MADDİ OLMAYAN DURAN VARLIKLARIN DEĞER İLİŞKİSİ

Öz

Teknolojik dönüşümler sonucu ortaya çıkan yeni düzen, maddi olmayan duran varlıklar MODV odaklı ekonomik sisteme geçişi beraberinde getirmektedir. Bu çalışmada, hem MODV’un hem de şerefiye ile şerefiye harici MODV’un değer ilişkisi incelenmektedir. Aynı zamanda analizler, Hayn 1995 tarafından altı çizilen zararların karlardan daha fazla bilgi taşıdığı gerçeğinden hareketle genişletilerek, bu değer ilişkisinin zarar eden firmalar ile kar eden firmalar arasında farklılaşıp farklılaşmadığı irdelenmektedir. Borsa İstanbul’da 2009-2018 yılları arasında listelenen firmalara ilişkin veriler, Fiyat Modeli’nin modifiye edilmiş versiyonu kullanılarak sabit etkiler modeli ile analiz edilmekte ve şu sonuçlar ortaya konmaktadır. Birincisi, MODV’un, şerefiyenin ve şerefiye harici MODV’un değer ilişkisi bulunmaktadır. Diğer bir deyişle, bu kalemlerin piyasa değeri üzerindeki etkileri istatistiki olarak anlamlı bir şekilde pozitiftir. İkincisi, hem MODV’ın hem de şerefiye ile şerefiye harici MODV’un değer ilişkileri, zarar eden şirketler ile kar eden şirketler arasında istatistiki olarak anlamlı bir şekilde farklı değildir. Diğer bir deyişle, bu kalemlerin piyasa değerine etkileri, şirketin kar ya da zarar etmesinden bağımsızdır. Yapılan muhtelif sağlamlık testleri de bu sonuçları teyit etmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Maddi Olmayan Duran Varlıklar, Şerefiye, Değer İlişkisi, Değerleme, Zarar

THE VALUE RELEVANCE OF INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Öz

The new system that occurred as a result of technological transformation brings the shift to an intangible-oriented economic system. In this study, the value relevance of intangibles as well as goodwill and intangibles except goodwill is analysed. At the same time, as losses convey more information than profits Hayn, 1995 , analyses are extended by considering profit and loss firms in order to analyse whether the value relevance of the variables of interest differs between profit and loss firms. A sample of Turkish listed firms between 2009 and 2018 are analysed by using a modified version of Price Model and by employing the fixed effects method. The following outcomes are reported. First, intangibles, as well as goodwill and intangibles except for goodwill, are all value relevant. In other words, impacts of these variables on market values are positive at conventional significance levels. Second, neither intangibles nor goodwill and intangibles except goodwill differ between profit and loss firms. In other words, impacts of these variables on market values are independent of whether a firm records profit or loss. We further perform a battery of robustness analyses and our outcomes remain the same

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Intangibles, Goodwill, Value Relevance, Valuation, Loss

Kaynakça

1. Allison, P. D. (2006). Fixed Effects Regression Methods In SAS®. SUGI 31 Proceedings, 1–20.
2. Amir, E., & Lev, B. (1996). Value-relevance of nonfinancial information: The wireless communications industry. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22(1–3), 3–30.
3. Atalay, B., Gökten, S., & Türkcan, M. (2018). An Overview of Measuring and Reporting Intellectual Capital. In H.
4. Dincer, Ü. Hacioglu, & S. Yüksel (Eds.), Global Approaches in Financial Economics, Banking, and Finance (pp. 369–388). Springer International Publishing.
5. Bauman, M. P., & Shaw, K. W. (2018). Value relevance of customer-related intangible assets. Research in Accounting Regulation, 30(2), 95–102.
6. Behname, M., Pajoohi, M. R., & Ghahramanizady, M. (2012). The Relationship Between Intangible Assets and The Market Value; Metals Industry of Tehran Stock Exchange Case Study. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 6(12), 115–122.
7. Bhana, N. (2013). The valuation of research and development expenditures: The case for companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. International Journal of Finance and Policy Analysis, 5(2), 3–15.
8. Brown, S., Lo, K., & Lys, T. (1999). Use of R2 in accounting research: measuring changes in value relevance over the last four decades. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 28(2), 83–115.

9. Burgstahler, D. C., & Dichev, I. D. (1997). Earnings, Adaptation and Equity Value. Accounting Review, 72(2), 187–215.
10. Chalmers, K., Clinch, G., & Godfrey, J. M. (2008). Adoption of international financial reporting standards: Impact on the value relevance of intangible assets. Australian Accounting Review, 18(3), 237–247.
11. Ciftci, M., Darrough, M., & Mashruwala, R. (2014). Value Relevance of Accounting Information for Intangible-Intensive Industries and the Impact of Scale: The US Evidence. European Accounting Review, 23(2), 199–226.
12. Correia, S. (2015). Singletons, cluster-robust standard errors and fixed effects: A bad mix. Technical Note, Duke University.
13. Dahmash, F. N., Durand, R. B., & Watson, J. (2009). The value relevance and reliability of reported goodwill and identifiable intangible assets. British Accounting Review, 41(2), 120–137.
14. Demir, V., Ertugrul, M., & Gür, E. (2016). Değer ilişkisi üzerine uluslararası yayınlar. Mali Çözüm, 136, 13–31.
15. Easton, P. D., & Sommers, G. A. (2003). Scale and the Scale Effect in Market-based Accounting Research. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 30(1–2), 25–55.
16. Ersoy, A., & Buyruk, A. (2005). İşletme Birleşmelerinin Uluslararası Muhasebe Standardı -(22) ve Uluslararası Finansal Raporlama Standardı-(IFRS 3)’e Göre İncelenmesi ve Muhasebeleştirilmesi. Muhasebe-Finansman Araştırma ve Uygulama Dergisi, 5(14), 13–25.
17. Ertuğrul, M. (2018). Muhasebe Verilerinin Değer İlişkisi (1st ed.). Ankara: Nobel Bilimsel Eserler.
18. Ertuğrul, M. (2019a). A Review of the Literature on IFRS Adoption From the Perspective of the Value Relevance.
19. In H. Dincer & S. Yüksel (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Global Issues in Financial Communication and Investment Decision Making (pp. 367–394). IGI Global.
20. Ertuğrul, M. (2019b). Interpretation of the Value Relevance Indicator With(out) Dummies: Demeaning. In H.
21. Dincer & S. Yüksel (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Global Issues in Financial Communication and Investment Decision Making (pp. 192–213). IGI Global.
22. Ertuğrul, M. (2019c). Kapsamlı Gelirin Değer İlişkisine Yönelik Uluslararası Literatür Taraması. Mali Çözüm, 155, 55-80.
23. Ertuğrul, M., & Demir, V. (2018). How Does Unobserved Heterogeneity Affect Value Relevance? Australian Accounting Review, 28(2), 288–301.
24. Fındık, D., & Ocak, M. (2015). Türkiye’de Maddi Olmayan Duran Varlıkların Sınıflandırılması: Borsa İstanbul’a (BİST) İlişkin Dönemsel Bir Analiz. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, 68, 17–37.
25. Glova, J., & Mrazkova, S. (2018). Impact of Intangibles on Firm Value: An Empirical Evidence from European Public Companies. Ekonomický C̆asopis, 66(7), 665–680.
26. Gökten, S., & Atalay, B. (2019). Bilanço Dışı Varlıkların Muhasebe Bilgisinin Değer İlgililiği Üzerindeki Etkisi: Türkiye’ye Özgü Bulgular. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, 12(2), 271–288.
27. Goncharov, I., & Veenman, D. (2014). Stale and Scale Effects in Markets-Based Accounting Research: Evidence from the Valuation of Dividends. European Accounting Review, 23(1), 25–55.
28. Gordon, L. A., Loeb, M. P., & Sohail, T. (2010). Market Value of Voluntary Disclosure Concerning Information Security. MIS Quarterly, 34(3), 567–594.
29. Gow, I. D., Ormazabal, G., & Taylor, D. J. (2010). Correcting for Cross-Sectional and Time-Series Dependence in Accounting Research. Accounting Review, 85(2), 483–512.
30. Gujarati, D. (1970a). Use of Dummy Variables in Testing for Equality between Sets of Coefficients in Linear Regressions: A Generalization. American Statistician, 24(5), 18–22.
31. Gujarati, D. (1970b). Use of Dummy Variables in Testing for Equality between Sets of Coefficients in Two Linear Regressions: A Note. American Statistician, 24(1), 50–52.
32. Gümrah, Ü., & Adiloğlu, B. (2011). Value relevance and reliability of goodwill and intangibles on financial statements: The case of Istanbul Stock Exchange. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(2), 155–165.
33. Hayn, C. (1995). The information content of losses. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 20, 125–153.
34. Hellman, N. (2008). Accounting Conservatism under IFRS. Accounting in Europe, 5(2), 71–100.
35. Hevas, D. L. (2005). The value relevance of start up costs and other balance sheet items: Some Greek evidence. Managerial Finance, 31(2), 55–65.
36. Ji, H. (2018). The value relevance and reliability of intangible assets: Evidence from South Korea. Global Business and Finance Review, 23(2), 98–107.
37. Jones, D. A. (2018). Using real options theory to explain patterns in the valuation of research and development expenditures. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 51(3), 575–593.
38. Kargin, S. (2013). The Impact of IFRS on the Value Relevance of Accounting Information: Evidence from Turkish Firms. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 5(4), 71–80.
39. Ke, F. Y., Pham, T., & Fargher, N. (2004). The Relevance to Firm Valuation of Capitalized Research and Development Expenditures. Australian Accounting Review, 14(3), 72–76.
40. Kimouche, B., & Rouabhi, A. (2016). The impact of intangibles on the value relevance of accounting information: Evidence from French companies. Intangible Capital, 12(2), 506–529.
41. Kothari, S. P., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1995). Price and return models. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 20(2), 155–192.
42. Lev, B. (2000). Intangibles: Management, Measurement and Reporting. Brookings Institution Press.
43. Lev, B., & Sougiannis, T. (1996). The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 21, 107–138.
44. Lev, B., & Zarowin, P. (1999). The Boundaries of Financial Reporting and How to Extend Them. Journal of Accounting Research, 37(2), 353–385.
45. Machlup, F. (1962). The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
46. Ocak, M., & Fındık, D. (2019). The Impact of Intangible Assets and Sub-Components of Intangible Assets on Sustainable Growth and Firm Value: Evidence from Turkish Listed Firms. Sustainability, 11(19), 5359.
47. OECD. (2006). Creating Value from Intellectual Assets.
48. Ohlson, J. A. (1995). Earnings, Book Values, and Dividends in Equity Valuation. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11(2), 661–687.
49. Oliveira, L., Rodrigues, L. L., & Craig, R. (2010). Intangible assets and value relevance: Evidence from the Portuguese stock exchange. British Accounting Review, 42(4), 241–252.
50. Onali, E., Ginesti, G., & Vasilakis, C. (2017). How should we estimate value-relevance models? Insights from European data. British Accounting Review, 49(5), 460–473.
51. Özcan, A. (2017). Analysis of Value Relevance of Intangible Assets Under International Financial Reporting Standards: Evidence from Borsa Istanbul. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14(40), 364–377.
52. Petersen, M. A. (2009). Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Review of Financial Studies, 22(1), 435–480.
53. Suadiye, G. (2012). Value Relevance of Book Value & Earnings Under the Local GAAP and IFRS: Evidence from Turkey. Ege Akademik Bakış, 12(3), 301–310.
54. Türel, A. (2009). The Value Relevance of IFRS: The Case of Turkey. Acta Universitatis Danubius. Œconomica, 5(1), 119–128.
55. Türkiye Muhasebe Standartları (TMS) 38, Maddi Olmayan Duran Varlıklar Standardı.
56. Türkiye Finansal Raporlama Standartları (TFRS) 3, İşletme Birleşmeleri Standardı.