IFRS Taxonomy and Financial Reporting Practices The Case of Italian Listed Companies - 2012 - International Journal of Accounting Information Systems PDF

International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 13 (2012) 163180
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
International Journal of Accounting

Information Systems
IFRS Taxonomy and nancial reporting practices: The case of

Italian listed companies
Diego Valentinetti , Michele A. Rea 1
University G. d'Annunzio of Chieti-Pescara, Faculty of Economics, Department of Economics (DEc), Viale della Pineta,
4-65129 Pescara, Italy
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: XBRL taxonomies have a crucial role in digital nancial reporting. On
Received 28 October 2010 the one hand, they provide a unique set of computer-readable tags to
Received in revised form 2 September 2011 allow the interchange of interactive information. On the other hand, a
Accepted 26 September 2011
systematic, agreed-upon convention for naming each taxonomy tag is
needed. In this context, the IFRS Foundation is playing a relevant role
Keywords:
in developing well-structured taxonomies, which could simulta-
XBRL
neously favor both the interoperability and the homogenization of
IFRS Taxonomy
Taxonomy t
the rms' nancial information at the global level. Due to its impor-
Taxonomy extensions tance, XBRL is being applied in many countries, but according to dif-
Financial reporting in Italy ferent implementation schemas.
In this study, we attempt to verify if the IFRS Taxonomy released by
the IFRS Foundation adequately reects the reporting practices of
the Italian listed companies for which XBRL is not yet required. The
results reveal a general discrepancy between the nancial items dis-
closed by the companies and the taxonomy tags. Specically, we no-
ticed that the nancial statements items are more disaggregated
than the taxonomy tags and that this depends on the sector and the
size of the companies. Unless the XBRL implementation system ex-
plicitly allows companies to use and disclose taxonomy extensions,
a loss of detailed information occurs if the taxonomy is applied.
2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Corporate nancial reporting is undergoing important changes. On the one hand, the widespread dif-
fusion of the Internet as a means for sharing information has established a new technology-based method
for nancial reporting. On the other hand, the ongoing development of global accounting standards aims
Corresponding author. Tel.: + 39 347 8425306; fax: + 39 085 45083 208.

E-mail addresses: d.valentinetti@unich.it (D. Valentinetti), m.rea@unich.it (M.A. Rea).
1
Tel.: + 39 085 45083 223; fax: + 39 085 45083 208.
1467-0895/$ see front matter 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.accinf.2011.09.001
164 D. Valentinetti, M.A. Rea / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 13 (2012) 163180
to reach the international standardization of the corporate nancial information. XBRL (eXtensible Business
Reporting Language) seems to be the best solution to join these issues. Since its introduction, the primary
scope of XBRL has been to facilitate sharing of business information through different platforms and appli-
cations to provide interoperability. Additionally, the worldwide application of XBRL-based taxonomies
allows further standardization and harmonization of international business reporting standards and,
in particular, the standardization of the format and content of nancial information (Wagenhofer,
2003; Premuroso and Bhattacharya, 2008).
Despite the general knowledge and increasing interest in the benets of XBRL for business communi-
cation (Amrhein et al., 2009; Bonsn et al., 2009a; Hu et al., 2010; Marshall et al., 2010; Peng and Janie
Chang, 2010; Roohani et al., 2010; Yan et al., 2010; Baldwin and Trinkle, 2011; Yoon et al., 2011; Alles
et al., in press), it is still unclear what the potential impacts of XBRL are on the quality of nancial infor-
mation. In particular, from an accounting perspective, it is important to explore the degree of XBRL com-
pliance with accounting standards and reporting practices of the rms. Three main empirical studies
consider this issue, assessing the t between XBRL taxonomies and nancial reporting concepts. Bovee
et al. (2002) assessed how well the year 2000 version of the XBRL taxonomy for nancial reporting by
commercial and industrial (C&I) rms under U.S. GAAP accommodates current reporting practices of pub-
lic companies. The results show, on average, a good t with some signicant differences in exceptions
across nancial statements and industries, suggesting the need to develop industry-specic taxonomy ex-
tensions. Bonsn et al. (2009b) analyzed whether the IFRS-GP Taxonomy adequately covers European
companies reporting practices. Their ndings show that the taxonomy largely covers the account items
disclosed by the sample companies, even if some deviations occur, particularly in the nancial and insur-
ance sectors and in the Statement of Changes in Equity. Recently, Valentinetti and Rea (2011) assessed the
Italian GAAP Taxonomy released for XBRL mandatory ling in Italy and found an almost perfect t with a
sample of nancial statements from non-listed companies. The degree of mist, when it occurs, depends
on the sector and the size of the companies.
These previous studies belong to some institutional backgrounds with different characteristics. Both the
US GAAP and the IFRS Taxonomy are inspired by principle-based standards, which offer guidelines, not specic
rules. In this case, the analysis of the mist represents a suggestion for further evolution of the taxonomies. In
contrast, the Italian GAAP Taxonomy is inspired by template-based standards. In this case, the mist indicates
not only a possible evolution for the taxonomy but also a way to assess how companies are applying the
reporting requirements. Another key feature concerns the XBRL implementation processes adopted (or to
be adopted) in each case. In particular, two main models can be identied that depend on the role that reg-
ulatory bodies play in the adoption of the standard (Bonsn et al., 2009c): active push adopted for Spanish
listed companies and Italian non-listed companies is when companies are allowed to use a standard taxon-
omy on a blind basis without the possibility of disclosing voluntary items; non-active push adopted by the
SEC in the USA , is when each company tags its own information with the possibility of extending and dis-
closing the standard taxonomy for the voluntary items. This is a crucial factor to be considered because the
adopted implementation schema should consider the amount and the nature of the mist between the
XBRL taxonomies and the reporting practices of the rms. The degree of mist, in fact, indicates the potential
loss of information or, alternatively, the potential extensions to be applied by the rms depending on the
XBRL implementation model: active push or non-active push.
Based on this rationale, this study attempts to verify if the IFRS Taxonomy released by the IFRS Foun-
dation adequately reects the reporting practices of the Italian listed companies and then to provide useful
suggestions for implementing the IFRS Taxonomy in Italy. Currently, only non-listed companies must sub-
mit their nancial statements in XBRL format according to the Italian GAAP Taxonomy, 2 but the intention
is to expand this requirement to the listed companies, which have to le nancial statements according to
the IFRSs. 3 In this context, we think that this study could be interesting and useful for Italian institutions
2
For further information, see http://www.xbrl.org/it/nmpxbrl.aspx?id=271.
3
The original rule released by the Italian Government (Law No. 248 of August 4, 2006) proposed the adoption of XBRL for the an-
nual deposit of nancial statement documents drawn by all the limited companies. Subsequently, a Prime Minister Decree required,
as a rst stage of enforcement, the mandatory ling of annual reports in XBRL format only for the limited companies that do not
apply the International Financial Reporting Standards, that is the non-listed companies (Prime Minister Decree of December 10,
2008). Hence, according to these rules, the application of XBRL will be required also for the IFRS compliant nancial statements that
are disclosed by the listed companies.
D. Valentinetti, M.A. Rea / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 13 (2012) 163180 165
voluntary Misfit Extensions
Disclosure type
items
compulsory
items
PDF XBRL
Format
Fig. 1. Document formats and accounting items.
and, more broadly, for the academic community and XBRL users. Furthermore, on April 8, 2011, the IFRS
Foundation announced that it would publish supplementary tags for the IFRS Taxonomy to reect disclo-
sures that are commonly reported by entities in their IFRS nancial statements. 4 Hence, the results of this
study provide additional feedback for the IFRS Foundation to enhance the IFRS Taxonomy to reect com-
mon reporting practices across the world and across industries.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Section 2 provides a background on XBRL taxon-
omies and leads to the research question. Section 3 sets out the research method and the results obtained.
The last section discusses the implications of the results and suggests directions for future research.
2. Background and research question
In the academic literature, three main theories are most commonly used to explain company disclo-
sures: agency theory, which argues that a company disseminates information as a way for management
to justify its actions to the shareholders and correct the asymmetry of information between the two
groups; signaling theory, which explains the disclosures as a means to distinguish the company from its
competitors; and institutional theory, which is perceived as a complement and provides additional expla-
nations for the specic case of Internet disclosure as a government mandate, as the imitation of early
adopters, as the search for legitimacy or as pressure from capital providers (Xiao et al., 2004). In the nan-
cial reporting context, companies use annual reports as a traditional and exible instrument to publish a
mix of compulsory and voluntary accounting items. These annual reports are traditionally delivered in a
standard human readable format, but, considering the actual relevance of the Internet environment, com-
panies need to evolve from the traditional document formats (such as the PDF or the HTML) to a new, so-
phisticated format able to improve information location and retrieval (Debreceny and Gray, 2001; Ghani
et al., 2009). As shown in Fig. 1, a loss of interactive data can occur if companies decide to disclose volun-
tary information using traditional formats. This loss of interoperability can be identied, according to pre-
vious studies, as mist (Bovee et al., 2002; Bonsn et al., 2009b). In contrast, companies can take
advantage of XBRL thanks to its extensibility. The IFRS Foundation states that creating an extension of
the IFRS Taxonomy has two key advantages for receiving institutions. First, it reduces maintenance costs
when making updates following changes in IFRSs. Secondly, if more entities extend the IFRS Taxonomy,
4
For further information, see http://www.ifrs.org/News/XBRL/Taxonomy+common+practice.htm.
this then provides greater interoperability of nancial information and therefore increased transparency
in nancial markets (IFRSFoundation, 2009). In light of this situation, XBRL represents a useful support
for companies to increase their transparency levels and preserve the interoperability of their nancial
reports.
Two relevant research lines can be identied in the academic literature on XBRL taxonomies: the XBRL
technical advantages for representing and transmitting nancial data and the role of XBRL taxonomies in
promoting the use of a global GAAP.
Regarding the rst research line, XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language) is identied as a com-
puter meta-language for business reporting of rms. Based on XML (eXtensible Markup Language), its goal
is to enhance the sharing of business information through a system of tagging, that is, through the pro-
cess of assigning XBRL tags to nancial data. The logical structure of XBRL relies on two main concepts:
the taxonomy, which is a hierarchy of elements (i.e., items) used for tagging the data, and the instance
document, which is the document that contains the business facts tagged in XBRL. Taxonomies, which
allow data codication into XBRL format, play a relevant role. Each tag, in fact, provides contextual infor-
mation about the data, which can be recognized, selected and presented in customized formats. In this
sense, the XBRL taxonomies are the necessary core elements that will lead the future of digital nancial
reporting of rms because the extent of information retrievable from XBRL instance documents depends
on the taxonomies used for tagging the data. According to the methods of approaching XBRL proposed
by Doolin and Troshani (2004), many previous studies analyzed this particular aspect of XBRL as a stan-
dard, that is, as XBRL taxonomy development. Debreceny et al. (2005) explain a series of research impli-
cations in the development of XBRL taxonomies, including the completeness of taxonomies, the factors
determining the adequacy of standard taxonomies and the role of extensions to the standard taxonomies.
Baldwin et al. (2006) discuss the potential impacts of XBRL on the quality of nancial information in terms
of a series of relevant characteristics proposed by the FASB: consistency and comparability, reliability and
accessibility, relevance, decision usefulness and transparency (FASB, 1980). They argue that the quality of
nancial information could be improved through well-dened standard taxonomies and a radical increase
in the degree of automation made possible by those taxonomies. Similarly, Debreceny et al. (2010) recog-
nize that the design and complexity of taxonomies can impact the data quality of instance documents.
Other studies (Boritz and No, 2003; Cohen et al., 2003; Lymer and Debreceny, 2003; Boritz and No,
2008; Plumlee and Plumlee, 2008; Boritz and No, 2009; Srivastava and Kogan, 2010a, 2010b; Trites,
2010; White, 2010) focus on the problem of data quality, considering the role of taxonomies for assurance
on XBRL nancial reporting. In particular, Srivastava and Kogan (2010a) propose a conceptual framework
of assertions for providing assurance on XBRL instance documents. Four of these assertions concern the
taxonomies: the choice of appropriate XBRL taxonomies for drawing instance documents (Proper Taxon-
omies); the compliance of taxonomy extensions with all rules of XML and XBRL (Valid Taxonomy Exten-
sions); the appropriate introduction of new elements in XBRL taxonomy extensions (Proper Extension
Elements); and the appropriateness of linkbases in XBRL taxonomy extensions (Proper Linkbases). Final-
ly, Alles et al. (in press) analyze the role of taxonomies and the way in which tagged data are rendered to
answer the question of whether XBRL takes full advantage of its potential to improve governance decision
making.
In the second research line, a key point of XBRL development for nancial reporting is the standardiza-
tion of nancial information. Chang and Jarvenpaa (2005) argue that XBRL is expected to become the
global data standard for nancial statement information over the Internet. According to Premuroso and
Bhattacharya (2008), XBRL allows regulators to further the standardization and harmonization of interna-
tional business reporting standards. Similarly, Wagenhofer (2003) states that the widespread adoption of
XBRL will standardize both the format and the content of nancial information. Based on this assumption,
some authors acknowledge the relevant role of XBRL taxonomies for standardizing nancial reporting.
According to Wagenhofer (2003), XBRL usage could increase the pressure on companies to report under
a single GAAP worldwide. He also states that a common base taxonomy (like the IFRS Taxonomy) could
be an optimum solution for cross-sectional comparability of nancial reports. Bonsn (2001) analyzes
the role of XBRL in the European Union in conjunction with the adoption of the International Accounting
Standards (IAS). He states that having a unique framework for nancial reporting allows the denition of a
standard XBRL taxonomy, which includes a unique set of element names and a different set of element la-
bels for each language. It also allows the use of alternative accounting valuation methods allowed by the
XBRL Status (XBRL Status (IFRS

IFRS Taxonomy version Release date Description
specification International) Foundation)
Based on IFRSs issued up to 31

December 2008 (ie 2008 Bound
IFRS Taxonomy 2009 2 April 2009 2.1 Approved Final
Volume), including disclosures for
banking and similar institutions
Fig. 2. The IFRS Taxonomy (2009).
IAS. In summary, the application of XBRL in conjunction with the worldwide movement toward the IFRSs
is expected to facilitate a better quality of nancial reporting at the global level (Efendi et al., 2009).
In this context, the IFRS Foundation is playing a relevant role to develop well-structured taxonomies,
which could favor both the homogenization and the interoperability of nancial information. According
to the IFRS Foundation website, 5 the IFRS Taxonomy is the XBRL representation of the IFRSs, including In-
ternational Accounting Standards (IASs) and Interpretations, as issued by the IASB in the annual Bound
Volume of IFRSs. However, the taxonomy cannot ignore the reporting needs of rms that have to properly
tag each concept in their nancial accounts. In this sense, a taxonomy should be able to accommodate -
nancial reporting practices to meet user demands at the country, industry or rm level (Debreceny and
Gray, 2001; Bovee et al., 2005; Debreceny et al., 2005; Baldwin et al., 2006).
In summary, XBRL can represent an additional support for companies to increase their transparency
levels and, moreover, the interoperability and efciency of their nancial information. Two conditions
should be considered to benet from this standard. First, the XBRL taxonomy should present a satisfactory
level of quality in the sense that it should reect as much as possible the reality of corporate reporting: any
possible mist should be analyzed. Second, it is worth seeing whether the XBRL national implementation
process allows companies to become familiar with the standard and become proactive in generating pri-
vate extensions for the general taxonomy and the creation of their own XBRL instances. If the level of mis-
t is relevant, the XBRL ofcial ler should admit the submission of such extended taxonomies along with
the instances and make them public, which currently happens in the US with the SEC ling program. Oth-
erwise, companies that, according to the theory, are prone to disclose as much information as possible, will
tend to use PDF complementary les to increase their transparency, leading to a subsequent loss of inter-
operability and efciency for the information's nal users.
On the basis of this framework, the Italian stock market represents a good scenario for an interesting
ex-ante analysis, as the current situation is as follows:
Italy has a permanent XBRL jurisdiction 6;

XBRL is mandatory for non-listed companies;
Italian listed companies must present their nancial information according to the IFRS accepted by the
EU;
the Italian XBRL Jurisdiction is planning to extend the IFRS Taxonomy for the nancial reporting of
listed companies; and
currently, there is no XBRL compulsory or voluntary ling program in Italy for listed companies (Fig. 2).
The Italian stock market and institutions can benet from the previous experiences of countries like
Spain or the US, where XBRL is mandatory for listed companies and where different XBRL implementation
processes have been adopted. This study suggests some possible extensions of the IFRS Taxonomy for cer-
tain companies and, furthermore, investigates which implementation model could be more useful in the
Italian situation. Specically, we assessed the nal version of the IFRS Taxonomy (2009) released by the
IFRS Foundation on the basis of the 2008 IFRS Bound Volume (Fig. 5). In light of this issue, we can state
the following research question:
5
See http://www.ifrs.org/XBRL/IFRS+Taxonomy/IFRS+Taxonomy.htm.
6
See http://www.xbrl.org/it/.
RQ: Does the IFRS Taxonomy adequately reect the nancial reporting practices of Italian listed
companies?
This question addresses implications for nancial reporting. First, we think a good t could favor the
adoption of the taxonomy itself and, more broadly, of XBRL. In contrast, a poor t could lead to resistance
to using the taxonomy, which risks negating anticipated rm or information-user benets (Bovee et al.,
2002).
Second, analyzing the extent of the mist is useful because it helps regulators choose the best solution
regarding the implementation process to be adopted.
Third, the degree of mist signals the different levels of the companies' desired reporting practices. In
fact, it is expected that the distance between the taxonomy and the information provided by the compa-
nies depends on their particular characteristics. For this reason, we formulated some hypotheses to discov-
er which factors can explain the degree of mist.
According to institutional theory, companies belonging to the same sector prefer to adopt similar
reporting practices to acquire legitimacy and a particular corporate image related to their specic environ-
ment. Additionally, political theory and signaling theory suggest an industry effect on corporate disclosure.
On the one hand, in fact, the vulnerability of a rm can be affected by its industry membership, where
rms belonging to the same sector are prone to adopt the same disclosure levels. On the other hand, if a
rm does not follow the reporting practices of its industry, this could be viewed as a negative signal to
the markets, that is, as a way to hide bad news. Several empirical studies conrm that the industry sector
affects the amount of information provided by the companies (Armenic and Maiocco, 1981; Bazley et al.,
1985; Bonsn and Escobar, 2002; 2006). Additionally, all previous studies on the XBRL taxonomy mist
show a signicant impact of the sector (Bovee et al., 2002; Bonsn et al., 2009b; Valentinetti and Rea,
2011). On this basis, the rst hypothesis can be stated:
H1. The level of mist between the IFRS Taxonomy and the reporting practices of Italian listed compa-
nies depends on the sectors.
To represent the different industrial sectors to which the companies belong, seventeen dichotomous
variables have been created according to the Industry Classication Benchmark (ICB) system. 7 The variables
are: Automobiles & Parts, Banks, Construction & Materials, Financial services, Food & Beverage, Health
Care, Industrial Goods & Services, Insurance, Media, Oil & Gas, Personal & Household Goods, Real Estate,
Retail, Technology, Telecommunications, Travel & Leisure and Utilities. Each variable takes 1 if the compa-
ny belongs to that sector, 0 if not.
On the basis of agency theory, larger companies tend to disclosure more information, as this practice can
reduce agency costs due to the conicting interests of shareholders and managers. According to signaling the-
ory, larger companies are incentivized to disclose more information to signal their quality to the stakeholders
and the markets. Furthermore, larger rms can reduce political costs, due to their high visibility, by means of
improved disclosures. A positive relationship between the size of the company and the extent of nancial dis-
closure has been found by many empirical studies (Chow and Wong-Boren, 1987; Cooke, 1989; Lang and
Lundholm, 1993; Mckinnon and Dalimunthe, 1993; Aitken et al., 1997; Botosan, 1997; Adams and Hossain,
1998; Craven and Marston, 1999; Craven and Otsmani, 1999; Debreceny et al., 2002). Additionally, the size
of the company is positively associated with the degree of mist noticed between the Italian GAAP Taxonomy
and the reporting practices of Italian non-listed companies (Valentinetti and Rea, 2011), a rm's decision to
be an early and voluntary ler of nancial information in XBRL format (Premuroso and Bhattacharya,
2008) and the reduction of information asymmetry for the XBRL adoption in the Korean stock market
(Yoon et al., 2011). On this basis, the second hypothesis can be stated:
nies depends on the size.
7
ICB is a detailed and comprehensive structure for sector and industry analysis, facilitating the comparison of companies across
four levels of classication and national boundaries. The system allocates companies to the Subsector whose denition most closely
describes the nature of its business. The nature of a company's business is determined by its source of revenue or where it constitutes
the majority of revenue. See http://www.icbenchmark.com/index.html.
The value of the logarithm of Total Assets, Log(TOTAL ASSETS), is considered a proxy for the size of the
companies.
In light of agency theory, larger audit rms are prone to force companies to apply more stringent
and extensive disclosure standards. In particular, they require companies to disclose as much informa-
tion as possible to reduce possible litigation costs due to the absence of information. The relationship
between the type of audit and the levels of company disclosure is demonstrated in several empirical
studies (Craswell and Taylor, 1992; Wallace et al., 1994; Wallace and Naser, 1995; Inchausti, 1997;
Camfferman and Cooke, 2002). On this basis, the third hypothesis can be tested:
nies depends on the type of audit.
A dichotomous variable (AUDIT_BIG4) has been created to distinguish the companies audited by one of
the Big 4 auditing rms (=1) from the companies audited by other auditors (=0).
Following the previous study of Valentinetti and Rea (2011), it is interesting to consider that the mist
actually represents a voluntary deviation from the set of compulsory items and that this deviation can con-
sist of a more disaggregated set of accounting items, which means more information available, or, by con-
trast, a constraint or aggregation of items that represents an absolute loss of information. Hence, it is
necessary to consider the interaction between the tendency to provide more disaggregated information
and the tendency to provide less disaggregated information. On this basis, the fourth hypothesis can be
stated:
H4. The practice of disclosing information more disaggregated than the taxonomy for certain items is
negatively associated with the practice of disclosing information less disaggregated for other items.
Two variables were created to consider the level of mist of information 8 (Valentinetti and Rea, 2011):
Disaggregated_PROP, which represents the proportion of nancial statement accounts more disaggre-
gated than the IFRS Taxonomy items;
Constricted_PROP, which represents the proportion of nancial statement accounts less disaggregated
than the IFRS Taxonomy items.
3. Research method
3.1. Sample
The analysis was conducted on a sample of limited companies quoted on the Italian Stock Exchange on
December 31, 2008. We randomly selected 89 companies listed on the MTA 9 (in Italian, Telematic Stock
Market), which represents the main nancial market of Italian Stock Exchange. Table 1 shows the compo-
sition of the sample by industry according to the Industry Classication Benchmark (ICB) system.
The companies' annual reports were downloaded from the Italian Stock Exchange website (www.
borsaitaliana.it). We retrieved the separate nancial statements drawn up according to IFRS by each com-
pany, which contain the Balance Sheet, the Income Statement, the Statement of Cash Flows and the State-
ment of Changes in Equity. All documents (in PDF format) were printed individually to preserve the
original formatting of each nancial statement.
3.2. Tagging process
We conducted a two-step analysis. The rst step veried if the taxonomy adequately reects the com-
panies' reporting practices. For this purpose, each item in the nancial statements was compared with the
8
How we calculated the proportions is explained in the next section.
9
MTA is the Italian Market where shares, convertible bonds, warrants and option rights are traded. It is dedicated to mid and
large size companies that meet the best international standards. MTA supports companies in raising domestic and international -
nancing from institutional and professional investors on one side and from retail investors on other side, and it has always registered
high liquidity performances. Companies are admitted to MTA on the basis of both formal and substantial requirements. See http://
www.borsaitaliana.it/azioni/mercati/mta/mta-mercato-telematico-azionario.en.htm.
Table 1
Distribution of the sample by industry.
Industry No. of companies
Automobiles & Parts 4

Banks 11
Construction & Materials 3
Financial services 3
Food & Beverage 4
Health Care 2
Industrial Goods & Services 18
Insurance 6
Media 5
Oil & Gas 1
Personal & Household Goods 9
Real Estate 1
Retail 2
Technology 7
Telecommunications 3
Travel & Leisure 2
Utilities 8
Total 89
XBRL elements of the IFRS Taxonomy. Specically, we assigned an appropriate XBRL tag to each nancial
concept reported in the nancial statements, and the deviations were collected as Elements for Special At-
tention (ESA). This variable indicates the number of nancial statements items that do not have a direct
correspondence in the taxonomy (Bovee et al., 2002; Bonsn et al., 2009b). Accordingly, the semantic re-
lationship between the taxonomy items and the nancial statement items was considered. When the
same accounting concept simply appeared with different labels, no ESA was registered. A positive value
indicates the absolute number of mists noticed, while a value of zero indicates a perfect t (no mist no-
ticed). Then the ESA variable was divided by the total number of line items comprising each nancial
statement. The new variable obtained (PROP) describes the degree of mist between the taxonomy and
the nancial statements analyzed (i.e., the degree of the taxonomy coverage of the rms' reporting
practices).
The second step of the study analyzed the nature of each mist noticed. In particular, when a statement
item does not correspond to taxonomy tags, there are two basic outcomes: no tag for the statement item
exists, or tags exist but the item can be mapped to two or more child tags that do not belong to the same
parent. In the rst case, if there are sufcient occurrences (more than two cases in two or more different
industries) of the same (or similar) line item without matching taxonomy tags, there may be a case for a
new tag. Less frequently occurring line items without taxonomy tags may simply be idiosyncratic to a sin-
gle rm (only one or two cases) or industry (more than two cases but in the same industry). In the second
case, depending on how the company with the non-corresponding tag chooses to deal with it, the situa-
tion can create a lack of disaggregation or a lack of comparability. On this basis, we cataloged the ESA col-
lected into three groups (Bovee et al., 2002):
new tag items, that is, the nancial statements items for which a taxonomy tag does not exist but argu-
ably should, as several companies in different industries introduced these new items into their PDFs. An
example of this type of ESA is represented by the Gross operating income and Net operating income
accounts, which have been retrieved in almost every Income Statement analyzed. Further accounts
not provided by the taxonomy are Legal reserve and Extraordinary reserve, which are commonly dis-
closed both in the Balance Sheet and in the Statement of Changes in Equity. A comprehensive list of the
New Tags retrieved is provided in Appendix A.
rm specic items, which are the nancial statement items containing rm or industry specic detail. For
example, Premuda SpA provides the accounts Vessels and Vessels under construction in its Balance
Sheet. Such items clearly reect the particular activity of the company as a shipping operator in maritime
transport. Other examples are found in the Statements of Cash Flow of Gemina SpA, where some items
refer to specic relationships with third parties (such as Sale of shareholding in Elilario and 3 Italia and
Table 2
Descriptive statistics of ESA and PROP per rm.
N Mean Std. deviation Minimum Maximum
ESA per rm 89 75.39 51.38 31 283

PROP per rm 89 0.5036 0.1244 0.3166 0.9064
Additional charges for disposal of the shareholding which directly reduce the capital gains disposal of the
shareholding in Elilario). Further examples of the rm specic items retrieved are provided in Appendix B.
grouped items, that is, the nancial statements items mapped to several taxonomy tags. The account (In-
vestment in) disposals of Property, plant and equipment retrieved from the Statement of Cash Flow of
MondoTV SpA, for example, maps to two taxonomy items: Purchase of property, plant and equipment
and Proceeds from sales of property, plant and equipment. Additionally, in its Income Statement, the
same company directly discloses the account Net nancial income (expense) without the subdivision
into Finance income and Finance costs as suggested by the IFRS Taxonomy. Appendix C shows the
most common Grouped items retrieved.
It is clear that the Firm specic and the New tags ESA signal the number of items more disaggregated
than the taxonomy tags, while the Grouped ESA signals the number of items less disaggregated than the
taxonomy tags. Once the corresponding PROPs were calculated from the three type of ESA, we calculated
two new variables (as mentioned in the previous section), combining the New tags and the Firm specic
items as Disaggregated_PROP and leaving the Grouped Items as Constricted_PROP. The variables are
dened by the following formulas:
Firm Specific New Tags

DisPROP
Total items
Grouped items
ConstrPROP
Total items
To manage the IFRS Taxonomy in a human readable format, we used The IFRS Taxonomy Illustrated 10
(IFRSFoundation, 2009). Specically, we downloaded the IFRS Taxonomy organized according to nancial
statements in Italian, released by the IFRS Foundation on 17 November 2009. One person performed the
tagging process to provide a high degree of consistency. All headings, totals and subtotals disclosed on
the nancial statements were considered. Any items with amounts equal to zero were considered only
if they had a value other than zero in the previous year.
3.3. Results
Descriptive statistics of ESA and PROP per rm (Table 2) show the presence of mist, since both vari-
ables have positive values. Specically, the mean of the PROP per rm (50.36%) ags a relevant degree of
mist between the taxonomy and the nancial accounts of rms. Furthermore, if we analyze the PROP
considering the nancial statements in which they are detected (Table 3), we notice the highest degree
of mist for the Statement of Changes in Equity (63.53%), followed by the Income Statement (57.39%),
the Statement of Cash Flows (45.53%) and the Balance Sheet (41.30%).
10
According to the IFRS Foundation, The IFRS Taxonomy Illustrated presents a simplied view of the IFRS Taxonomy in an easy to
read, visual format that does not require knowledge of XBRL. It has been specially prepared for accountants, auditors and those
wanting a comprehensive overview of the structure and content of the IFRS Taxonomy, in order to promote understanding of the
Taxonomy and assist with preparing IFRS nancial reports in XBRL format. The IFRS Taxonomy Illustrated sets out the hierarchy of
the Taxonomy and the elements within it (which represent IFRS disclosure requirements), the required format of these elements
(such as text, monetary values, etc.), and the IFRSs and IASs that these elements relate to. See http://www.ifrs.org/XBRL/
Resources/IFRS+Taxonomy+Illustrated.htm.
Table 3
Descriptive statistics of PROP per nancial statement.
PROP per BS 89 0.4130 0.1574 0.1070 0.8870

PROP per IS 89 0.5739 0.1685 0.2500 0.9460
PROP per SCF 89 0.4553 0.1222 0.1520 0.8750
PROP per SCE 89 0.6353 0.1126 0.3330 0.8930
To answer the research question, we can state that the IFRS Taxonomy (2009) does not fully reect the
current reporting practices of Italian listed companies. Particularly, the Statement of Changes in Equity
presents the highest degree of mist.
The second step of the study more clearly explained the type of mist that occurred. As Table 4 shows,
there is a clear prevalence of New tags, followed by Firm specic and Grouped items. That is to say, nancial
reporting items are more disaggregated than taxonomy items. This evidence is conrmed when the ESA
and the PROP are viewed by type and nancial statement (Tables 5 and 6), where there is a clear preva-
lence of New tags and Firm specic items for all nancial statements, while Grouped items are less relevant.
The analysis performed using descriptive statistics suggests that a mist exists, is relevant and consists
of a higher level of disaggregation in the accounting items. On the basis of this evidence, we have per-
formed a multiple regression model considering the general level of disaggregate mist (Dis_PROP) as a
dependent variable. Then, on the basis of the explanatory variable identied in the background section,
the model is dened as follows:
Dis PROPi 1 Automobiles & Parts 2 Banks

3 Construction & Materials 4 Financial services
5 Food & Beverage 6 Health Care 7 Industrial Goods & Services
8 Insurance 9 Media 10 Oil & Gas
11 Personal & Household Goods 12 Real Estate 13 Retail
14 Technology 15 Telecommunications
16 Travel & Leisure 17 Utilities 18 logTOTAL ASSETS
19 AUDIT BIG4 20 Constr PROP
where:
i denotes the rms,

1 to 17 denote the coefcients associated with the sectors,
18 denotes the coefcient associated with the size of the companies,
19 denotes the coefcient associated with the type of audit
20 denotes the coefcient associated with the Constricted PROP
Table 7 shows the model's results. The value of the R 2 indicates that the variables Insurance, Financial
services, Log(TOTAL ASSETS) and Constr_PROP explain 65.77% of the variation of Dis_PROP (Prob F-
statistic = 0). According to the background, the rst hypothesis can be accepted since the Insurance and
the Financial services sectors have a positive and signicant relation with the dependent variable
(4 = 0.3685; 8 = 0.8361); that is, companies belonging to those sectors tend to disclose more
Table 4
Descriptive statistics of ESA and PROP per type.
ESA_Firm specic 89 31.47 47.15 0 218

ESA _Grouped 89 7.17 2.68 2 14
ESA _New Tag 89 36.75 16.52 11 107
PROP_Firm specic 89 0.1796 0.1866 0.0000 0.7032
PROP_Grouped 89 0.0543 0.0232 0.0128 0.1215
PROP_New Tag 89 0.2698 0.1006 0.0728 0.5602
Table 5
ESA per type and nancial statement.
Balance Sheet Income Statement Statement of Cash Flows Statement of Changes in Equity Totals
Firm specic 906 1107 546 242 2801

Grouped 260 70 293 15 638
New tag 893 535 640 1203 3271
Totals 2059 1712 1479 1460 6710
Table 6
PROP per type and nancial statement (means).
Balance Sheet Income Statement Statement of Cash Flows Statement of Changes in Equity
Firm specic 0.1550 0.2945 0.1465 0.0955

Grouped 0.0628 0.0387 0.0984 0.0071
New tag 0.1951 0.2407 0.2104 0.5326
disaggregated information than the items comprising the IFRS Taxonomy. Regarding the size of the com-
panies, the second hypothesis can be accepted. Specically, the variable, log(TOTAL ASSETS), has a positive
and signicant relation with the dependent variable (18 = 0.0778). The fourth hypothesis can also be ac-
cepted. The variable, Constr_PROP, in fact, has a negative and signicant association with the Dis_PROP
(20 = 6.9291). This result conrms that the practice of adding of certain items contrasts with the prac-
tice of grouping other items. Other relationships are not relevant.
Following this rst model, we applied the same regression model for each nancial statement to verify
which factors affect the mist noted in each. According to the results obtained (Table 8), we observe that:
the Dis_PROP of the Balance Sheet (R 2 = 57.85%) is positively associated with the Insurance sector
(8 = 0.3748) and the size (18 = 0.0226) and negatively associated with the Constr_PROP of Balance
Sheet (20 = 0.7318);
the Dis_PROP of Income Statement (R 2 = 61.57%) is positively associated with the Financial services sec-
tor (4 = 0.1651), the Insurance sector (8 = 0.2439) and the size (18 = 0.0215) and negatively associ-
ated with the Constr_PROP of the Income Statement (20 = 1.9932);
the Dis_PROP of the Statement of Cash Flow (R 2 = 49.02%) is also positively associated with the Financial
services sector (4 = 0.1398), the Insurance sector (8 = 0.2047) and the size (18 = 0.0163) and nega-
tively associated with the Constr_PROP of the Statement of Cash Flow (20 = 0.8367);
the Dis_PROP of the Statement of Changes in Equity (R 2 = 11.88%) is positively associated with the In-
surance sector (8 = 0.0961) and the size of the companies (18 = 0.0112).
Table 7
Multiple regression model with Dis_PROP.
Variable Coefcient Std. error t-Statistic Prob.
Dependent variable: Dis_PROP

Method: least squares
Sample: 1 89
Included observations: 89
C 1.630856 0.126573 12.88469 0.0000
Insurance 0.836103 0.129094 6.476693 0.0000
Financial services 0.368554 0.169113 2.179340 0.0321
log(TOT_ASSETS) 0.077886 0.013370 5.825380 0.0000
Constr_PROP 6.929117 1.375602 5.037154 0.0000
R-squared 0.657711 F-statistic 40.35174
Adjusted R-squared 0.641412 Prob(F-statistic) 0.000000
Table 8
Multiple regression models with Dis_PROP per nancial statement.
Variable Coefcient Std. error t-Statistic Prob.
Dependent variable: Dis_PROP of Balance Sheet

Sample: 1 89
C 0.211989 0.036307 5.838828 0.0000
Insurance 0.374805 0.046439 8.070847 0.0000
log(TOT_ASSETS) 0.022611 0.005169 4.374686 0.0000
Constr_PROP of BS 0.731879 0.306115 2.390861 0.0190
Dependent variable: Dis_PROP of Income Statement

Sample: 1 89
C 0.438532 0.048920 8.964184 0.0000
Insurance 0.243993 0.054452 4.480915 0.0000
log(TOT_ASSETS) 0.021593 0.006001 3.598185 0.0005
Constr_PROP of IS 1.993237 0.317531 6.277295 0.0000
Dependent variable: Dis_PROP of Statement of Cash Flow

Sample: 1 89
C 0.306116 0.039583 7.733600 0.0000
Insurance 0.204728 0.043022 4.758702 0.0000
log(TOT_ASSETS) 0.016305 0.004641 3.513230 0.0007
Constr_PROP of SCF 0.836787 0.177682 4.709479 0.0000
Dependent variable: Dis_PROP of Statement of Changes in Equity

Sample: 1 89
C 0.542786 0.036871 14.72138 0.0000
Insurance 0.096115 0.047216 2.035652 0.0449
log(TOT_ASSETS) 0.011229 0.005063 2.217993 0.0292
4. Discussion and conclusion
Considering XBRL as a standard (Doolin and Troshani, 2004) leads us to focus on taxonomy develop-
ment for standardizing corporate nancial reporting. In this context, the IFRS Taxonomy has a key role be-
cause it could simultaneously favor both the homogenization and the interoperability of nancial
information. In this study, we assessed the t between the IFRS Taxonomy (2009) and the nancial report-
ing practices of the Italian listed companies. The results suggest some implications.
First, the high degree of mist reveals a general discrepancy between the nancial items disclosed by
the companies and the taxonomy tags, despite both of them belonging to IFRS. This evidence conrms the
potential mismatch that can occur when a standard taxonomy is applied in a real context. Specically, the
IFRS Taxonomy is the XBRL representation of the IFRSs, which consist of a set of principle-based standards
offering guidelines for nancial reporting, but not specic rules. In this sense, this study demonstrated
that, effectively, there is a relevant distance between the IFRS Taxonomy (2009) and the nancial report-
ing practices of Italian listed companies.
Second, regarding the type of mist, the prevalence of Firm specic and New tag ESA explains that the rms
usually provide nancial information more disaggregated than the IFRS Taxonomy. If the taxonomy is applied,
a signicant potential loss of interoperable information could occur, as companies will tend to use comple-
mentary PDFs to disclose those voluntary accounting items. In this context, rms can adopt two alternative
solutions. They can use the taxonomy as written without any changes, which achieves complete data compa-
rability but causes a loss of detailed information, or they can create custom items to extend the taxonomy. In
this case, the desired informational detail is preserved, but with a potential loss of comparability.
Third, a relevant relation has been detected regarding the results of the econometric estimations between
the level of disaggregated mist and two nancial industries, namely, the Financial services and Insurance in-
dustries. This evidence suggests that the Italian market can benet from two possible solutions: the develop-
ment of national extensions for nancial entities 11 or the adoption of the FINREP Taxonomy released by the
Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS).12 Furthermore, the application of XBRL in the insurance
sector can offer a relevant contribution to the process of implementation of Solvency II to ensure the digital
transparency of insurance companies engaged in this new regulatory requirement (Bonsn et al., 2010).
Size was also a relevant variable when explaining the presence of disaggregated mist. Bigger companies ap-
pear more likely to use voluntary accounting items to represent more complex activities and environments.
This nal result, combined with the relevant presence of New tags, suggests that the Italian market should also
take advantage of the US XBRL initiative, allowing companies to create individual extensions that can be sub-
mitted to the regulatory ler along with the XBRL instances.
Lastly, considering the most recent initiatives, there is also the need to investigate how different regu-
latory settings could either boost or slow down the global implementation of XBRL. The open issue con-
cerns which efcient implementation process could best promote XBRL adoption. In the initiation
phase, for example, two pure models can be identied, depending on the role that the regulatory bodies
play in the adoption of the standard: active push and non-active push (Bonsn et al., 2009c). In the rst
case, the regulator decides to apply XBRL, implementing a system of automatic conversion or mapping:
that is, companies can only use a standard taxonomy on a blind basis, without the possibility of disclosing
voluntary items that are provided in PDF or other traditional formats. In the second case, the regulator in-
vites the companies to apply XBRL on their own accord: that is, companies tag their own information and
have the possibility to extend the standard taxonomy and use XBRL for the voluntary items. Fig. 3 repre-
sents the situation with the active push model. The standard taxonomy ofcially released by the regulators
captures only the mandatory items strictly required by the regulation, and there is no possibility of sub-
mitting the nancial statements with the extensions. In that case, companies prefer to use the traditional
format to disclose more information, losing the interoperability for the voluntary items.
Fig. 4 represents the situation with the non-active push model. In this case, companies have an incen-
tive to disclose with XBRL, since they can apply the standard taxonomy with the extensions that they
need. This means that they can take advantage of the interoperability for all information disclosed and, ad-
ditionally, the comparability is preserved, at least for the compulsory items in the standard taxonomy. This
solution seems to be appropriate for the Italian listed companies, as they need to report more detailed in-
formation than the IFRS Taxonomy schema. 13
In light of these results, it is worth highlighting the crucial role of XBRL taxonomies for corporate nan-
cial reporting. Future research on XBRL should give more attention to the development and application of
standard taxonomies to evaluate their potential impacts on the qualitative characteristics of nancial in-
formation (Baldwin et al., 2006). Of particular interest is the investigation of how a standard taxonomy
is adapted by the rms through the creation of taxonomy extensions to discover possible common
11
In Spain, for example, the Spanish Stock Exchange Commission CNMV issued two specic taxonomies for nancial entities: the
IIC (in Spanish, Investment Companies) Taxonomy and the FTA (in Spanish, Asset Securitization Funds) Taxonomy. For further
information, please see http://www.cnmv.es/Portal/xbrl/xbrl.aspx?lang=es.
12
According to a recent survey on XBRL adoption and usage in Europe, Italy is one of the countries interested in the application of FINREP
Taxonomy for nancial entities. For further information, please see http://www.euroling.info/nrepTaxonomy/taxonomy.html.
13
In contrast, the active push model is recommended for the application of the Italian GAAP Taxonomy because of the almost per-
fect t with the reporting practices of non-listed companies (Valentinetti and Rea, 2011), making it possible to take advantage of the
rapidity and cost effectiveness of XBRL adoption.
voluntary
Disclosure type
items Misfit
compulsory non-active push

items
active push
PDF XBRL
Format
Fig. 3. Active push model.
practices in different countries or sectors. Moreover, the role of XBRL taxonomies within the ongoing stan-
dardization of accounting standards cannot be ignored. According to Bonsn et al. (2001; Bonsn et al.,
2009b), Weber (2003) and Doolin and Troshani (2004), research is needed on the inuence of the
move to International Financial Reporting Standards on XBRL taxonomy development and how XBRL
may facilitate the standardization and harmonization of these standards.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful for the valuable comments from the reviewers, the XBRL Special Issue editors
and the editor of the International Journal of Accounting Information Systems. They also thank the
Extensions
voluntary
Disclosure type
items
compulsory non-active push

items
active push
PDF XBRL
Format
Fig. 4. Non-active push model.

participants at the 22nd XBRL International Conference held in Brussels, Belgium, in May 2011, for their
helpful insights on earlier draft of this paper.
Appendix A. New Tag items retrieved
Balance Sheet Anticipated taxes

Trade receivables
Legal reserve
Fair value and hedge reserve
Net prot/(loss) for the year
Trade payables
Banks borrowings
Derivative nancial instruments
Payments on account
Bonds
Income Statement Other operating income
Total operating income and revenue
Other non-operating income
Costs of services
Costs for use of third parties assets
Allocation to provisions for risks
Other operating costs
Total operating costs
Total costs
Gross prot for operations
Net prot for operations
Gross operating margin
Total nancial gains/(losses)
Extraordinary incomes
Extraordinary costs
Foreign exchange gains/(losses)
Prot/(loss) on investments
Current income taxes
Deferred income/(expenses) taxes
Statement of Cash Flow Depreciation of property, plant and equipment
Amortization of intangible assets
Write-downs of non-current assets
Write-downs of investments
Increase/(decrease) in provisions for risks and contingencies
Net movement in staff termination benets
Cash generated by operations before movements in working capital
Movements in working capital
Income on equity investments
Stock options expenses
Increase/(decrease) in deferred taxes
Derivative instruments
Changes in reserves
Statement of Changes in Equity Net prot for the year
Legal reserve
Extraordinary reserve
Treasury shares reserve
Hedging reserve
Prot reserve
Reserve for stock-option grant plans
Revaluation reserve
Unrealized gains reserve
Suspended-tax reserve
Deferred taxes recorded in equity
Prot/(loss) recognized directly in equity
Fair value gains/(losses) on hedging derivative instruments
Appendix B. Firm Specic items retrieved
Balance Sheet Intercompany current account receivables

Loans on policies
Reinsures' share of technical reserves
Premium reserve
Claims reserve
Mathematical reserve
Complementary insurance premium reserve
Technical reserve where investment risk is borne by policyholders and reserves relating to pension
fund management
Suspense reinsurance accounts
Deposits from reinsurers
Income Statement Royalties income and sourcing commissions
Leases, concessions and royalties
Media and sponsorship costs
Interest margin
Commission income
Commission expenses
Net commissions
Net income from trading activities
Net income from hedging activities
Brokerage margin
Premiums, net of outwards reinsurance
Other technical income, net of outwards reinsurance
Charges relating to claims, net of recoveries and outwards reinsurance
Change in other technical reserves, net of outwards reinsurance
Reversals and prot participation, net of outwards reinsurance
Changes in equalization reserves
Result of non-life business technical account
Result of life business technical account
Income on investments in non-life business
Capital and nancial charges of non-life business
Statement of Cash Flow Merger contributions
Net commissions
Payments on account for construction of new headquarter
Change in non-life premium reserve
Change in claims reserve and other non-life technical reserves
Change in mathematical reserves and other life technical reserves
Statement of Changes in Incorporation of AV Suisse
Equity Changes in reserves for SGP Ansaldo STS SpA
Changes in reserves fo SGP of other companies
Changes in reserves from delivery of SGP shares
Reserve for VAT detraction
Appendix C. Grouped items retrieved
Balance Sheet Other non-current assets

Other current assets
Other assets
Sundry receivables and other non-current assets
Sundry receivables and other current assets
Investments and other nancial assets
Reserves and retained earnings
Other non-current liabilities
Other current liabilities
Other liabilities
Payables and other nancial liabilities
Sundry payables and other non-current liabilities
Appendix C (continued)
Sundry payables and other current liabilities
Other medium-long term provisions and liabilities
Income Statement Depreciations and amortizations, provisions and write-downs
Financial income/(expense)
Selling expenses, general and administrative costs and royalty expenses
Statement of Cash Flow Change in current assets and liabilities
Change in nancial assets
Change in nancial liabilities
(Increase)/decrease in current receivables
Increase/(decrease) in current liabilities
(Purchase)/sales of property, plant and equipment and intangible assets
Investments
Change in other assets/liabilities
(Increase)/decrease in intangible xed assets
(Increase)/decrease in tangible xed assets
Proceeds/(repayments) of nancial payments
(Increase)/decrease in trade receivables and other assets
Increase/(decrease) in trade payables and other liabilities
(Investments)/disinvestments in equity investments
Net change in nancial receivables/payables
Proceeds from sales of property, plant and equipment, intangible assets and investments
Own shares issues/acquisitions
Capital instruments issues/acquisitions
Interests paid and exchange differences
Interests received and exchange differences
Operating investments
Operating disinvestments
Operation in non-current n assets
Changes in nancial assets and liabilities
Statement of Changes in Equity Other reserves and retained earnings
References
Adams M, Hossain M. Managerial discretion and voluntary disclosure: empirical evidence from the New Zealand life insurance
industry. J Acc Public Policy 1998;17(3):24581.
Aitken M, Hooper C, Pickering J. Determinants of voluntary disclosure of segment information: a re-examination of the role of
diversication strategy. Acc Finance 1997;37(1):89-109.
Alles M., Piechocki M., in press. Will XBRL improve corporate governance?: A framework for enhancing governance decision making
using interactive data. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems.
Amrhein DG, Farewell S, Pinsker R. REA and XBRL GL: synergies for the 21st century business reporting system. Int J Digit Acc Res
2009;9(October):12752.
Armenic J, Maiocco M. Improvement in disclosure by Canadian public companies. Cost Manage 1981;55(6):1620.
Baldwin AA, Trinkle BS. The impact of XBRL: a Delphi investigation. Int J Digit Acc Res 2011;11(January):1-24.
Baldwin AA, Brown CE, Trinkle BS. XBRL: an impacts framework and research challenge. J Emerg Technol Acc 2006;3(1):97-116.
Bazley M, Brown P, Izan HY. An analysis of lease disclosures by Australian companies. Abacus 1985;21(1):4463.
Bonsn E. The role of XBRL in Europe. Int J Digit Acc Res 2001;1(December):10110.
Bonsn E, Escobar T. A survey on voluntary disclosure on the internet. Empirical evidence from 300 European Union Companies. Int J
Digit Acc Res 2002;2(June):2751.
Bonsn E, Escobar T. Digital reporting in Eastern Europe: an empirical study. Int J Acc Inf Syst 2006;7(4):299318.
Bonsn E, Cortijo V, Escobar T. A Delphi investigation to explain the voluntary adoption of XBRL. Int J Digit Acc Res 2009a;9(December):
193205.
Bonsn E, Cortijo V, Escobar T. Towards the global adoption of XBRL using international nancial reporting standards (IFRS). Int J Acc
Inf Syst 2009b;10(1):4660.
Bonsn E, Cortijo V, Escobar T, Flores F. Implementing XBRL successfully by mandate and voluntary. Online 2009c;Jan-Feb(1):3740.
Bonsn E, Cortijo V, Escobar T, Flores F, Monreal S. Solvency II and XBRL: new rules and technologies in insurance supervision.
J Financ Regul Compliance 2010;18(2):14457.
Boritz JE, No WG. Assurance reporting for XBRL: XARL (eXtensible Assurance Reporting Language). Trust and Data Assurances in
Capital Markets: The Role of Technology Solutions. B. College; 2003.
Boritz JE, No WG. The SEC's XBRL voluntary ling program on EDGAR: a case for quality assurance. Curr Issues Auditing 2008;2(2):
A3650.
Boritz JE, No WG. Assurance on XBRL-related documents: the case of United Technologies Corporation. J Inf Syst 2009;23(2):4978.
Botosan CA. Disclosure level and the cost of equity capital. Acc Rev 1997;72(3):32349.
Bovee M, Ettredge M, Srivastava RP, Vasarhelyi MA. Does the year 2000 XBRL taxonomy accommodate current business nancial
reporting practice? J Inf Syst 2002;16(2):16582.
Bovee M, Kogan A, Srivastava RP, Vasarhelyi MA, Nelson K. Financial Reporting and Auditing Agent with Net Knowledge (FRAANK)
and eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL). J Inf Syst 2005;19(1):1941.
Camfferman K, Cooke T. An analysis of disclosure in annual reports of U.K. and Dutch companies. J Int Acc Res 2002;1(1):3-30.
Chang C, Jarvenpaa S. Pace of information systems standards development and implementation: the case of XBRL. Electron Mark
2005;15(4):36577.
Chow CW, Wong-Boren A. Voluntary nancial disclosure by Mexican corporations. Acc Rev 1987;62(3):53341.
Cohen EE, Lamberton B, Roohani S. The implications of economic theories for data level assurances: research opportunities. Trust and
Data Assurances in Capital Markets: The Role of Technology Solutions. B. College; 2003http://www.xbrleducation.com/pubs/
PWC_Book.pdf.
Cooke T. Voluntary corporate disclosure by Swedish companies'. J Int Financ Manage Acc 1989;1(2):11324.
Craswell AT, Taylor SL. Discretionary disclosure of reserves by oil and gas companies: an economic analysis. J Bus Financ Acc
1992;19(2):295308.
Craven BM, Marston CL. Financial reporting on the Internet by leading UK companies. Eur Acc Rev 1999;8(2):32133.
Craven BM, Otsmani B. Social environmental reporting on the Internet by leading UK companies. France; 1999.
Debreceny R, Gray GL. The production and use of semantically rich accounting reports on the internet: XML and XBRL. International
Journal of Accounting Information Systems 2001;2(1):4774.
Debreceny R, Gray GL, Rahman A. The determinants of Internet nancial reporting. J Acc Public Policy 2002;21(45):37194.
Debreceny RS, Chandra A, Cheh JJ, Guithues-Amrhein D, Hannon NJ, Hutchison PD, et al. Financial reporting in XBRL on the SEC's
EDGAR system: a critique and evaluation. J Inf Syst 2005;19(2):191210.
Debreceny R, Farewell S, Piechocki M, Felden C, Grning A. Does it add up? Early evidence on the data quality of XBRL lings to the
SEC. J Acc Public Policy 2010;29(3):296306.
Doolin B, Troshani I. XBRL: a research note. Qual Res Acc Manage 2004;1(2):93-104.
Efendi J, Smith ML, Wong J. Longitudinal analysis of voluntary adoption of XBRL on nancial reporting. Available at; 2009http://ssrn.
com/abstract=1440956.
FASB quality characteristics of accounting information. Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 2; 1980.
Ghani EK, Laswad F, Tooley S. Digital reporting formats: users' perceptions, preferences and performances. Int J Digit Acc Res
2009;9(July):4598.
Hu B, He K, Wang J. Semantic interoperability for nancial information: a component-based approach. Proceedings 3rd IEEE
International Conference on Compuer Science and Information Technology, 6. Chengdu: ICCSIT; 2010. p. 22832.
IFRSFoundation. The IFRS taxonomy illustrated. . Available atA view of the IFRS Taxonomy organised according to nancial
statements in Italian; 2009http://www.ifrs.org/XBRL/Resources/IFRS+Taxonomy+Illustrated+2009.htm.
IFRSFoundation IFRS Taxonomy Guide. Available athttp://www.ifrs.org/NR/rdonlyres/C052A8D1-695B-4044-B782-9D40B7CCDFBC/
0/IFRSTaxonomyGuide2009download.pdf2009.
Inchausti AG. The inuence of company characteristics and accounting regulation on information disclosed by Spanish rms. Eur Acc
Rev 1997;6(1):4568.
Lang M, Lundholm R. Cross-sectional determinants of analyst ratings of corporate disclosures. J Acc Res 1993;31(2):24672.
Lymer A, Debreceny R. The auditor and corporate reporting on the internet: challenges and institutional responses. Int J Auditing
2003;7:10320.
Marshall B, Mortenson K, Bourne A, Price K. Visualizing basic accounting ows: does XBRL + model + animation = understanding?
Int J Digit Acc Res 2010;10(March):2754.
Mckinnon JL, Dalimunthe L. Voluntary disclosure of segment information by Australian diversied companies. Acc Finance
1993;33(1):3351.
Peng J, Janie Chang C. Applying XBRL in an accounting information system design using the REA approach: an instructional case. Acc
Perspect 2010;9(1):5578.
Plumlee RD, Plumlee MA. Assurance on XBRL for nancial reporting. Acc Horiz 2008;22(3):35368.
Premuroso RF, Bhattacharya S. Do early and voluntary lers of nancial information in XBRL format signal superior corporate
governance and operating performance? Int J Acc Inf Syst 2008;9(1):1-20.
Roohani S, Xianming Z, Capozzoli EA, Lamberton B. Analysis of XBRL literature: a decade of progress and puzzle. Int J Digit Acc Res
2010;10(November):13147.
Srivastava RP, Kogan A. Assurance on XBRL instance document: a conceptual framework of assertions. Int J Acc Inf Syst 2010a;11(3):26173.
Srivastava RP, Kogan A. Response to discussions on Assurance on XBRL Instance Document: A Conceptual Framework of Assertions.
Int J Acc Inf Syst 2010b;11(3):2824.
Trites G. Discussion of Assurance on XBRL Instance Document: A Conceptual Framework of Assertions. Int J Acc Inf Syst 2010;11(3):
27981.
Valentinetti D, Rea MA. Adopting XBRL in Italy: early evidence of t between Italian GAAP taxonomy and current reporting practices
of non-listed companies. Int J Digi Acc Res 2011;11(May):4567.
Wagenhofer A. Economic consequences of internet nancial reporting. Schmalenbach Bus Rev 2003;55(4):26279.
Wallace RSO, Naser K. Firm-specic determinants of the comprehensiveness of mandatory disclosure in the corporate annual reports
of rms listed on the stock exchange of Hong Kong. J Acc Public Policy 1995;14(4):31168.
Wallace RSO, Naser K, Mora A. The relationship between the comprehensiveness of corporate annual reports and rm characteristics
in Spain. Acc Bus Rev 1994;25(97):4153.
Weber R. XML, XBRL, and the future of business and business reporting. S. J. Roohani Trust and Data Assurances in Capital Markets:
The Role of Technology Solutions. Bryant College; 2003.
White Jr CE. Discussion of Assurance on XBRL instance document: A conceptual framework of assertions A discussion and extension.
Int J Acc Inf Syst 2010;11(3):2748.
Xiao JZ, Yang H, Chow CW. The determinants and characteristics of voluntary Internet-based disclosures by listed Chinese companies.
J Acc Public Policy 2004;23(3):191225.
Yan J, Wang A, Zai Y, Wen J, Wang K. Research on application of XBRL based scal backup records exporting technology. Second
International Workshop on Education Technology and Computer Science. Wuhan: ETCS; 2010. p. 6369.. 3.
Yoon H, Zo H, Ciganek AP. Does XBRL adoption reduce information asymmetry? J Bus Res 2011;64(2):15763.

IFRS Taxonomy and Financial Reporting Practices The Case of Italian Listed Companies - 2012 - International Journal of Accounting Information Systems PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

IFRS Taxonomy and Financial Reporting Practices The Case of Italian Listed Companies - 2012 - International Journal of Accounting Information Systems PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 13 (2012) 163180

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Accounting

IFRS Taxonomy and nancial reporting practices: The case of

Corresponding author. Tel.: + 39 347 8425306; fax: + 39 085 45083 208.

voluntary Misfit Extensions

Fig. 1. Document formats and accounting items.

2. Background and research question

XBRL Status (XBRL Status (IFRS

Based on IFRSs issued up to 31

Fig. 2. The IFRS Taxonomy (2009).

Italy has a permanent XBRL jurisdiction 6;

3.2. Tagging process

Industry No. of companies

Automobiles & Parts 4

N Mean Std. deviation Minimum Maximum

ESA per rm 89 75.39 51.38 31 283

Firm Specific New Tags

N Mean Std. deviation Minimum Maximum

PROP per BS 89 0.4130 0.1574 0.1070 0.8870

Dis PROPi 1 Automobiles & Parts 2 Banks

i denotes the rms,

N Mean Std. deviation Minimum Maximum

ESA_Firm specic 89 31.47 47.15 0 218

Firm specic 906 1107 546 242 2801

Firm specic 0.1550 0.2945 0.1465 0.0955

Variable Coefcient Std. error t-Statistic Prob.

Dependent variable: Dis_PROP

Variable Coefcient Std. error t-Statistic Prob.

Dependent variable: Dis_PROP of Balance Sheet

Dependent variable: Dis_PROP of Income Statement

Dependent variable: Dis_PROP of Statement of Cash Flow

Dependent variable: Dis_PROP of Statement of Changes in Equity

4. Discussion and conclusion

compulsory non-active push

Fig. 3. Active push model.

compulsory non-active push

Fig. 4. Non-active push model.

Appendix A. New Tag items retrieved

Balance Sheet Anticipated taxes

Appendix B. Firm Specic items retrieved

Balance Sheet Intercompany current account receivables

Appendix C. Grouped items retrieved

Balance Sheet Other non-current assets

Potrebbero piacerti anche