. Governance level is assessed using a composite measure that incorporates several internal and external characteristics. Consistent with our prediction, strong governance firms show significantly higher levels of conditional accounting conservatism. Our tests take into account the endogenous nature of corporate governance, and the results are robust to the use of several measures of conservatism (market-based and nonmarket-based). Our evidence is consistent with the direction of causality flowing from governance to conservatism, and not vice versa, indicating that governance and conservatism are not substitutes. Finally, we study the impact of earnings discretion on the sensitivity of earnings to bad news across governance structures. We find that, on average, strong-governance firms appear to use discretionary accruals to inform investors about bad news in a timelier manner.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Determinants, mechanisms and consequences of corporate governance reporting: a research framework

Does corporate governance affect financial analysts’ stock recommendations, target prices accuracy and earnings forecast characteristics? An empirical investigation of US companies

Corporate social responsibility and corporate disclosures: an investigation of investors’ and analysts’ perceptions.

Following Beaver and Ryan ( 2005 ), we refer to this news-dependent conservatism as conditional. Other authors label it as ex post conservatism, income statement conservatism, or earnings conservatism. Unconditional or news-independent conservatism—also labeled ex ante or balance-sheet conservatism—in turn, refers to the persistent understatement of shareholders’ equity that results from historic cost accounting and underrecognition of certain intangible assets due to the accounting rules (Feltham and Ohlson 1995 ). In the paper, we only focus on conditional conservatism as it plays a clear role in the contracting and monitoring functions of corporate governance. However, it is difficult to see how contracting is affected by conservatism in the form of an unconditional accounting bias of known magnitude. Rational agents would simply invert the bias. If the bias is unknown, it can only reduce contracting efficiency (Ball and Shivakumar 2005 ).

Watts ( 2003 b) argues that tax and regulation also contribute to conservatism; however, the empirical evidence thus far offers more limited evidence on the contribution of these factors to conservatism.

Our use of the expression strong (weak) governance is purely descriptive. It is not intended to mean that strong governance is better than weak governance.

For example, internal governance mechanisms such as independent boards of directors and audit committees have been shown to constrain aggressive practices, limiting the incidence of income-increasing earnings management (Beasley 1996 ; Klein 2002 ; Peasnell et al. 2005 ). Similarly, recent research shows that independent audit committees hire better quality auditors (Abbot et al. 2003 ) that, in turn, impose more conservative accounting choices (Basu et al. 2001 ; Chung et al. 2003 ).

Literature on this field provides mounting evidence that efficient corporate governance results in lower agency costs and that internal and external governance structures are associated to firm performance. For example, Cremers and Nair ( 2005 ) show that firms with strong external and internal governance generate abnormal returns of 10% to 15%. Core et al. ( 1999 ) find that less effective boards of directors—characterized by the CEO holding the chairman position; larger size; directors appointed by the CEO; and the presence of gray outside directors, old directors, and busy directors—are correlated with higher levels of CEO compensation after controlling for economic determinants of compensation; moreover, they find that predicted excess compensation, based on the governance structure of the firm, is negatively correlated with stock returns 1, 3, and 5 years ahead.

Gompers et al. ( 2003 ) examine 24 provisions: anti-greenmail, blank-check preferred stock, business combination laws, bylaw and charter amendment limitations, classified board, compensation plans with change in control provisions, director-indemnification contracts, control share cash-out laws, cumulative voting requirements, director’s duties, fair-price requirements, golden parachutes, director indemnification, limitations on director liability, pension parachutes, poison pills, secret ballots, executive severance agreements, silver parachutes, special meeting requirements, supermajority requirements, unequal voting rights, and limitations on action by written consent.

Like Bertrand and Mullainathan ( 2001 ), we use unit weights to construct Totgov following the recommendations of Grice and Harris ( 1998 ), who find that unit-weighted composites exhibit better psychometric properties than alternative weighting schemes.

Prior studies (Givoly et al. 2007 ; Callen et al. 2006 ) express their distrust of inferences drawn from the Basu ( 1997 ) model if used in a time-series (firm-specific) approach. We use a cross-sectional approach.

Ryan ( 2006 , Footnote 2) states that “two well-known empirical results together imply the biases identified by Dietrich et al. are likely to be fairly small and so biases in returns-based measures of asymmetric timeliness are likely to be correspondingly small. First, the low R2s observed in contemporaneous returns-earnings regressions suggest that the extent to which earnings causes returns is tiny compared to the extent to which both variables are determined by other, more primitive information. Second, a large literature, only some of which employs the reverse regressions of earnings on returns used to estimate asymmetric timeliness, exists that shows returns typically reflect information on a timelier basis than earnings.”

Basu uses the annual stock rate of return measured from 9 months before fiscal year end t to 3 months after fiscal year-end t . However, most subsequent studies use the fiscal year. Measuring returns 3 months after fiscal year-end is aimed at giving time to the market to incorporate information in contemporaneous earnings. Using fiscal year returns avoids returns being distorted by new information (different from earnings) coming to the market. Our results are not affected by this choice.

The inclusion of additional control variables such as the incidence of losses and earnings variability (Francis et al. 2004 ) does not change the inferences. Neither does including as a proxy for growth opportunities, the book-to-market value of assets ratio. We exclude this last variable because it also captures a certain degree of conservatism.

We are grateful to an anonymous referee for this insight.

Managers may also manipulate the timing and level of cash flows (e.g., Roychowdhury 2006 ; Bushee 1998 ; Bartov 1993 ), however, due to its low flexibility and high visibility, this is expected to be a residual form of earnings management (Peasnell et al. 2000 ).

Our data covers the period 1992 through 2003. The IRRC data is only available for 1990, 1993, 1995, 1998, 2000, and 2002. Gompers et al. ( 2003 ) report that for the majority of firms there is little time-series variation in the index. Taking advantage of this fact, like Cremers and Nair ( 2005 ), we align the index values available for 1990 with firm data for 1992, the index values for 1993 with firm data for 1993 and 1994, the index values for 1995 with firm data for 1995, 1996, and 1997, the index values for 1998 with firm data for 1998 and 1999, the index values for 2000 with firm data for 2000 and 2001, and the index values for 2002 with firm data for 2002 and 2003.

For parsimony, we only report the results that use the modified Jones model of Dechow et al. ( 1995 ) to estimate discretionary accruals. The results are not affected by the choice of accruals estimation method.

Fama and MacBeth ( 1973 ) regressions should be interpreted with caution. Basu ( 1999 ) gives a number of reasons against the use of mean annual regressions, related mainly to the parameters not being stationary.

Our estimate of discretionary accruals is based on the modified Jones model. This model only controls for two simple relations: between accruals and sales and accruals and property, plant, and equipment. This model would rarely capture other possible drivers of conservatism such as special items (restructuring charges and other one-time items). Managers also may use special items to affect conservatism. To assess this possibility, we augment earnings and the discretionary accruals estimate by adding the special items (Compustat item #17) deflated by beginning-of-the-period market value of equity. Then, we repeat the tests in Panel A of Table  2 . Untabulated results indicate that the inferences still hold.

We also repeated this test including an industry × year interaction term and obtained the same inferences.

Notice that our proxies for conservatism—Basu’s ( 1997 ) earnings asymmetric timeliness, Ball and Shivakumar’s ( 2005 ) accruals asymmetric timeliness, and Givoly and Hayn’s ( 2000 ) average accruals—are different from the measure for the relevance of accounting numbers used by Bushman et al. Their measure captures earnings symmetric timeliness, which is closer to what the literature refers to as relevance.

In these tests we are unable to use the Heckman procedure as described in Sect. 3.3. The reason is that here we are partitioning the sample into strong and weak governance firms, and the probit regression that models governance choice cannot be applied to each partition separately. Nevertheless, all previous evidence indicates that the results are not biased by not taking into account the endogeneity of governance choice.

Abbott, L. J., Parker, S., Peters G. F., & Raghunandan K. (2003). An empirical investigation of audit fees, nonaudit fees, and audit committees. Contemporary Accounting Research, 20 , 215–234.

Article   Google Scholar  

Adams, R. B. (2000).What do boards do? Evidence from committee meeting and director compensation. Working paper, Federal Reserve Bank of New York .

Ahmed, A. S., & Duellman, S. (2007). Evidence on the role of accounting conservatism in corporate governance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 43 , 411–437.

Ball, R., Kothari, S. P., & Robin, A. (2000). The effect of international institutional factors on properties of accounting earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 29 , 1–51.

Ball, R., Robin, A., & Wu, J. S. (2003). Incentives versus standards: Properties of accounting 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.

Bartov, E. (1993). The timing of asset sales and earnings manipulation. The Accounting Review, 68 , 840–855.

Google Scholar  

Basu, S. (1997). The conservatism principle and the asymmetric timeliness of earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24 , 3–37.

Basu, S. (1999). Discussion of International differences in the timeliness, conservatism and classification of earnings. Journal of Accounting Research, 37 (Supplement), 89–99.

Basu, S., Hwang, L.-S., & Jan, C.-L. (2001). Auditor conservatism and quarterly earnings. Working Paper, City University of Hong Kong.

Beasley, M. S. (1996). An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud. The Accounting Review, 71 , 443–465.

Beaver, W. H., & Ryan, S. G. (2005). Conditional and unconditional conservatism: Concepts and modeling. Review of Accounting Studies, 10 , 269–309.

Becker, C., DeFond, M., Jiambalvo, J., & Subramanyam, K. R. (1998). The effect of audit quality on earnings management. Contemporary Accounting Research, 15 , 1–24.

Beekes, W., Pope, P. F., & Young, S. (2004). The link between earnings timeliness, earnings conservatism and board composition: Evidence from the UK. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12 , 47–51.

Berle, A. A., & Means, G. C. (1932). The modern corporation and private property . New York: McMillan Publishing Co.

Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2001). Are CEOs rewarded for luck? The ones without principals are. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116 , 901–932.

Bowen, R. M., Rajgopal, S., & Venkatachalam, M. (2004). Accounting discretion, corporate governance and firm performance. Working paper, University of Washington.

Bushee, B. J. (1998). The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behaviour. The Accounting Review, 73 , 305–333.

Bushman, R., Chen, Q., Engel, E., & Smith, A. (2004). Financial accounting information, organizational complexity and corporate governance systems. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 37 , 167–201.

Bushman, R. M., & Piotroski, J. D. (2006). Financial reporting incentives for conservative accounting: The influence of legal and political institutions. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42 , 107–148.

Byrd, J. W., & Hickman, K. A. (1992). Do outside directors monitor managers? Evidence from tender offer bids. Journal of Financial Economics, 32 , 195–222.

Callen, J. L., Hope, O. K., & Segal, D. (2006). The pricing of conservative accounting and the measurement of conservatism at the firm-year level. Working paper, University of Toronto.

Chandra, U., Wasley, C., & Waymire, G. (2004). Income conservatism in the U.S. Technology Sector. Working Paper, University of Rochester.

Chung, R., Firth M., & Kim, J.-B. (2003). Auditor conservatism and reported earnings. Accounting and Business Research, 33 , 19.

Core, J. E., Holthausen, R. W., & Larcker, D. F. (1999). Corporate governance, the executive officer compensation, and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 51 , 371–406.

Cremers, K. J. M., & Nair, V. B. (2005). Governance mechanisms and equity prices. Journal of Finance, 60 , 2859–2894.

Davila, A., & Penalva, F. (2006). Governance structure and the weighting of performance measures in CEO compensation. Review of Accounting Studies, 11 , 463–493.

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 , 3–42.

Dechow, P., & Dichev, I. (2002). The quality of accruals and earnings: The role of accrual estimation errors. The Accounting Review 77 (Supplement), 35–59.

Dechow, P. M., Sloan, R. G., & Sweeney, A. P. (1995). Detecting earnings management. The Accounting Review, 70 , 193–225.

Dechow, P. M., Sloan, R. G., & Sweeney, A. P. (1996). Causes and consequences of earnings manipulation: An analysis of firms subject to enforcement actions by the SEC. Contemporary Accounting Research, 13 , 1–36.

Demsetz, H., & Lehn, K. (1985). The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. Journal of Political Economy, 93 , 1155–1177.

Dietrich, J. R., Muller, K. A., & Riedl, E. J. (2007). Asymmetric timeliness tests of accounting conservatism. Review of Accounting Studies, 12 , 95–124.

Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88 , 288–307.

Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26 , 319–337.

Fama, E., & MacBeth, J. (1973). Risk, return, and equilibrium: Empirical tests. Journal of Political Economy, 81 , 607–636.

Feltham, G. A., & Ohlson, J. A. (1995). Valuation and clean surplus accounting for operating and financial activities. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11 , 689–731.

Francis, J., LaFond, R., Olsson, P., & Schipper, K. (2004). Cost of equity and earnings attributes. The Accounting Review, 79 , 967–1010.

García Lara, J. M., García Osma, B., & Mora, A. (2005). The effect of earnings management on the asymmetric timeliness of earnings. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 34 , 691–726.

Givoly, D., & Hayn, C. (2000). The changing time-series properties of earnings, cash flows and accruals: Has financial reporting become more conservative? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 29 , 287–320.

Givoly, D., Hayn, C., & Natarajan, A. (2007). Measuring reporting conservatism. The Accounting Review, 82 , 65–106.

Gompers, P., Ishii, J., & Metrick, A. (2003). Corporate governance and equity prices. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118 , 107–155.

Grice, J. W., & Harris, R. J. (1998). A comparison of regression and loading weights for the computation of factor scores. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33 , 221–247.

Granger C. W. J. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica, 37 , 424–438.

Guay, W. R., Kothari, S. P., & Watts, R. L. (1996). A market based evaluation of discretionary accruals models. Journal of Accounting Research, 34 (Supplement), 83–105.

Guay, W. R., & Verrecchia, R. (2006). Discussion of an economic framework for conservative accounting and Bushman and Piotroski (2006). Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42 , 149–165.

Heckman, J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47 , 153–161.

Heninger, W. G. (2001). The association between auditor litigation and abnormal accruals. The Accounting Review, 76 , 111–125.

Hermalin, B. E. (2005). Trends in corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 60 , 2351–2384.

Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. (1988). The determinants of board composition. RAND Journal of Economics, 19 , 589–606.

Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. (1998). Endogenously chosen boards of directors and the monitoring of the CEO. American Economic Review, 88 , 96–118.

Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. (2003). Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of the economic literature. Economic Policy Review, 9 , 7–26.

Holthausen, R. W., & Watts, R. L. (2001). The relevance of the value relevance literature for financial accounting standard setting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31 , 3–75.

Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. American Economic Review, 76 , 323–329.

Jensen, M. C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance, 48 , 831–880.

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3 , 305–360.

Jones, J. J. (1991). Earnings management during import relief investigations. Journal of Accounting Research, 29 , 193–228.

Kasznik, R. (1999). On the association between voluntary disclosure and earnings management. Journal of Accounting Research, 37 , 57–81.

Kellogg, R. L. (1984). Accounting activities, security prices, and class action lawsuits. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 6 , 185–204.

Klein, A. (2002). Audit committee, board of directors’ characteristics, and earnings management. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 33 , 375–400.

Kothari, S. P., Leone, A. J., & Wasley, C. E. (2005). Performance matched discretionary accrual measures. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39 , 163–197.

Lang, L., Stulz, R., & Walkling, R. (1991). A test of the free cash flow hypothesis: The case of bidder returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 29 , 315–335.

Lobo, G. L., & Zhou, J. (2006). Did conservatism in financial reporting increase after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act? Initial evidence. Accounting Horizons, 20 , 57–74.

Mikkelson, W. H., & Partch, M. M. (1997). The decline of takeovers and disciplinary managerial turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 44 , 205–228.

Peasnell, K. V., Pope, P. F., & Young, S. (2000). Accrual management to meet earnings targets: UK evidence pre- and post-Cadbury. British Accounting Review, 32 , 415–445.

Peasnell, K. V., Pope, P. F., & Young, S. (2005). Board monitoring and earnings management: Do outside directors influence abnormal accruals? Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 32 , 1311–1346.

Pope, P. F., & Walker, M. (1999). International differences in the timeliness, conservatism, and classification of earnings. Journal of Accounting Research, 37 (Supplement), 53–87.

Raonic, R., McLeay, S., & Asimakopoulos, I. (2004). The timeliness of income recognition by european companies: An analysis of institutional and market complexity. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 31 , 115–148.

Richardson, S. A., Sloan, R. G., Soliman, M. T., & Tuna, I. A. (2005). Accrual reliability, earnings persistence and stock prices. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39 , 437–485.

Rogers, W. (1993). Regression standard errors in clustered samples. Stata Technical Bulletin Reprints (Vol. 3, pp. 83–94). College Station, TX: Stata Press.

Roychowdhury, S. (2006). Earnings management through real activities manipulation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42 , 335–370.

Roychowdhury, S., & Watts, R. (2006). Asymmetric timeliness of earnings, market-to-book and conservatism in financial reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 44 , 2–31.

Ryan, S. G. (2006). Identifying conditional conservatism. European Accounting Review, 15 , 511–525.

Ryan, S. G., & Zarowin, P. A. (2003). Why has the contemporaneous linear returns-earnings relation declined? The Accounting Review, 78 , 523–553.

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1986). Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of Political Economy, 94 , 461–488.

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52 , 737–783.

Sims, C. A. (1972). Money, income, and causality. American Economic Review, 62 , 540–552.

Smith, C., & Watts, R. (1992). The investment opportunity set and corporate financing, dividends, and compensation policies. Journal of Financial Economics, 32 , 263–292.

St Pierre, K., & Anderson, J. A. (1984). An analysis of the factors associated with lawsuits against public accountants. The Accounting Review, 59 , 242–263.

Vafeas, N. (1999). Board meeting frequency and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 53 , 113–143.

Watts, R. (2003a). Conservatism in accounting. Part I. Explanations and implications. Accounting Horizons, 17 , 207–221.

Watts, R. (2003b). Conservatism in accounting. Part II. Evidence and research opportunities. Accounting Horizons, 17 , 287–301.

Watts, R. L., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1986). Positive accounting theory . Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Weisbach, M. S. (1988). Outside directors and CEO turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 20 , 431–460.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We appreciate the helpful comments and suggestions from Carol Marquardt, Antonio Dávila, Miguel Ferreira, Joachim Gassen, Christian Leuz, Flora Muino, Ivana Raonic, William Rees, Stefan Reichelstein (the editor), Phillip Stocken, Martin Walker, two anonymous reviewers, and seminar participants at the AAA 2006 Annual Meeting, EAA 2005 Annual Meeting, ACCID 2005 Annual Conference, University of Alicante, University of Valencia, IESE Business School, ISCTE Business School, London Business School, The University of Manchester, and University of Navarra (Pamplona). We acknowledge financial contribution from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (SEJ2005-08644-C02-01/ECON). Juan Manuel García Lara also thanks the financial contribution from SECJ2004-09176-C02-02/ECO.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Business Administration, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Calle Madrid 126, 28903, Getafe, Madrid, Spain

Juan Manuel García Lara

Department of Accounting, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Fco. Tomás y Valiente 5, Madrid, 28049, Spain

Beatriz García Osma

IESE Business School, University of Navarra, Av. Pearson 21, Barcelona, 08034, Spain

Fernando Penalva

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fernando Penalva .

1.1 Determinants of governance choice

We use the two-step Heckman ( 1979 ) procedure to take into account the endogenous nature of governance. In the first stage, governance choice is modeled using a probit model. In particular, we regress a dummy variable that indicates whether the firm has selected either to have strong or weak governance on a set of determinants. We define strong (weak) governance as having values of Totgov below (above) the median of this variable. In the second stage, we estimate Eqs. 1–9 including as an additional control variable the inverse Mills ratio computed from the parameters of the first stage. The determinants of governance are taken from previous literature:

Size . Larger firms are more complex and place higher demands on governance structures. Demsetz and Lehn ( 1985 ) find that size is significantly associated with ownership concentration. We measure size as the three-year average of the natural logarithm of the market value of equity, measured at the end of the fiscal year, and predict a positive association with the quality of governance.

Growth opportunities . Previous research documents that growth opportunities explain the cross-sectional differences in governance configurations. Following Smith and Watts ( 1992 ), our (inverse) proxy for growth is the three-year average of the annual book-to-market value of assets ratio, measured at the end of the fiscal year. The market value of assets is defined as the market value of equity plus the book value of liabilities.

Firm age . Previous research hypothesizes that the age of the firm is related to the governance structure. Following Bushman et al. ( 2004 ), our proxy is the natural logarithm of the firm’s age at the end of the fiscal year, measured as the number of years the firm has been public.

Free cash flow . High free cash flow poses a problem for firms with low growth opportunities, since managers may invest the excess cash in negative net present value projects or engage in empire-building acquisitions. Jensen ( 1986 ) suggests that governance structures can mitigate this agency problem. Following Lang et al. ( 1991 ), our proxy to capture this determinant is the three-year average of [(operating cash flow minus preferred and common dividends)/total assets] if the book-to-market ratio is greater than or equal to one, and zero otherwise. Firms with book-to-market ratios greater than one are expected to have low growth opportunities. The free cash flow problem demands better governance, therefore we expect to find a positive association between Free cash flow and the quality of governance.

Idiosyncratic risk . Demsetz and Lehn ( 1985 ) suggest that the amount of noise in the firm’s operating environment is expected to increase the costs of direct monitoring, which in turn increases the demands on governance structures. These costs are expected to increase at a decreasing rate with the difficulty in monitoring. Hence, we use the logarithmic transformation of the firm’s idiosyncratic risk. Idiosyncratic risk is defined as the natural logarithm of the standard deviation of the residual return from a 36-month market model regression of the firm’s monthly returns on the returns to the CRSP value-weighted market portfolio, imposing a minimum of 12 observations. We predict a positive association between Idiosyncratic risk and the quality of governance.

Leverage . Cremers and Nair ( 2005 ) find that internal and external governance mechanisms are stronger complements in firms with low leverage, because higher debt reduces the probability of a takeover as the target is less attractive to the prospective acquirer. This fact reduces the governance usefulness of anti-takeover mechanisms. Our proxy for leverage is the ratio of short and long-term debt to total common shareholders , equity.

Industry concentration and geographic concentration . Bushman et al. ( 2004 ) argue that organizational complexity increases with industry and geographic diversification. These authors hypothesize and find that the complexity associated with diversification causes costly governance responses because the inherent additional managerial difficulties generated by more complex firms place higher demands on the governance structures. To control for the level of diversification, we employ the same proxies used by Bushman et al. ( 2004 ). Industry concentration is defined as the three-year average of the sum of the squares of (firm sales in each industry segment/total firm sales). Geographic concentration is defined as the three-year average of the sum of squares of (firm sales in each geographic segment/total firm sales). Higher values of these two proxies indicate more industry/geographic concentration. These two proxies are inverse measures of diversification; therefore, we expect to find a negative association with the quality of governance.

CEO tenure . Hermalin ( 2005 ) develops a model in which a trend towards more board diligence leads to shorter CEO tenures. Bushman et al. ( 2004 ) find that the number of years the CEO has been a director is positively associated with the presence of more inside directors in the board. Hermalin and Weisbach (1988) find that board independence declines over the course of the CEO’s tenure. We hypothesize that the number of years the CEO has been in office, CEO tenure , is another determinant of governance as longer tenures increase the likelihood of having more insiders in the board. We predict a negative association between CEO tenure and governance.

Performance . Previous research documents the association between certain governance attributes and past firm performance. Hermalin and Weisbach (1988) find that the likelihood of independent directors being added to the board increases following poor firm performance. Similar to Demsetz and Lehn ( 1985 ), to control for past firm performance we use the three-year stock return measured as the continuously compounded monthly CRSP return over 36 months, ending at fiscal year-end.

Regulation . The additional monitoring provided by regulators may systematically affect the governance characteristics of firms operating in regulated environments. Following Demsetz and Lehn ( 1985 ) and Bushman et al. ( 2004 ), we include an indicator variable that takes the value of one if the firm is a utility and zero otherwise. We do not control for financial firms because our sample excludes these firms.

High-tech industry . We also include an indicator variable if the firm is in a high-tech industry (Chandra et al. 2004 ).

Quality of the auditor . The quality of the auditor may be associated with the quality of governance (Basu et al. 2001 ). We define an indicator variable, Big-5 , that takes on the value of one if the auditor of the firm is a Big Five auditor and zero otherwise.

The table below contains the results of the estimation of the first-stage probit regression of a Heckman ( 1979 ) model. The sample consists of 9,152 firm-year observations (1,611 firms) for the years 1992 through 2003. The reported z -statistics are based on standard errors which are robust to both heteroscedasticity and within-group serial correlation. The two-sided thresholds of the z -statistics for significance at the 0.10, 0.05, and 0.01 confidence levels are 1.64, 1.96, and 2.61, respectively.

As a sensitivity check, we also included additional variables to control for past accounting performance. In particular, we estimated specifications that included current and past return on assets, or a variable to reflect the incidence of negative earnings realizations in the past, calculated as the proportion of losses over the prior ten years. None of the inferences reported in the tables in the paper is affected by the inclusion of these variables.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

García Lara, J.M., García Osma, B. & Penalva, F. Accounting conservatism and corporate governance. Rev Account Stud 14 , 161–201 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-007-9060-1

Download citation

Published : 30 November 2007

Issue Date : March 2009

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-007-9060-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Conditional conservatism
• Corporate governance
• Managerial discretion

JEL Classifications

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Search Search Please fill out this field.

What Is Accounting Conservatism?

• How It Works
• Disadvantages

Using Accounting Conservatism

The bottom line.

• Corporate Finance

Accounting Conservatism: Definition, Advantages & Disadvantages

Daniel Liberto is a journalist with over 10 years of experience working with publications such as the Financial Times, The Independent, and Investors Chronicle.

Accounting conservatism is a set of bookkeeping guidelines that call for a high degree of verification before a company can make a legal claim to any profit .

The general concept is to factor in the worst-case scenario of a firm’s financial future. Uncertain liabilities are to be recognized as soon as they are discovered. In contrast, revenues can only be recorded when they are assured of being received.

Key Takeaways

• Accounting conservatism is a principle that requires company accounts to be prepared with caution and high degrees of verification.
• All probable losses are recorded when they are discovered, while gains can only be registered when they are fully realized.
• If an accountant has two solutions to choose from when facing an accounting challenge, the one that gives the least optimistic view of the situation should be selected.

Ryan Oakley / Investopedia

How Accounting Conservatism Works

Generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) insist on a number of accounting conventions being followed to ensure that companies report their financials as accurately as possible. One of these principles, conservatism, requires accountants to show caution, opting for solutions that reflect least favorably on a company’s bottom line in situations of uncertainty.

Accounting conservatism is not intended to manipulate the dollar amount or timing of reporting financial figures. It is a method of accounting that provides guidance when uncertainty and the need for estimation arise: cases where the accountant has the potential for bias.

Accounting conservatism establishes the rules when deciding between two financial reporting alternatives. If an accountant has two solutions to choose from when facing an accounting challenge, the one that yields inferior numbers should be selected.

A cautious approach generally presents financial statement in the least optimistic light. There is a danger that  assets  and revenue would be overstated, so where the accountant has two acceptable options, the principle of conservatism would recommend presenting the lower of the two options. There is a danger that liabilities and  expenses , on the other hand, will be understated.

Conservatism dictates that if it is more probable than not that the loss will be incurred, accountants are encouraged to record it immediately, regardless of whether it has actually been paid out yet. In contrast, if there is a possibility of a gain coming the company’s way, they are advised not to record it in the financial statements until virtually certain of receiving some benefit.

Recording Revenue

Since there is a danger that companies will manipulate revenue numbers to record higher profits, there are very stringent rules around revenue recognition. There are many ways in which revenue could be manipulated that lie in an accounting “gray area.” Recording legitimate revenues before they are really true sales is one such risk. For this reason, before a sale can be recorded, there are several criteria that must be met:

• There must be a customer contract.
• Accountants must identify performance obligations within that contract to break down clearly what goods will be sold and what services will be rendered.
• Determine the transaction price for goods sold and services rendered.
• Allocate the transaction price to the different parts of the contract, identifying what the customer should pay for goods and services if both are being sold.
• Recognize revenue when you’ve fulfilled each performance obligation and not before. For goods, this is when they are transferred, and for services rendered, this is when the service is performed.

The fulfillment of the performance obligations is an example of conservatism in action. No revenue should be recorded before these events take place, even if business managers are very sure that a customer is going to want products or services.

Advantages of Accounting Conservatism

Understating gains and overstating losses means that accounting conservatism will always report lower net income  and lower financial future benefits. Painting a bleaker picture of a company’s financials actually comes with several benefits.

Most obviously, it encourages management to exercise greater care in its decisions. It also means there is more scope for positive surprises, rather than disappointing upsets, which are big drivers of share prices. Like all standardized methodologies, these rules should also make it easier for investors to compare financial results across different industries and time periods.

Disadvantages of Accounting Conservatism

On the flip side, GAAP rules such as accounting conservatism can often be open to interpretation. This means that some companies will always find ways to manipulate them to their advantage.

Another issue with accounting conservatism is the potential for  revenue shifting . If a transaction does not meet the requirements to be reported, it must be reported in the following period. This will result in the current period being understated and future periods being overstated, making it difficult for an organization to track business operations internally.

Accounting conservatism may be applied to  inventory valuation . When determining the reporting value for inventory, conservatism dictates the lower of  historical cost  or net realizable value is the amount that should be included on the balance sheet as an asset.

Estimations such as uncollectable accounts receivable (AR) and casualty losses also use this principle. If a company expects to win a litigation claim, it cannot report the gain until it meets all  revenue recognition  principles.

However, if a litigation claim is expected to be lost, an estimated economic impact is required in the  notes to the financial statements . Contingent liabilities such as royalty payments or  unearned revenue are to be disclosed, too.

What Does Accounting Conservatism Take into Account?

Accounting conservatism records all probable losses when they are discovered and registers gains only when they are fully realized.

What Does Accounting Conservatism Provide?

Accounting conservatism provides guidance when uncertainty and the need for estimation arise: cases where the accountant has the potential for bias. It establishes the rules when deciding between two financial reporting alternatives. The one that yields inferior numbers should be selected.

Does Accounting Conservatism Have a Bright Side?

It does. Accounting conservatism encourages management to use greater care in decision making. It also means more scope for positive surprises instead of disappointing upsets, which drive share prices. Finally, it also makes it easier for investors to compare financial results across different industries and time periods.

Accounting conservatism is a set of bookkeeping guidelines. It requires company accounts to be prepared with caution and high degrees of verification. The point is to factor in the worst-case scenario for a company’s financial future.

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy

• Publisher Home

• About the Journal
• Editorial Team
• Article Processing Fee
• Privacy Statement
• Crossmark Policy
• Copyright Statement
• GDPR Policy
• Open Access Policy
• Publication Ethics Statement
• Author Guidelines
• Announcements

The Seeds of Accounting Conservatism

• David S. Christensen  

David S. Christensen

Search for the other articles from the author in:

Abstract Views 590

Downloads 425

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Why does the accounting principle of accounting conservatism persist, despite the criticism of 20th-century deductive accounting theorists? Accounting conservatism's etymology suggests that the traditional connotation of deliberate understatement began in America, circa 1900. Its genealogy, however, reaches much deeper into the past. This research adds to the work of Basu (1997, 2009) who reports evidence of accounting conservatism in medieval Europe and China, and to the work of Bloom (2018) and Watts (2003), who provide modern rationales for accounting conservatism. By using key elements derived from its definition, accounting conservatism's genealogy is traced from ancient times to the 20th century. A review of major works on accounting history and notable articles on accounting conservatism reveals that the seeds of accounting conservatism predate Pacioli, and were sown for largely pragmatic reasons. As long as accounting retains its pragmatic flavor, accounting conservatism will likely survive its critics. It has passed the test of time.

• Recently Active
• Top Discussions
• Best Content

By Industry

• Investment Banking
• Private Equity
• Hedge Funds
• Real Estate
• Venture Capital
• Asset Management
• Equity Research
• Investing, Markets Forum
• Business School
• Fashion Advice
• Technical Skills
• Accounting Articles

Accounting Conservatism

A fundamental principle of accounting that necessitates companies to promptly acknowledge potential losses and liabilities while being more cautious in recognizing potential gains and assets.

• What Is Accounting Conservatism?

How Accounting Conservatism Works

• Examples Of Accounting Conservatism
• Advantages Of Accounting Conservatism
• Disadvantages Of Accounting Conservatism

Accounting Conservatism FAQs

What is accounting conservatism.

Accounting conservatism is a fundamental principle of accounting that necessitates companies to promptly acknowledge potential losses and liabilities while being more cautious in recognizing potential gains and assets.

This principle has a basis upon which potential risks and uncertainties associated with any account should be considered to reflect a realistic assessment of financial status.

This means that businesses should be more aggressive when estimating liabilities, expenses, and potential losses while being more conservative when estimating the value of assets, revenues, and profits. 

For instance, instead of assuming that all accounts receivable will be collected, a company should recognize a lesser value of these assets on its balance sheet if it needs to be clarified about their potential to be collected. 

Similarly, even if the outcome of the legal case is uncertain, a corporation should acknowledge any potential legal liability as soon as practicable.

The conservative principle has numerous significant financial reporting ramifications:

• Low reported earnings: It can lead to lower reported earnings and asset values, which may impact a company's stock price and valuation . However, providing investors with a more realistic picture of a company's financial status and risks might be useful when making investment decisions. 
• Fair analysis: Conservatism can help prevent companies from reporting too optimistically, which can lead to false expectations and poor investment decisions. 
• Transparency: Conservatism can also help to promote transparency and accountability in financial reporting by requiring companies to disclose potential risks and uncertainties clearly and honestly.

Key Takeaways

• Accounting conservatism is a principle in financial reporting that requires accountants to exercise caution and prudence when faced with uncertainty in financial transactions.
• This approach tends to recognize potential losses and liabilities sooner rather than later, while revenues and assets are only recognized when they are assured of being received.
• The main goal of accounting conservatism is to provide a safeguard against overstatement of financial health and performance.
• It aims to present a more cautious and potentially less optimistic view of a company's financial situation to stakeholders, reducing the risk of misleading financial statements.

The principle of conservatism is an important principle in financial reporting that guides how companies should recognize and report their financial transactions and events. 

It ensures that financial statements provide a more conservative and cautious view of a company's financial position.

Essentially, conservatism dictates that potential losses and expenses should be recognized immediately, even if their occurrence is uncertain. In contrast, potential gains and revenues should only be recognized when they are realized or virtually certain. 

This principle's underlying goal is to prevent the overstatement of assets and income, providing a more realistic and cautious portrayal of a company's financial health .

The application of conservatism in accounting involves several key practices:

• In that case, conservatism mandates recognizing the loss by reducing the inventory value on the balance sheet.
• For example, a company may defer recognizing revenue from long-term service contracts until the services are provided or until collection is highly probable.
• Allowances for doubtful accounts: Conservatism calls for allowances for doubtful accounts to reflect potential losses from uncollectible receivables. By estimating and recognizing potential bad debts, companies exercise caution and reduce the risk of overstating their accounts receivable.
• Impairment of assets: When the value of long-lived assets, such as property, plant, and equipment, is impaired or likely to be impaired, conservatism requires companies to recognize the impairment loss by reducing the asset's carrying value on the balance sheet. 

This ensures that the assets are reported at their lower recoverable amounts.

By incorporating conservatism into financial reporting, companies aim to provide a more accurate and reliable representation of their financial position. 

The conservatism principle generally aims to ensure that monetary statements provide a more accurate view of an enterprise's financial situation and performance, that's critical for stakeholders like traders, lenders, and others who rely on this information to make decisions.

Examples of Accounting Conservatism

An example of the conservatism principle can be seen in the way companies handle their inventory valuation . 

Inventory may be valued using various methods under accounting standards, which include:

• First-In, First-Out ( FIFO ) 
• Last-In, First-Out ( LIFO ) 
• Weighted average cost 

Under the FIFO method, the goods that enter first have been sold from the inventory. On the other hand, LIFO assumes that the last item entered is sold first. Weighted Average Cost calculates the value of each item sold by taking the average cost of all inventory items.

When inventory values decline, accounting conservatism suggests that a company should use the lower cost or market method to value its inventory. 

This indicates that if an item's market price goes below its cost, the corporation should modify the inventory value to reflect the reduced market value .

This method assures that the company's financial statements accurately reflect its financial situation and performance.

Suppose a company has a product in its inventory that costs $10 to manufacture. However, it could be sold only at $15 due to changes in the market and economy ; otherwise, it would have been sold at $20. 

If the corporation applied the FIFO technique, it would continue to value the product at $10, inflating the value of its inventory.

However, if the company uses accounting conservatism and applies the lower cost or market method, it would adjust the product's value in its inventory to $15. 

By doing so, a decrease in the MV of inventory would reduce the book value of the inventory in the company's balance sheet and, in turn, the reporting income.

By using the lower cost or market method, the company is being conservative in its accounting practices. It recognizes the potential for loss and adjusts the value of its inventory accordingly. 

Advantages of Accounting Conservatism

Several advantages of conservatism in accounting make it an important component of financial reporting for companies and investors.

It aids in ensuring that financial statements reflect an accurate view of a company's financial situation and performance. 

Companies that use conservative accounting practices avoid overvaluing their assets or underreporting their obligations, which can lead to misleading financial statements. As a result, investors can make more informed judgments based on reliable financial data.

Reduced Financial Risk

Conservatism helps companies reduce financial risk by recognizing potential losses and expenses earlier. By preparing for future risks and uncertainties, conservatism can help companies avoid financial distress , especially in periods of economic uncertainty.

Improved Transparency

The conservatism principle promotes transparency in  financial reporting  by requiring companies to disclose potential losses and expenses in their financial statements. 

Improved transparency helps in making informed investment decisions.

Consistency in Financial Reporting

It promotes consistency in financial reporting across different periods. 

This is because it requires corporations to employ a more cautious approach to accounting, which decreases the risk of financial reporting variations that may arise if a company alters its accounting standards.

Reduced Earnings Manipulation

It can also reduce the potential for earnings manipulation by requiring companies to be conservative in their accounting practices. 

This can assist organizations in avoiding the overstatement of earnings or understatement of losses, which could potentially mislead investors and open the door to financial fraud.

Disadvantages of Accounting Conservatism

While conservatism in accounting is an important principle in financial accounting, its use has several potential disadvantages. These disadvantages include

• Reduced Transparency: It might be difficult for the investors to understand the company's financial position. This is because conservative accounting can lead to understating a company's assets and overestimating its liabilities. As a result, the true financial positions may not be reflected accurately.
• Reduced Comparability:  Comparing companies' financial statements would be difficult because they may use different accounting methods to record transactions. Accounting methods are flexible and are applied differently from company to company.
• Lower Reported Earnings: Conservative accounting procedures may result in a company reporting lesser earnings, which could harm the stock price and investor trust. 
• This can hinder innovation, expansion, and competitiveness in dynamic business environments.
• Higher Tax Burden: Conservative accounting practices can also lead to a higher tax burden for companies. This is because decreased reported profits can bring about better tax liabilities, reducing a business enterprise's cash flow and limiting its capacity to reinvest in the enterprise.

Accounting conservatism is a fundamental accounting principle that requires organizations to be more aggressive in predicting liabilities, expenses, and potential losses while remaining cautious in forecasting assets, revenues, and profits. 

It depicts the true picture of an organization's performance associated with relative risk, and adhering to it may result in low reporting income and asset value. 

Despite the potential drawbacks, conservatism promotes financial reporting transparency and accountability, which are required for modern financial markets to function .

Accounting conservatism is a key accounting principle that supports accurate financial reporting, lowers financial risk, increases transparency, encourages consistency in  financial reporting , and lowers the possibility of earnings manipulation. 

Conservatism in accounting is a key deciding factor in financial reporting for firms and stakeholders. Although it has several potential pitfalls, conservatism can help ensure that financial statements are dependable and provide a fair view of a company's financial health. 

To decide the optimal method for their firm, companies must compare the benefits of cautious accounting practices against these potential disadvantages.

Conservatism in Accounting helps provide a more realistic and prudent representation of a company's financial position and performance. It aims to prevent overstatement of assets and income while ensuring potential losses and risks. 

This conservative approach enhances transparency, reduces the likelihood of financial statement manipulation , and promotes investor confidence.

The key features of AC include

A. Recognition of losses

Conservatism emphasizes early recognition of potential losses and expenses, even uncertain ones. It discourages delaying recognition once all uncertainties are resolved.

B. Objective evidence

Conservative accounting relies on objective evidence to recognize gains and assets. It prefers verification through actual transactions or events rather than relying on speculative future outcomes.

C. Prudence in estimates

Conservatism advocates exercising caution when making estimates. Instead, it suggests selecting estimates on the lower end of a reasonable range when uncertain.

D. Impartiality

Accountants should be unbiased and neutral in decision-making, avoiding any incentives to manipulate financial information to achieve desired outcomes.

Conservatism in Accounting and fair value , accounting are two contrasting approaches:

• Conservatism focuses on recognizing potential losses early, even if uncertain. It tends to be more cautious and objective in recognizing gains and assets.
• Fair value accounting measures assets and liabilities at their current market values, reflecting their true economic worth. 

Fair value focuses on providing more relevant and timely information, but it may be subject to market fluctuations and volatility.

While conservatism leans towards a more prudent approach, fair value accounting leans towards a more market-based and potentially volatile approach. The choice between the two depends on the circumstances and the specific accounting standards applicable in each situation.

Everything You Need To Build Your Accounting Skills

To Help you Thrive in the Most Flexible Job in the World.

Free Resources

To continue learning and advancing your career, check out these additional helpful WSO resources:

• Accrual Accounting
• Inventory Valuation
• Prepaid Expenses
• Revenue Recognition

Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.

or Want to Sign up with your social account?