Purpose

When financial statements are public, the choice between alternative reporting regimes constitutes a signal that addresses external stakeholders. Generally, the choice of more complex regimes acts as a complement of firms' transparency. However, in the absence of audits, opportunistic behaviors could be incentivized. This study aims to test whether SMEs' choice between alternative accounting regimes is associated with earnings quality.

Design/methodology/approach

Drawing on the literature about accounting choices and earnings quality, this study investigates whether the same conclusions are confirmed for SMEs. Using a sample of 4,054 Italian companies and 12,114 observations, it compared four earnings quality proxies of a group of companies that opted for the “Full” rules and those of a subsample of the population of companies that applied the Simplified rules.

Findings

The results suggest that the signaling power of accounting rules' choice could lead to wrong conclusions for SMEs. Indeed, a positive relationship emerged (H1) between the choice of the “Full” rules and income smoothing behaviors, while the same choice appears to reduce the probability to disclose SPOS. Moreover, the results suggest that opportunistic behaviors are more frequent for firms that have settled in a “non-cooperative” social environment (H2).

Research limitations/implications

This study could foster research on financial reporting quality in private firms.

Practical implications

Comparing the quality of financial statements drawn up according to two alternative accounting regimes could provide useful suggestions for both users and regulators.

Originality/value

The results contribute to the limited literature on the implications of differential reporting. Finally, it enriches the literature about heterogeneity in accounting quality within private firms.

中文翻译：

---

差异化报告和盈利质量：越多越好吗？

目的

当财务报表公开时，替代报告制度之间的选择构成了向外部利益相关者发出的信号。一般来说，选择更复杂的制度可以作为公司透明度的补充。然而，在缺乏审计的情况下，机会主义行为可能会受到激励。本研究旨在检验中小企业对替代会计制度的选择是否与盈利质量相关。

设计/方法论/途径

本研究借鉴有关会计选择和盈利质量的文献，调查了中小企业是否也得到了同样的结论。它使用 4,054 家意大利公司的样本和 12,114 个观察结果，比较了选择“完整”规则的一组公司的四个盈利质量指标和应用简化规则的公司总体子样本的盈利质量指标。

发现

结果表明，会计规则选择的信号作用可能会导致中小企业得出错误的结论。事实上，“完全”规则的选择和收入平滑行为之间出现了正相关关系（H1），而同样的选择似乎降低了披露 SPOS 的可能性。此外，结果表明，对于处于“非合作”社会环境中的企业来说，机会主义行为更为频繁（H2）。

研究局限性/影响

这项研究可以促进对私营企业财务报告质量的研究。

实际影响

比较根据两种替代会计制度编制的财务报表的质量可以为用户和监管者提供有用的建议。

原创性/价值

这些结果为有关差异报告影响的有限文献做出了贡献。最后，它丰富了有关私营企业会计质量异质性的文献。