Relevant bibliographies by topics / Identifiable intangibles

Contents

  1. Journal articles
  2. Dissertations / Theses
  3. Books
  4. Book chapters

Academic literature on the topic 'Identifiable intangibles'

Author: Grafiati
Published: 4 June 2021
Last updated: 20 February 2023

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Identifiable intangibles.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Journal articles on the topic "Identifiable intangibles"

1

Pastor, Damián, Jozef Glova, František Lipták, and Viliam Kováč. "Intangibles and methods for their valuation in financial terms: Literature review." Intangible Capital 13, no. 2 (February 10, 2017): 387. http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.752.

Full text
Abstract:
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to review literature devoted to intangibles and their valuation and give examples of the methods that can be used for valuation of individual intangibles in financial terms.Design/methodology/approach: Paper presents a systematic review of articles dedicated to intangibles and their valuation.Findings: This review shows that there is a need for consensus in definitions of intangibles, intangible assets, knowledge assets and other related terms. These terms are used interchangeably in spite of their different meanings. Many methods for valuation of intangibles can be found in the literature, but widely accepted list of basic intangibles with suggested methods for their valuation in financial terms is still missing.Research limitations/implications: Not all the papers related to this topic could be covered in this paper. Presented list of important intangible components may be enhanced and examples of some other methods for their valuation may be added in the future.Practical implications: Paper calls for development of framework comprising list of the most important intangibles, proposals of methods used for their valuation and examples of their use. This framework can be helpful for organization, which are confronted with a difficult task of intangibles valuation.Originality/value: Basic definitions and differences between intangibles, intangible assets, identifiable intangible assets, knowledge assets and intellectual capital have not been mentioned in one paper yet. List of intangibles and methods for their valuation gives a direction for future work that can be fruitful for valuation of intangibles.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Zhang, Ivy Xiying, and Yong Zhang. "Accounting Discretion and Purchase Price Allocation After Acquisitions." Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 32, no. 2 (July 27, 2016): 241–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0148558x15598693.

Full text
Abstract:
The recent movement in standards setting toward fair-value-based accounting beyond financial assets and liabilities calls for more empirical evidence on fair-value measurement, especially that of intangible assets. This article studies the initial valuation of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets after acquisitions. We find that the allocation of purchase price to goodwill and identifiable intangible assets is related to the economic determinants of the valuation. However, it is also significantly affected by managerial incentives arising from the differential treatments of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) 142. The same managerial discretions are not exhibited in the purchase price allocation prior to SFAS 142, when goodwill and other intangibles are both amortized. These findings suggest that unverifiable fair value measures are associated with the underlying economics but also deviate from the true values in the presence of management reporting incentives. Further analysis suggests that external appraisers constrain managerial discretion in intangible asset valuation to an extent but do not completely eliminate it.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Nell, Tobias, Martin Tettenborn, and Silvia Rogler. "Materiality and disclosure quality of identifiable intangible assets: Evidence from Germany." Corporate Ownership and Control 12, no. 2 (2015): 374–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.22495/cocv12i2c3p3.

Full text
Abstract:
This paper examines both the materiality of intangibles and the related disclosure quality under IFRS in the notes of firms on the German benchmark stock index DAX during the four-year period 2008-2011. As proxies, we use the relation of intangibles-to-equity (materiality) and a disclosure index of our design (disclosure quality) that measures both the volume and presentation of information. Furthermore and contrary to the majority of prior studies on the disclosure of intangibles, our index measures disclosure quality itself, and is not restricted to voluntary or mandatory disclosures. In accordance with our predictions, we find in general that intangibles are considerably material, but that the related disclosure quality is low and remains at that low level over the period analyzed. Additionally, both aspects differ widely between firms. Finally, we find support for the hypothesis that management disclosure policies place more emphasis on the amount of information than on its presentation. Our results illustrate and promote the need for the improved regulation of disclosures in the notes, as currently discussed by the major standard setters IASB and FASB
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Alfredson, Keith. "Accounting for Identifiable Intangibles - An Unfinished Standard-Setting Task." Australian Accounting Review 11, no. 25 (November 2001): 12–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2001.tb00184.x.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Gray, Dahli, Monica Jorge, and Laura Rodriguez. "Goodwill Accounting Alternative: Private Versus Non-private Companies." Journal of Social Science Studies 3, no. 1 (October 16, 2015): 159. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/jsss.v3i1.8433.

Full text
Abstract:
<p>This article examines the accounting change effective after December 15, 2015 and illustrates the Goodwill Accounting Alternative available to private companies as introduced by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2014-18 Business Combinations (Topic 805) Accounting for Identifiable Intangible Assets in a Business Combination—a consensus of the Private Company Council (PCC). The measurement and reporting results of private companies are compared with those of public business entities and not-for-profit entities (i.e., non-private companies) for the same in-scope transactions (i.e., acquisitions, assessing fair value under the equity method, and reorganizations). If a private company adopts the FASB ASU 2014-18, then it must also adopt the FASB ASU 2014-02 Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350) Accounting for Goodwill—a consensus of the PCC. This results in the private company amortizing goodwill over 10 or fewer years using the straight-line method. Non-private companies use goodwill impairment testing involving fair value measurements. The illustration presented includes a comparison of the initial and subsequent period measurement and reporting requirements and results and indicates that financial accounting choice can result in a significant monetary difference in the total reported owners’ equity.</p>
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Kimbrough, Michael D. "The Influences of Financial Statement Recognition and Analyst Coverage on the Market's Valuation of R&D Capital." Accounting Review 82, no. 5 (October 1, 2007): 1195–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/accr.2007.82.5.1195.

Full text
Abstract:
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141 (SFAS No. 141)'s requirement that an acquirer in a business combination estimate the fair value of the target's separately identifiable assets and liabilities (including research and development capital) provides a rare occasion where estimated fair values of U.S. firms' research and development (R&D) capital based on private information about their R&D activities are publicly disclosed. The degree to which equity values impound the estimated fair values of R&D depends upon the extent to which the private information implicit in the R&D estimates is reflected in investor expectations. Financial statement recognition of R&D capital and analyst activities have been cited as alternative mechanisms by which private information about firms' R&D activities can be revealed to investors. I investigate the degree to which both mechanisms lead to the public revelation of the private information implicit in the R&D fair value estimates by examining whether financial statement recognition of R&D assets by the target prior to the merger announcement and/or analyst coverage of a target prior to the merger announcement influence the degree to which the target's pre-merger announcement equity value reflects the acquirer's subsequently disclosed estimate of the fair value of the target's R&D capital. I find that the degree to which a target's pre-merger announcement equity value reflects the estimated fair value of its R&D capital is increasing in the amount of R&D-related intangibles captured in the target's pre-merger announcement balance sheets and in the number of analysts covering the target prior to the merger announcement. This evidence is consistent with the notion that both financial statement recognition and analysts' private information search activities lead to the revelation of private information about the value of R&D assets that investors incorporate into equity values. I further find that the positive relation between analyst following and the market's valuation of R&D capital is strongest for the portion of the estimated fair value of R&D capital that is unrecognized by the target prior to the merger announcement. This finding is consistent with analysts filling in the information gap left by the lack of financial statement recognition. The results of this study confirm the theorized roles of financial statement recognition and analyst activities in aiding the market's valuation of intangible assets.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Panasenko, Svetlana Viktorovna, Oksana Sergeevna Karashchuk, Elena Anatolievna Krasilnikova, and Aleksandr Fedorovich Nikishin. "Efficiency evaluation of intangible resources of e-commerce organizations based on cost indicators." Lizing (Leasing), no. 1 (2022): 52–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.33920/vne-03-2201-07.

Full text
Abstract:
The paper substantiates a system of efficiency indicators of intangible resources in e-commerce based on the initial cost indicators. Performance indicators are divided by resource groups, including formalization (identifiable and non-identifiable), and stakeholder groups (owners, organization, suppliers and contact audiences, employees, customers). The scientific novelty of the work lies in the author's addition of already existing indicators for assessing the effectiveness of intangible resources and their adaptation to the fi eld of e-commerce.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Dahmash, Firas N., Robert B. Durand, and John Watson. "The value relevance and reliability of reported goodwill and identifiable intangible assets." British Accounting Review 41, no. 2 (June 2009): 120–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2009.03.002.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Nurnberg, Hugo. "Applying the New Accounting for Business Combinations and Intangible Assets to Partner Admissions." Issues in Accounting Education 29, no. 4 (June 1, 2014): 527–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/iace-50829.

Full text
Abstract:
ABSTRACT A long-standing partnership accounting issue is whether to recognize a bonus or goodwill (or other asset write-ups) upon a partner admission when the incoming partner's net asset contribution differs from his/her capital balance. Although extensively discussed in advanced accounting textbooks, that guidance is nonauthoritative, and the authoritative guidance in the FASB Codification makes almost no mention of partner admissions. This paper discusses how changes in GAAP since 2001 affect the accounting for partner admissions, especially the revised accounting for business combinations and intangible assets. It discusses the circumstances when partner admissions are business combinations. For most partner admissions that are business combinations, the partnership should recognize at fair value the net assets contributed by the incoming partner, including identifiable intangible assets and goodwill. For partner admissions that are reverse acquisitions, the partnership should revalue its own identifiable net assets and goodwill to fair value. Finally, for partner admissions that are not business combinations, the partnership should recognize the net assets contributed by the incoming partner, including identifiable and nonidentifiable intangible assets but not goodwill. Importantly, simple application of the bonus or goodwill methods that are illustrated in textbooks does not conform to GAAP for partner admissions that are business combinations.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Gerhardy, Peter, and Lisa Wyatt. "An Analysis of Corporate Lobbying on Australia's ED 49, Accounting for Identifiable Intangible Assets." Pacific Accounting Review 13, no. 2 (February 2001): 71–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb037961.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Identifiable intangibles"

1

Shahwan, Yousef Said. "The Australian market perception of goodwill and identifiable intangibles." Thesis, View thesis, 2002. http://handle.uws.edu.au:8081/1959.7/782.

Full text
Abstract:
Accounting for goodwill and identifiable intangibles is one of the most controversial issues in financial reporting. It has been on the agenda of the Australian Accounting Standards Board, the US, UK, and the International Accounting Standards Boards, and the Full High Court of Australia. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has also placed accounting for intangibles in its Media Releases directed at specific companies. Evidence suggests that the materiality of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets in corporate statements of financial position for a large number of companies is the reason for the considerable attention given to goodwill and identifiable intangibles. The present study has two objectives. First, it analyses the Australian market perception of goodwill and identifiable intangibles as assets in the determination of the market valuation of companies. Second, it investigates whether the market perceives goodwill and identifiable intangibles as wasting resources when valuing Australian firms. In order to achieve these objectives, the analysis initially develops and estimates a model (the asset-based model) that uses financial position statement items to explain the market value of companies' equity. This model examines the association between reported goodwill and identifiable intangible asset values and companies' market values. Given Ohlson's (1993) argument that companies' market value might be better explained by a model that includes a stock concept of value and a flow concept of earnings, a second model (the asset and income-based model) that incorporates an income variable into the initial model, is then developed and estimated. This model examines the association between the goodwill and identifiable intangible amortisation expense and companies' market values. Evidence suggests that there is a statistically significant negative association between equity market values and write-offs of goodwill, confirming the market perception of write-offs of goodwill as a wasting resource when valuing companies. Evidence also suggests that there is a statistically significant negative association between equity market values and write-offs of identifiable intangibles, at least for the total sample of the present study, providing limited evidence of the market perception of identifiable intangibles as wasting resources when valuing companies. However, the negative and inconsistently significant association between equity market values and write-offs of identifiable intangibles on an annual basis suggests that the relationship may be more complex than traditionally analysed
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Shahwan, Yousef Said. "The Australian market perception of goodwill and identifiable intangibles /." View thesis, 2002. http://library.uws.edu.au/adt-NUWS/public/adt-NUWS20030925.150453/index.html.

Full text
Abstract:
Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Western Sydney, 2002.<br>A thesis presented to the University of Western Sydney in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, June, 2002. Text missing p. 64. Bibliography : leaves 208-221.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Su, W. "Takeover gains and the recognition of identifiable intangible assets." Thesis, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/10453/20400.

Full text
Abstract:
University of Technology, Sydney. Faculty of Business.<br>This thesis investigates a number of issues surrounding the recognition of identifiable intangible assets consequent to business acquisitions in Australia. There is a body of research that evaluates a firm’s decision to allocate acquisition premiums to identifiable intangible assets, rather than goodwill, and this behaviour is commonly labelled opportunistic (e.g. Walker 1989; Woolf 1989; Carlin & Finch 2007). This thesis extends this literature in two ways. First, it evaluates the association between identifiable intangible assets recognised in a business combination and acquisition premiums paid in Australia. Second, it evaluates the relation between amounts recognised as identifiable intangible assets and postacquisition performance. Of particular interest is whether the recognition of identifiable intangible assets encourages ‘overpayment’ and as a consequence is associated with poor post-acquisition performance. This evaluation is also undertaken across periods before and after the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in 2005, which changed the accounting treatments for identifiable intangible assets and goodwill. In the period prior to the transition to IFRS, there is evidence that firms recognising identifiable intangible assets made acquisitions with higher acquisition premiums. However, this did not persist subsequent to the transition to IFRS when the opportunistic incentive to avoid recognising goodwill ceased. There is also evidence of firms recognising identifiable intangible assets reporting poorer post-acquisition performance. These results are consistent with the ability to recognise identifiable intangible assets encouraging overpayment, and firms attempting to obscure this through making opportunistic accounting choices.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Books on the topic "Identifiable intangibles"

1

Board, Financial Accounting Standards. An analysis of issues related to accounting for the impairment of long-lived assets and identifiable intangibles. Norwalk, Cn: FASB, 1990.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Staff, Business Valuation Resources. Benchmarking Identifiable Intangibles and Their Useful Lives in Business Combinations. Business Valuation Resources, LLC, 2021.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Staff, BVR. Benchmarking Identifiable Intangibles and Their Useful Lives in Business Combinations, Second Edition. Business Valuation Resources, 2015.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Board, Financial Accounting Standards, ed. An Analysis of issues related to accounting for the impairment of long-lived assets and identifiable intangibles. Norwalk, Conn: Financial Accounting Standards Board, 1990.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Book chapters on the topic "Identifiable intangibles"

1

Bryan, Dick, Michael Rafferty, and Duncan Wigan. "Intangible Capital." In Global Wealth Chains, 89–113. Oxford University Press, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198832379.003.0005.

Full text
Abstract:
In this chapter, Dick Bryan, Mike Rafferty, and Duncan Wigan trace the increasing significance of intangible capital and outline the analytical challenges this poses for the global wealth chain project and the practical challenges this poses for regulators seeking to gain traction on it. Akin to innovations in finance, intangible capital is driving a historical transformation in both the value composition and the institutional and organizational forms of global capital. The chapter argues that these transformations are changing the nature of production, exchange, and consumption, and relationships between state and capital. Intangible capital is also collapsing categorical distinctions between what is a commodity and what is a financial asset, and between financial and non-financial firms. The chapter illustrates the depth of these transformations by exploring how the management of intellectual property assets has led to the transcendence of tax rules based on valuation by comparison, accrual concepts of liabilities and assets, and readily identifiable ties between legal jurisdictions, economic activity, income streams and assets. Bryan, Rafferty, and Wigan show that while information asymmetries between the regulator and client/supplier are large in hierarchy global wealth chains because of multijurisdictional strategies deployed by firms within corporate structures, they are also large because current regulatory tools are based on outmoded concepts inadequate to capital’s evolving forms.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
You might also be interested in the extended bibliographies on the topic 'Identifiable intangibles' for particular source types:
Journal articles
We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!

To the bibliography