Compliance with goodwill impairment disclosure and reasons provided by management: Evidence from South Africa
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this article is to investigate compliance with the IFRS disclosure requirements regarding goodwill impairment testing in the South African setting, using JSE-listed firms as a sample. The article considers the explanatory strategies used by management to provide reasons for goodwill impairment.Motivation: Goodwill and its impairment are continually debated in accounting because of the nature of this intangible asset, and changes in the accounting standards regarding disclosure of goodwill and goodwill impairment.Design/Methodology/Approach: Panel least squares regressions and a cluster analysis were used to analyse JSE-listed firms for the period from 2006 to 2017.Main findings: The findings show that firms with material goodwill balances and an independent audit committee are associated with higher compliance with goodwill impairment disclosure. Firms that provided an excuse for impairing goodwill without taking responsibility for that impairment tended to have higher compliance regarding goodwill impairment disclosure than firms that did not provide any reason for goodwill impairment at all.Practical implications/Managerial impact: Managers exhibiting compliance with goodwill impairment disclosure standards are inclined to furnish more comprehensive elucidation regarding the underlying reasons for the initiation of goodwill impairment. Investors, in turn, might find it useful to study and question the reasons provided as part of the goodwill impairment disclosure recognizing its potential significance in their decision-making processes.Novelty/Contribution: The findings of the study provide evidence that aids understanding of goodwill impairments and the compliance with its disclosures, thereby enhancing knowledge of the effectiveness of the implementation of IFRS 3.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 2
- Authors
- Louw, E., Hall, J. H., & Brümmer, L. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Pretoria (ZA)
- Corresponding author
- Louw, E.
- Venue
- South African Journal of Accounting Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2024-01-23
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 91-112
- ISSN
- 1029-1954 (ISSN-L)
- 2376-3981
- OpenAlex
- W4391145380
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 1.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- South African Journal of Accounting Research (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Accounting Theory and Financial Reporting
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Governance and Financial Management
- Keywords
- goodwill impairment, disclosure compliance, IFRS 3, audit committee independence, intangible assets, South Africa, IFRS 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