We functionally derive the discretionary component of the pension obligation (PBO) based on deviation of actuarial assumptions—discount rate and compensation growth rate—from their respective industry medians. We then examine the implications of allowing discretion in the choice of pension assumptions on the pricing of the PBO. We find no evidence that discretion—as currently allowed under U.S. GAAP—impairs the value relevance of the PBO. We also find that the discretionary component is incrementally value‐relevant beyond the nondiscretionary component. Additional analyses suggest that these results are unlikely attributable to market fixation on reported PBO or measurement error in our discretionary component. Overall, we find that imposing uniformity in the choice of pension assumptions, on average, prevents communication of value‐relevant information through the PBO.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
1 January 2007
Research Article|
January 01 2007
Uniformity versus Flexibility: Evidence from Pricing of the Pension Obligation
Rebecca N. Hann;
Rebecca N. Hann
University of Southern California
Search for other works by this author on:
Yvonne Y. Lu;
Yvonne Y. Lu
University of Southern California
Search for other works by this author on:
K. R. Subramanyam
K. R. Subramanyam
University of Southern California
Search for other works by this author on:
Online ISSN: 1558-7967
Print ISSN: 0001-4826
American Accounting Association
2007
The Accounting Review (2007) 82 (1): 107–137.
Citation
Rebecca N. Hann, Yvonne Y. Lu, K. R. Subramanyam; Uniformity versus Flexibility: Evidence from Pricing of the Pension Obligation. The Accounting Review 1 January 2007; 82 (1): 107–137. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2007.82.1.107
Download citation file:
Pay-Per-View Access
$25.00