CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 54Banking stability, regulation, efficiencyAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceAccounting Theory and Financial Reporting

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Moving toward the expected credit loss model under IFRS 9: capital transitional arrangement and bank systematic risk

Open access
Dong, Minyue, Oberson, Romain·2022·Accounting and Business Research
DOI 10.1080/00014788.2021.1952060
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper examines banks’ option to adopt the capital transitional arrangement (CTA) set out by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, in response to the introduction of the International Financial Reporting Standard 9 (IFRS 9), which requires the use of an expected credit loss model instead of an incurred loss model to estimate the impairment of financial assets. Using a sample of publicly listed European banks from 2016 to 2019, we find that bank CTA adoption choice is associated with neutral factors captured by bank-specific fundamental characteristics, and potential opportunistic factors related to regulatory constraints implied by the application of IFRS 9. We further find that banks that adopted the CTA (CTA adopters) decrease their exposure to systematic risk during the transitional period. However, this relationship is only significant in countries with powerful banking authorities. In those with less powerful banking authorities, CTA adopters tend to exercise more aggressively their accounting discretion. Our study is the first to address banks’ voluntary choice to adopt the CTA policy under the mandatory application of IFRS 9.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00014788.2021.1952060

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 72 · Cited by 54

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. 10.1257/aer.102.3.59 · DOI
  2. 10.1093/rfs/hhw088 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/S0165-4101(99)00017-8 · DOI
  4. 10.1515/ecfr-2016-5001 · DOI
  5. 10.1080/09638180.2010.498619 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.jfi.2003.06.002 · DOI
  7. 10.1108/17576381311329661 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/j.jacceco.2020.101359 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.jacceco.2014.08.009 · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.jacceco.2020.101362 · DOI
  11. 10.2307/2491487 · DOI
  12. 10.2308/accr.2002.77.3.547 · DOI
  13. Behn M. Haselmann R.F.H. and Vig V. 2016. The limits of model-based regulation. ECB Working Paper 1928 (July 4 2016). · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.12.005 · DOI
  15. 10.2139/ssrn.1628843 · DOI
  16. 10.2139/ssrn.3644284 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2008.08.006 · DOI
  18. 10.1093/rfs/hhw060 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/j.jimonfin.2018.11.005 · DOI
  20. 10.1016/j.jacceco.2012.04.002 · DOI
  21. 10.1111/1475-679X.12117 · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.jempfin.2019.12.002 · DOI
  23. 10.1111/1475-679X.12195 · DOI
  24. 10.1111/1475-679X.12255 · DOI
  25. 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.06.014 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.bar.2016.09.001 · DOI
  27. 10.1016/j.jfi.2009.04.001 · DOI
  28. 10.1093/rof/rfu012 · DOI
  29. 10.1080/1351847X.2017.1339622 · DOI
  30. 10.1007/s11142-017-9419-x · DOI
  31. 10.1080/09638180.2017.1375418 · DOI
  32. 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1984.tb03898.x · DOI
  33. 10.1093/rof/rfm007 · DOI
  34. 10.20955/r.85.67 · DOI
  35. 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2019.03.001 · DOI
  36. 10.1111/j.1468-5957.2011.02242.x · DOI
  37. 10.1080/00014788.2019.1609898 · DOI
  38. 10.2139/ssrn.2187515 · DOI
  39. 10.1093/pan/mpr025 · DOI · Paper page
  40. 10.18637/jss.v054.i07 · DOI
  41. 10.1016/j.intfin.2012.04.003 · DOI
  42. 10.1080/17449480.2016.1210179 · DOI
  43. 10.1080/00014788.2018.1526665 · DOI
  44. 10.1177/1536867X1701700306 · DOI
  45. 10.1111/jofi.12964 · DOI
  46. 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2017.08.019 · DOI
  47. 10.1506/8187-56KM-6511-Q532 · DOI
  48. 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2014.06.003 · DOI
  49. 10.1093/rfs/hhy091 · DOI
  50. IASB, 2018. The Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting. London: International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation.
  51. 10.2308/accr.2010.85.6.2011 · DOI
  52. 10.1007/BF00114851 · DOI
  53. 10.1017/S1876404511200046 · DOI · Paper page
  54. 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2013.06.006 · DOI
  55. 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.04.003 · DOI
  56. 10.2139/ssrn.3024186 · DOI
  57. 10.1016/j.jfi.2014.04.004 · DOI
  58. 10.2307/2978814 · DOI
  59. 10.1080/00014788.2015.1048770 · DOI
  60. 10.1016/0165-4101(90)90027-2 · DOI
  61. 10.1086/705883 · DOI
  62. 10.1506/X652-8M45-1702-7424 · DOI
  63. 10.1080/17449480.2016.1210180 · DOI · Paper page
  64. 10.1080/00014788.2013.747260 · DOI
  65. 10.2139/ssrn.3234652 · DOI
  66. 10.1016/j.jfs.2016.02.001 · DOI
  67. 10.1561/1400000021 · DOI
  68. 10.1093/rof/rfs042 · DOI
  69. 10.2308/accr-10246 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Dong, M., & Oberson, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Lausanne (CH)
  • Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Oberson, Romain
ORCID
Venue
Accounting and Business Research
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2021-08-27
Volume
52
Issue
6
Pages
641-679
ISSN
  • 0001-4788 (ISSN-L)
  • 2159-4260
DOI
10.1080/00014788.2021.1952060
OpenAlex
W3198523620
Cited by
54
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2
FWCI
5.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Accounting and Business Research (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Banking stability, regulation, efficiency
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Accounting Theory and Financial Reporting
Keywords
expected credit loss model, IFRS 9, systematic risk, accounting discretion, banking regulation, Basel Committee, European banks, accounting standards adoption

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Moving toward the expected credit loss model under IFRS 9: capital transitional arrangement and bank systematic risk. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00014788.2021.1952060
The paper
Dong, M., & Oberson, R. (2022). Moving toward the expected credit loss model under IFRS 9: capital transitional arrangement and bank systematic risk. Accounting and Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2021.1952060