Related Party Transactions and Earnings Management
SSRN Electronic Journal
2005
- 42Citations
- 21,736Usage
- 238Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
In this paper, we investigate whether related party transactions are associated with earnings management. If a firm's executives and/or board members engage in related party transactions to expropriate the firm's resources, then they have incentives to manage earnings either to justify (or increase) these perquisites or possibly to mask such expropriation. An alternative view is that related party transactions rationally fulfill other economic demands of a company, for example, by providing access to in-depth skills and expertise or providing an alternative form of compensation. If this were the case, there would be no incentives to manage earnings since the related party transaction need not be obscured or offset; consequently, we would not expect a relation between earnings management and related party transactions. In our paper, we first provide a comprehensive empirical description of the types of related party transactions in which companies engage and then investigate whether related party transactions are associated with earnings management. We present a description of the number of, the parties involved with, the types of and where available, the dollar amounts of related party transactions for 331 publicly-traded companies in fiscal years 2000 and 2001. In our earnings management tests, we present evidence that adjusted absolute abnormal accruals (our earnings management measure), are positively associated with limited types of transactions such as fixed-rate financing from related parties. Overall, it appears that concerns about related party transactions as a factor associated with earnings management are warranted, but for only certain related party transactions. The mere presence of related party transactions is not necessarily an indication that a firm is likely to engage in greater earnings management.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know