Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

The First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income

Statement in Italy:
Critical Aspects on a Financial Performance Indicator

1
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Abstract

The reporting of comprehensive income, as a firm performance indicator, is becoming

increasingly important, international standard setters requiring its presentation in
financial statements.
The new version of IAS 1 revised recently issued by the IASB provides the mandatory
reporting of other comprehensive income items for the EU listed companies. This
circumstance is of particular relevance in the Italian context, characterized by a strong
historical cost accounting model and by concentrated ownership publicly traded
companies.
This study aims to examine the impact of unrealized gains and losses reporting on
Italian entities performance, and thus on investors decision process, by investigating its
effects as opposed to the traditional net income for a randomly selected sample of 80
listed groups. Moreover, in order to assess the influence of national context
peculiarities, we compare Italian data with those of a consistent UK sample.
The results show that, currently, the first time adoption of comprehensive income
reporting does not significantly affect Italian listed groups performance, given the
irrelevant spread existing between net income and comprehensive income book values.

Keywords:
Comprehensive Income, Financial Ratios, Investors.

2
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Summary: 1. Introduction. – 2. Prior Research. – 3. Research Questions – 4.

Research Design. – 5. Results. – 6. Concluding Remarks. – References.

1. Introduction

The IASB has released IAS 1-revised “Presentation of Financial Statements” in 2007,
with its provisions being effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January
2009.
This revised version of the above mentioned accounting standard establishes, among
others things , the reporting and the presentation of comprehensive income, as a
measurement of an entity performance including both realized and unrealized gains and
losses (Walton, 2006; Pisani, 2007; De Beelde, Van Cawenberge, 2008).
Prior to this, in 1997 FASB already issued SFAS 1301, requiring companies to report
comprehensive income, defined as “the change in equity of a business enterprise during
a period from transactions and other events and circumstances from non-owner sources.
It includes all changes in equity during a period except those resulting from investments
by owners and distributions to owners” (SFAC n. 6, 1985).
The standard would allow three alternative presentation formats of other comprehensive
income items, either in the income statement, in a separate income statement or in the
statement of changes in equity.
This increasing interest in the reporting of the unrealized gains and losses arising during
the reporting period strictly relates to the shareholder information needs perspective
assumed by international standard setters (IASC, 1989; Whittington, 2008), (with) some
influential user groups putting pressure with regard to the provision of mandatory
disclosure of comprehensive income (Choi, Das 2007; Jordan, Clark…).
Given that present and potential investors “are concerned with the risk inherent in, and
return provided by, their investments” (IASC, 1989, par. 9), they need information that
enables them to assess and forecast future firms performance. Thus, comprehensive
income, taking into account the changes in fair value occurred in the assets and
liabilities during the reporting period, better measures the firm process of value creation
and allows the prediction of the firm ability to generate cash and cash equivalents in the
future (van Zijl, Whittington, 2006).
Moreover, this is consistent with the clean surplus accounting theory (De Beelde, Van
Cawenberge, 2008), according to which profit is determined by comparing the book
value of equity at the end of a financial year with the same value recorded at the
beginning of the year, without the shareholders operations (Sousa 2010).
Within the context of this trends, the IASB IAS 1 revised no longer allows to disclose
other comprehensive income items in the statement of changes in equity, but requires
their presentation in a separate income statement or, alternatively, as a part of the
traditional single income statement.
Following the IASB provisions, comprehensive income includes such components as:
− changes in revaluation surplus;
− actuarial gains and losses on defined benefit plans;
− gains and losses arising from translating the financial statements of a foreign
operation;
1
Cenno a UK

3
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

− gains and losses on remeasuring available-for-sale financial assets;

− the effective portion of gains and losses on hedging instruments in a cash flow
hedge.
Thus, net income represents one of the comprehensive income items and, moreover,
profit and revenue recognition turns out more strongly linked to timely price recognition
and to the fair value approach (Brimble, Hodgson2005).
In order to assess the quantitative effects produced by the first time adoption of IAS 1-
revised on income measurements, the current study examines the consolidated financial
statements of80 Italian listed groups, so to investigate the impact of unrealized gains
and losses, with particular reference to the ROE, as it is one the most relevant and
widespread ratios in evaluating firm financial performance and in analysing financial
statements (Sousa, 2009).

2. Prior Research

Prior comprehensive income research can be divided in three branches: the first relating
to the field of descriptive statistics, focused on the comprehensive income display
choices made by management; the second one pertaining to the value relevance
analysis, aimed to stress the impact of presentation format on analysts and investors,
and the ability of comprehensive income in reflecting firms market value; the third one
analyzing the impact of the comprehensive income as opposed to the net income.
1. Many studies examined the presentation of comprehensive income by samples of
listed companies. The results of the examination of financial statements show that a
majority of the sampled companies presented comprehensive income as a part of the
statement of changes in equity, instead of presenting comprehensive income on the
face of the income statement or in a separate income statement (Campbell et Al.,
1999; Pandit, Phillips, 2004; Pandit et Al, 2006; Thompson et Al., 2002).
The preference for reporting comprehensive income in the equity statement is
explained with the lack of usefulness perceived by CFO’s or with the greater ability
for the managers, in this case, to manage or hide current period earnings (King et Al.,
1999; Choi, 2007).
2. In addition, much of the prior research has focused on the incremental information
content (which is defined as the impact on stock price changes) of the comprehensive
income items over net income, finding mixed results (Goncharov, Hodgson, 2009).
Some Authors report that net income has higher value relevance than comprehensive
income, others report no incremental information content for comprehensive income
components, whilst others report that comprehensive income has a higher association
with stock returns2.
The more relevant results show that the unrealized gain or loss on securities held-for-
sale or short term financial investments has a significant association with price
changes (Chambers et Al., 2007), stressing that aggregation and reporting location
do matter in case of markets inefficiencies of psychological factors influence. In fact,
it’s been found that location strengthens the perceived items importance and that it
can raise incremental information (Goncharov, Hodgson, 2009).

2
Cfr. Brimble, Hodgson (2005); Cahan (2000); Chambers et Al. (2007); Choi (2006); Ernsrberger
(2008); Goncharov, Hodgson (2009); Hirst, Hopkins (1998); Maines (2000); Pinto (2005).

4
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Moreover, some Authors examined whether comprehensive income better reflects

listed companies stock returns than net income, finding no evidence that the first is
more strongly associated with returns and with market value or that it allows, better
than net income, the prediction of future cash flows than net income, with a weak
exception for comprehensive income adjustments (Dhaliwal et al. 1999; Dastgir,
Velashani, 2008).
3. In addition, a few studies focused on the impact of comprehensive income on net
income, particularly analyzing whether calculating the ROE using comprehensive as
opposed to using net income significantly affect the value of the mentioned ratio.
The results showed that unrealized gains and losses do influence the ROE measure,
especially in a recession period with market drops (Sousa Fernàndez, Carro
Arana2009; Sousa Fenàndez, Carro Arana 2010a; Sousa Fernàndez, Carro Arana,
2010b).
Our study contributes to the latter branch of researches, as it attempts to inquire on the
effects that comprehensive income brought on the ROE of Italian listed groups.
Particularly, in our hypothesis we expected unrealized gains and losses not to influence
in a relevant way the performance indicators of Italian groups, because of the national
context peculiarities.
Specifically, the Italian context is characterized by a strong historical cost accounting
model, fair value accounting being recently introduced with the mandatory application
of International Accounting Standards IAS IFRS.
Moreover, the majority of Italian publicly traded firms have concentrated ownership,
with a little rate of minority shareholders, if compared with Anglo-Saxon firms.
The current study is thus aimed to verify if these circumstances could have reduced
other comprehensive income effects on groups performance.

3. Research Questions

The aim of the current research is to contribute to the accounting literature focused on
the impacts of comprehensive income, as against net income, on the firms performance
evaluation by financial statements users.
Moreover, our main objective is to investigate the impact of the reporting of unrealized
gains and losses in the Italian context , which - as said before - is strongly tied to an
accounting system based on historical cost and where there are relatively concentrated
public traded companies.
Thus, our study also aims to compare the effects of other comprehensive income items
with the findings of the mentioned international studies, in order to verify the impact of
national distincvtive features on the reporting of comprehensive income.
To do so, we investigate whether or not calculating the ROE posing comprehensive
income as the numerator could significantly influence this ratio value, and thus the
present and potential investors judgements and investment decisions.
Further, with reference to the findings of the study conducted by Sousa and Carro, we
compare the ROE of Italian groups with those of United Kingdom groups for the year
2008, this latter being the year for which the Authors found a greater impact of other
comprehensive income items on companies performance.

5
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

4. Research Design

The data for our research were collected from a randomly selected sample of 80 Italian
listed manufacturing and trading groups (Appendix A) traded on the Milan Stock
Exchange, so that it comprises the most liquid Italian stocks.
Financial services, banks and insurance companies were not included in our sample,
because of the specific mandatory rules to which they are subjected.
We examined the 2009 consolidated financial statements, as this is the first year
companies were required to report comprehensive income. Particularly, we examined
the book values of the comprehensive income items in the year 2009 and 2008, this one
mandatorily restated.
In addition, we also collected data from 2008 financial statements of a randomly
selected sample of 64 United Kingdom listed groups, in order in order to assess possible
impacts of the different accounting system and corporate governance models between
these two Contries.
According to our research question, we attempted to investigate the impact of
comprehensive income on the ROE by calculating it using two different income
measurements:
- ROE1, defined as the following ratio: CI/E, where CI represents the consolidated
comprehensive income, and E represents the consolidated shareholders equity at the
closure of the reporting period;
- ROE2, defined as the ratio: NI/E, where NI represents the consolidated net income,
and E represents the consolidated shareholders equity at the closure of the reporting
period.
Afterwards, we compared ROE1 with ROE2, recurring descriptive statistics, in order to
verify if unrealized gains and losses significantly influence companies performance and,
thus, the above said financial analysis ratio.
Lastly, we investigated the outliers groups, so to find out whether it could be
established some correlation between their position and the value assumed by one or
more items adding up in the comprehensive income.

5. Results

As above said, in order to compare ROE1 with ROE2 we first collected the book values
of other comprehensive income items for each group under review, as well as the book
values of consolidated net income, comprehensive income and shareholders equity.
We then calculated the ROE1 and the ROE2 for the years 2009 and 2008, using restated
items for the latter.
Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics of the variables ROE1 and ROE2.

Final sample: 80 Italian

6
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

listed groups

YEAR MIN MAX MEAN MEDIAN 1° QUART. 3° QUART.

ROE1 -11,2520 12,8401 -0,0782 0,0381 -0,0478 0,1145
2008
ROE2 -11,2607 12,3646 -0,0425 0,0661 -0,0149 0,1326
ROE1 -4,2872 4,6167 0,00466 0,0430 -0,0373 0,0976
2009<
ROE2 -4,1881 4,4082 -0,01006 0,0324 -0,0346 0,0902
Table 1: Descriptive statistics for ROE1 and ROE2 of the Italian sample,
years 2008 restated and 2009.

We may see that the mean of ROE1 and ROE2 does not significantly differ for both
sampled years, as well as the median, the first and the third quartile. Also, focusing on
minimum and maximum scores, it is noticeable that their spread is no relevant.
Moreover, Charts 1 and 2 show the graphic relation between ROE1 and ROE2 for each
group of our sample in the years 2008 e 2009, highlighting that unrealized gains and
losses do not seem to affect significantly the representation of the groups performance.
In fact, their linear interpolation shows that our variables are distributed along the angle
bisector of Cartesian axes, suggesting that ROE1 approximately equals ROE2.

Chart 1: graphic relation between ROE1 and ROE2 of the Italian sample,
year 2009

7
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Chart 2: graphic relation between ROE1 and ROE2 of the Italian sample,
year 2008
When considering data from United Kingdom groups financial statements, we found a
little more relevant spread between ROE1 and ROE2 (Chart 3). It could be explained
considering with the stronger tradition of fair value accounting model.

Chart 3: graphic relation between ROE1 and ROE2 of the United Kingdom
sample, year 2009

8
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Accordingly to our first findings with regard to the Italian sample, when we checked the
difference between ROE1 and ROE2 by subtracting the first from the second one (ROE1-
ROE2), we found that the difference between the two variables was scarcely relevant, as
shown in Table 2, which displays the related descriptive statistics.

Final sample: 80 Italian listed groups

MEAN
YEAR 1° 3° ABSOLUTE
MIN MAX MEAN MEDIAN QUART. QUART. DEVIATION
2008 -
ROE1 - ROE2 -0,6946 0,4756 -0,0357 -0,0156 0,0000 0,02349
0,0442
2009 -
ROE1 - ROE2 -0,0991 0,2085 0,0105 0,0000 0,0163 0,06176
0,0051
Table 2: Descriptive statistics for the difference between ROE1 and ROE2
of the Italian sample, years 2008 restated and 2009.

As already noticed the spread between the two variables ROE1 and the ROE2 is not
significant, as highlighted by the mean, median, first and third quartiles sets of values.
We then calculated the mean absolute deviation, in order to single out outlier variables,
aiming to investigate the specific other comprehensive income items influencing their
performance.
Therefore, Charts 4 and 5 show the cumulative frequency curves describing the sample
distribution of the difference between ROE1 and ROE2 for the year 2008 and 2009. The
charts also show the average value (continuous horizontal line) and the points lying
outside the mean absolute deviation (dotted lines).

Chart 4: distribution of ROE1-ROE2 of the Italian sample, year 2009

9
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Chart 5: distribution of ROE1-ROE2 of the Italian sample, year 2009

Further, we tried to identify specific items that do influence outlier groups performance,
in order to isolate the components with a greater impact on comprehensive income. To
this end we reviewed the descriptive statistics related to other comprehensive income
items of the whole sample. As shown in Appendix 2 and 3 and in Charts 6 and 7, we
found that three out of five other comprehensive income items generally have a greater
impact on comprehensive income: i.e.: the effective portion of gains and losses on
hedging instruments in a cash flow hedge, gains and losses on remeasuring available-
for-sale financial assets and gains and losses arising from translating the financial
statements of a foreign operation.

Chart 6: impact of OCI items on CI of the Italian sample, year 2009

10
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Once singled out the most relevant other comprehensive income items, we finally verify
their score in relation to the outliers, as shown in Charts 7 and 8.

Chart 7: impact of OCI items on CI of the Italian sample, year 2008

Consistently, the following charts show that the above mentioned components are the
other comprehensive income items with a greater impact on the outliers. This confirms
that, in the Italian context, changes in revaluation surplus and actuarial gains and losses
on defined benefit plans do not influence significantly groups performance, probably
owing to the traditional accounting model imposed and strictly regulated it by the
Italian legal system.

11
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Chart 8: Outliers OCI items of the Italian sample, year 2009

Chart 9: Outliers OCI items of the Italian sample, year 2008

6. Concluding Remarks

The mandatory introduction of comprehensive income reporting, requiring the

presentation in entities financial statements of unrealized gains and losses, brings to a

12
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

configuration of firms income strongly linked to fair value accounting and reflecting all
sources of value creation, as it embraces all changes in the firm assets.
This condition is truly relevant in the Italian context, marked by a strong historical cost
accounting model and by concentrated ownership in publicly traded companies.
Our study has examined the impact of the other comprehensive income items reporting
on the performance of a sample of Italian listed groups, by calculating the ROE based
either on net income or comprehensive income.
We also compared our results with the ones obtained by analysing a sample of United
Kingdom listed groups.
Our first sample didn’t show any significant impact on Italian groups performance, due
to the reporting of other comprehensive items and, accordingly, we found no relevant
spread between ROE1 and ROE2.
Further, considering the outliers we saw that the most relevant other comprehensive
income items are three out of five, with no great impact caused by changes in
revaluation surplus and actuarial gains and losses on defined benefit plans.
Moreover, when comparing our findings on the Italian sample with United Kingdom
sample, we found that UK groups performance looks little more influenced by
unrealized gains and losses. In fact the United Kingdom scores present themselves more
dispersed than Italian ones, and the interpolating line a little away from the angle
bisector of Cartesian axes, towards the 4th quarter (y + ; x –).
Concluding, our empirical research results suggest that, at the present time, unrealized
gains and losses due to changes in fair value do not significantly affect Italian listed
groups performance.
Nonetheless, it needs to be stress that currently there is not yet evidence enough to
investigate the trends of comprehensive income reporting in the Italian context.
In the future, our research could thus replicate this study, also considering a larger
number of reporting periods. In addition, future research should be completed with a
detailed outliers analysis, in order to identify possible associations with specific other
comprehensive income items.

13
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

References

Allegrini M., Ninci E. (2008), “Novità in vista per gli schemi di bilancio: lo IAS 1
revised 2007”, Amministrazione & Finanza, n. 9, pp. 7-13.

Bhamornsiri S., Wiggins C. (2001), “Comprehensive Income Disclosures”, The CPA

Journal, October, pp. 54-56.

Brimble M., Hodgson A. (2005), “The Value Relevance of Comprehensive Income and
Components for Industrial Firms”, http://www1.fee.uva.nl.

Cahan F., Courtenay S.M., Gronewoller P.L., Upton D.R. (2000), “Value Relevance of
Mandated Comprehensive Income Disclosures”, Journal of Business Finance &
Accounting, vol. 27, n. 9/10, 1273-1301.

Campbell L., Crawford D., Franz D.R. (1999), “How Companies Are Complying the
Comprehensive Income Disclosure Requirements”, Ohio CPA Journal, January, pp.
13-20.

Chambers (2007), “An evaluation of SFAS No. 130 comprehensive income”, Review of
Accounting Studies, vol. 12, n. 4, pp. 557-593.

Choi J.H. (2006), “Implications of Comprehensive Income Disclosure for Future

Earnings and Analysts’ Forecasts”, Seoul Journal of Business, vol. 12, n. 2, pp. 77-
109.

Choi J.H., Das S. (2007), “Comprehensive Income, Future Earnings and Market
Mispricing”, http://www.bschool.nus.edu.sg.
Dastgir M., Velashani A.S. (2008), “Comprehensive Income and Net Income as
Measures of FirmPerformance: Some Evidence for Scale Effect”, European Journal of
Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, n. 12.
De Beelde I., Van Cawenberge P. (2008), “Does the Comprehensive Income Matrix
Make Unsophisticated Users Overemphasise Fair Value Income?” Maandschrift
Accountancy & Bedrijfskunde, vol. 28, n. 7 pp. 31-40.

De Beelde I., Van Cawenberge P. (2007), “On the IASB Comprehensive Income
Project: An Analysis of the Case for Dual Income Display”, Abacus, vol. 43, n. 1, pp.
1-26.

Ernstberger J. (2008), “The value relevance of comprehensive income under IFRS and
US GAAP: empirical evidence from Germany”, International Journal of Accounting,
Auditing and Performance Evaluation, vol. 5, n. 1, pp. 1-29.

Goncharov I., Hodgson A. (2008), “Comprehensive Income in Europe: Valuation,

Prediction and Conservative Issues”, Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series
Oeconomica, n. 10, vol. 1, pp. 1-33.

14
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Hirst D.E., Hopkins P.E., Wahlen J.M. (2004), “Fair Values, Comprehensive Income
Reporting, and Bank Analysts’ Risk and Valuation Judgments”, The Accounting
Review, April, pp. 455-474.

Hitz J.M. (2007), “The Decision Usefulness of Fair Value Accounting – A Theoretical
Perspective”, European Accounting Review, vol. 16, n. 2, pp. 323-362.

IASB – International Accounting Standards Board (2006), “An Improved Conceptual

Framework for Financial Reporting: Objective of Financial Reporting and
Qualitative Characteristics of Decision-Useful Financial Reporting Information”
Preliminary Views, (IASB), http://www.iasb.org.

IASB – International Accounting Standards Board (2008), “Financial Statement

Presentation”, Preliminary Views, (IASB), http://www.iasb.org.

IASB – International Accounting Standards Board (2008), “An Improved Conceptual

Framework for Financial Reporting: Chapter 1: The Objective of Financial
Reporting. Chapter 2: Qualitative Characteristics and Constraints of Decision-
Useful Financial Reporting Information”, (IASB), Exposure Draft,
http://www.iasb.org.

IASB – International Accounting Standards Board (2008), “Conceptual Framework for

Financial Reporting: The Reporting Entity”, Preliminary Views, (IASB),
http://www.iasb.org.

IASC - International Accounting Standards Committee (1989), “Quadro sistematico per

la preparazione e la preparazione del bilancio”, (IASB), http://www.iasb.org.

Jordan C.E., Clark S.J. (2002), “Comprehensive Income: How Is It Being Reported And
What Are Its Effects?”, The Journal of Applied Business Research, vol. 18, n. 2, pp.
1-8.

King T.E., Ortegren A.K., Reed B.J. (1999), “An analysis of the impact of alternative
financial statement presentations of comprehensive income”, Academy of Accounting
and Financial Studies Journal, vol. 3, n.1, pp. 19-42.

Landsman W.R. (2007), “Is fair value accounting information relevant and reliable?
Evidence from capital market research”, Economic and Business Research, Special
Issue: International Accounting Policy Forum, pp. 19-30.

Maines L.A., McDaniel L.S. (2000), “Effects of Comprehensive Income Characteristics

on Non Professional Investors’ Judgments: The Role of Financial Statement
Presentation Format”, The Accounting Review, vol. 75, n. 2, pp. 179-207.

Mazza C., Porco B. (2004), “An assessment of the transparency of comprehensive

income reporting practices of U.S. companies”, Working Paper, (Fordham
University), http://www.fordham.edu.

15
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Pandit G.M., Phillips J.J. (2004), “Comprehensive Income: Reporting Preferences of

Public Companies”, The CPA Journal, November, pp. 40-41.

Pandit G.M., Rubenfield A., Phillips J.J. (2006), “Current NASDAQ Corporation
Methods of Reporting Comprehensive Income”, Mid-American Journal of Business,
vol. 21, n. 1, pp. 13-19.

Penman S.H. (2007), “Financial reporting quality: is fair value a plus or a minus?”,
Accounting and Business Research, Special Issue: International Accounting Policy
Forum, pp. 33-44.

Pinto J.A. (2005), “How Comprehensive is Comprehensive Income? The Value

Relevance of Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments”, Journal of International
Financial Management and Accounting, n. 2, vol. 16, pp. 97-122.

Pisani M. (2007), La misura delle prestazioni nel bilancio di esercizio. Il

comprehensive income statement, Milano, Franco Angeli.

Rosenfield P. (2008), “Prospects: A Missing Piece of Current Selling Price Reporting”,

Abacus, vol. 44, n. 1, pp. 48-60.

Ryan S.G. (2008), “Fair Value Accounting: Understanding the Issues Raised by the
Credit Crunch”, White Paper, (Council of Institutional Investors),
http://www.cii.org/resourcesPublications.

Sousa Fernàndez F., Carro Arana M.M. (2009), “Debate internacional en torno a la
presentaciòn del comprehensive income”, Partida Doble, n. 216, pp. 20-33.

Sousa Fernàndez F., Carro Arana M.M. (2010a), “Comprehensive Income Under The
Crisis:Empirical Evidence For Ibex-35 Companies”, IBFR Global Conference on
Business and Finance Proceedings, Vol. 5, n. 1.

Sousa Fernàndez F., Carro Arana M.M. (2010b), Effects Of Comprehensive Income On
ROE In A Context Of Crisis: Empirical Evidence For IBEX-35 Listed Companies
(2004-2008), IABL & ITLC Conference proceedings.

Thompson J.H., Womack C., Hodge T.G., McCoy T.L. (2002), “A survey of Fortune
500 companies’ reporting of comprehensive income”,
http://aaahq.org/northeast/Abstracts%5c Thompson. pdf

Van Cauwenberge P. (2007), “A Critical Note on Empirical Comprehensive Income

Research”, Working Paper, (Pennsylvania State University), http://www.psu.edu.

van Zijl T., Whittington G. (2006), “Deprival value and fair value: a reinterpretation
and a reconciliation”, Accounting and Business Research, vol. 36, n. 2, pp. 121-130.

Walton P. (2006), “A research note. Fair value and executory contracts: moving the
boundaries in international financial reporting”, Accounting and Business Research,
vol. 36, n. 4, pp. 337-343.

16
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Whittington G. (2008), “Fair Value and the IASB/FASB Conceptual Framework

Project: An Alternative View”, Abacus, vol. 44, n. 2, pp. 139-168.

17
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Appendix A - Italian sample

1 ACEA
2 ACOTEL
3 ACTELIOS
4 AEDES
5 AEROPORTO DI FIRENZE
6 ALERION
7 AMPLIFON
8 ASTALDI
9 ATLANTIA
10 AUTOGRILL
11 AUTOSTRADE TO - MI
12 BASTOGI
13 BEGHELLI
14 BENETTON
15 BENI STABILI
16 BIESSE
17 BREMBO
18 BULGARI

19 BUONGIORNO VITAMINIC

20 BUZZI UNICEM
21 CAD IT
22 CALTAGIRONE
23 CALTAGIRONE EDITORE
24 CAMFIN
25 CAMPARI
26 CDC
27 CEMBRE
28 CEMENTIR
29 CIR
30 CLASS EDITORI
31 COFIDE
32 CRESPI
33 CSP
34 DADA
35 DATALOGIC
36 DE' LONGHI
37 DMAIL GROUP
38 EDISON
39 EMAK
40 ENEL
41 ENGINEERING
42 ENI

18
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

43 ERG
44 ESPRESSO
45 ESPRINET
46 FASTWEB
47 FIAT
48 FINMECCANICA
49 FULLSIX
50 GABETTI
51 GEFRAN
52 GEMINA
53 GEWISS
54 HERA
55 IMA
56 IMMSI
57 IMPREGILO
58 INDESIT
59 INTEK
60 INTERPUMP
61 IRCE
62 IRIDE
63 ISAGRO
64 ITALCEMENTI
65 ITALMOBILIARE
66 LA DORIA
67 LOTTOMATICA
68 LUXOTTICA
69 MARIELLA BURANI
70 MEDIASET
71 MONDADORI
72 MONRIF
73 MONTEFIBRE
74 PERMASTEELISA
75 PININFARINA
76 PIRELLI
77 PREMUDA
78 RATTI
79 RCS
80 REPLY
81 RETELIT
82 RISANAMENTO
83 SABAF
84 SAEG GETTERS
85 SAIPEM
86 SEAT PAGINE GIALLE

19
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

87 SIAS
88 SNAI
89 SNAM
90 SNIA
91 SOCOTHERM
92 STEFANEL
93 TELECOM ITALIA
94 TELECOM ITALIA MEDIA
95 TOD'S
96 TXT
97 UNILAND
98 VIANINI INDUSTRIA
99 VIANINI LAVORI
100 ZUCCHI

20
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Appendix B - United Kingdom sample

1 4IMPRINT
2 AEGIS GROUP
3 AMEC
4 ANGLO AMERICAN
5 ANGLO PACIFIC GROUP
6 ARENA LEISURE
7 ARM HOLDINGS
8 BALFOR BEATTY
9 BC GROUP
10 BLOOMBSBURY
11 BRIXTON
12 CAIRN ENERGY
13 CAMELIA
14 CENTRICA
15 CLARK T
16 COBHAM
17 DANA PETROLEUM
18 DELTA
19 DEVELOPMENT SECURITIES
20 FISHER JAMES AND SON
21 GENETIX GROUP
22 GKN
23 HAMMERSON
24 INCHAPE
25 IP GROUP
26 KELLER
27 LAVENDON GROUP
28 MEGGITT
29 MELROSE
30 MOLINS
31 MORGAN CRUCIBLE
32 MORGAN SINDALL
33 PARKWOOD HOLDINGS
34 PERSIMMON
35 REGUS
36 REXAM
37 ROLLS ROYCE
38 RPS
39 SAVILLS
40 SENIOR
41 SERCO

21
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

42 SIG
43 SOPHEON
44 SPECTRIS
45 SPIRAX
46 STAT PRO
47 TANFIELD
48 TARSUS
49 TAYLOR
50 TAYLOR WIMPLEY
51 TRAFFIC MASTER
52 TRINITY MIRROR
53 TT ELECTRONICS
54 TULLOW
55 UK COAL
56 UNITE GROUP
57 UNIVERSE
58 UNIVERSE GROUP
59 VERNALIS
60 VITEC
61 WIMPEY
62 WOOD GROUP (DOLLARI)
63 WPP GROUP
64 XAAR

22
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Appendix C- Descriptive statistics for other comprehensive income items

ANNO

MAX
1° 3° -
MIN MAX MEAN MEDIAN QUART. QUART. MIN
CHANGES IN REVALUATION
-0,0003 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 -0,0373 0,0000 0,0003
SURPLUS
ACTUARIAL GAINS AND
-0,0198 0,0022 -0,0005 0,0000 -0,0373 0,0000 0,0220
LOSSES
GAINS AND LOSSES ARISING
FROM TRANSLATING THE -0,0991 0,0783 0,0038 0,0000 -0,0374 -0,0002 0,1774
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
GAINS AND LOSSES ON
REMEASURING AVAILABLE-
-0,3506 0,1956 0,0006 0,0000 -0,0373 0,0000 0,5462
2009

FOR-SALE FINANCIAL
ASSETS
THE EFFECTIVE PORTION OF
GAINS AND LOSSES ON
-0,0581 0,5098 0,0048 0,0000 -0,0417 -0,0044 0,5679
HEDGING INSTRUMENTS IN A
CASH FLOW HEDGE
GAINS AND LOSSES OF
SUBSIDIARIES
-0,0128 0,0321 0,0003 0,0000 -0,0373 0,0000 0,0449
CONSOLIDATED WITH NET
EQUITY METHOD
RELATED TAX EFFECT -0,0183 0,0375 0,0003 0,0000 -0,0373 0,0000 0,0558
OTHER -0,0023 0,1063 0,0014 0,0000 -0,0373 0,0000 0,1087

CHANGES IN REVALUATION
-0,4244 0,0000 -0,0053 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,4244
SURPLUS
ACTUARIAL GAINS AND
-0,0302 0,0093 -0,0004 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0395
LOSSES
GAINS AND LOSSES ARISING
FROM TRANSLATING THE -0,3770 0,6673 -0,0039 0,0000 -0,0124 0,0000 1,0443
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
GAINS AND LOSSES ON
REMEASURING AVAILABLE-
-0,1036 0,2326 -0,0045 0,0000 -0,0027 0,0000 0,3362
2008

FOR-SALE FINANCIAL
ASSETS
THE EFFECTIVE PORTION OF
GAINS AND LOSSES ON
-0,7378 0,0101 -0,0166 0,0000 -0,0074 0,0000 0,7480
HEDGING INSTRUMENTS IN A
CASH FLOW HEDGE
GAINS AND LOSSES OF
SUBSIDIARIES
-0,4556 0,0005 -0,0065 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,4561
CONSOLIDATED WITH NET
EQUITY METHOD
RELATED TAX EFFECT -0,0082 0,1102 0,0025 0,0000 0,0000 0,0006 0,1184
OTHER -0,0850 0,0111 -0,0009 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0960

23
 Critical Aspects of the First Time Adoption of Comprehensive Income Statement in Italy

Appendix D – Outliers other comprehensive income items: absolute values for

years 2009 and 2008.

24