Expanded audit report and the value relevance of goodwill impairment
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: This study examines the value relevance of goodwill impairment losses and explores the role of Expanded Auditor Reporting (EAR) in mitigating the negative effects of managerial discretion on financial reporting quality. Design/methodology/approach: Using a sample of firms before and after EAR adoption in the UK, the study analyses the relationship between goodwill impairment disclosures and market valuations. It further investigates how the specificity of auditor disclosures (entity-specific versus generic) influences the alignment between reported impairments and market reactions. Findings: The results indicate that goodwill impairments lacked value relevance before EAR adoption, as managerial opportunism led to delayed or understated impairments. Following EAR adoption, enhanced auditor disclosures reduced information asymmetry, aligning reported impairments more closely with economic realities and improving their value relevance. Entity-specific disclosures were found to be particularly effective in providing incremental information to investors compared to generic disclosures. Practical implications: The findings provide actionable insights for regulators, auditors, and standard-setters on how enhanced audit disclosures can improve financial reporting quality. Entity-specific disclosures should be emphasised in regulatory frameworks to maximise their value to investors. Originality/value: This study advances theoretical understanding and practical application by addressing the persistent challenge of aligning goodwill impairments—an inherently subjective and discretion-prone accounting item—with economic realities. While prior research has broadly explored the implications of EAR, this study is among the first to isolate its effects on goodwill impairments, revealing the critical role of enhanced auditor transparency in mitigating managerial opportunism. Furthermore, by distinguishing the value of entity-specific disclosures versus generic disclosures, the findings provide actionable insights for auditors and standard-setters on how tailored communication can bridge the gap between reported impairments and market valuations.
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.
Cites
The relevance of the value-relevance literature for financial accounting standard setting
Holthausen, R. W., & Watts, R. L. (2001) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/s0165-4101(01)00029-5 · Cited by 1,742 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…prior research has largely established the value relevance of accounting numbers such as earnings and book value of equity ( Francis & Schipper, 1999 ), certain items, like goodwill impairments, remain controversial due to their subjectivity and managerial discretion ( Holthausen & Watts, 2001 ).”
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Elmahgoub, M., Smith, J. A., Elamer, A. A., & Abdelfattah, T.
- Affiliations
- Mansoura University (EG)
- University of Strathclyde (GB)
- Alfaisal University (SA)
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Venue
- Journal of Accounting Literature
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2026-02-12
- Pages
- 1-28
- ISSN
- 0737-4607 (ISSN-L)
- 2452-1469
- OpenAlex
- W7128468758
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2
- FWCI
- 15.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Journal of Accounting Literature (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
- Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (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, auditor disclosure, value relevance, managerial discretion, financial reporting quality, information asymmetry, market valuation
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