SYNOPSIS AND INTRODUCTION: The majority of empirical regulatory accounting studies on financial reporting have focused on the ex post evaluation of accounting choices (see Lev [1979] and Barth [1991] among others) after an accounting method is adopted. There has not been much research involving the evaluation of accounting methods ex ante because, it is argued, newly mandated accounting information is usually available only some time after the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has required its release. In December 1990, after lengthy and controversial deliberations, the FASB issued SFAS No. 106, Employers' Accounting for Postretirement Benefits other than Pensions (PRB) replacing the current "pay as you go" practice with a combination of present-value and accrual method. Few of the information items mandated by SFAS No. 106 has yet been disclosed earlier. Consequently, this research uses the data that were available during the time of the FASB's deliberations as an example of ex ante empirical research concerning the standard-setting process. This study uses the PRB cash payments to retirees as disclosed by firms in their footnotes to the financial statements under SFAS No. 81 (FASB 1984) to investigate whether investors underestimated the full effect
[1]
H. Tehranian,et al.
Impact on equity prices of pronouncements related to nonpension postretirement benefits
,
1991
.
[2]
H. Dankner.
Retiree health benefits : field test of the FASB proposal
,
1989
.
[3]
J. Heckman.
Sample selection bias as a specification error
,
1979
.
[4]
M. Warshawsky,et al.
The impact of liabilities for retiree health benefits on share prices
,
1993
.
[5]
Mary E. Barth,et al.
The market valuation implications of net periodic pension cost components
,
1992
.
[6]
Wayne R. Landsman,et al.
AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF PENSION FUND PROPERTY RIGHTS
,
1986
.
[7]
Michael D. Geurts,et al.
Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control
,
1977
.
[8]
O. Mitchell,et al.
Pensions, Economics and Public Policy
,
1987
.