请教，tax contingency是甚意思？

是 否 +2 论坛币

k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群

赵安豆老师微信：zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

立即领取

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币！

+2 论坛币

如题，急请教！

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

分享0 收藏0 回帖

关键词：Contingency Ency con ING tax

yaowangxin 发表于 2014-8-31 18:06
如题，急请教！

或有，可能有，可能沒有，依赖其它事情是否发生而决定的税收

songlinjllive 发表于 2014-8-31 18:35
或有，可能有，可能沒有，依赖其它事情是否发生而决定的税收

Tax contingency
Frischmann et al. (2008) and Robinson and Schmidt (2009) address the market pricing of the unrecognized tax benefits(i.e., the tax contingency). Both report that the market seems to view the contingency account positively, consistent with a positive perception of tax planning activities. However, potential problems suggest caution when interpreting their findings, leaving the door open for future research to address the suspect issues.
These two papers examine the market reaction to the release of the contingency balance in the 10-Q. Frischmann et al.(2008) regress the 3-day abnormal return (computed around the release of the 10-Q) on the unrecognized tax benefit balance reported in the footnotes (as required by FIN 48) and unexpected earnings. They find that the contingency balance is positively associated with the abnormal return, consistent with the market viewing tax planning positively. Robinson and Schmidt (2009)expand on this finding, testing whether this positive relation varies with the quality of the disclosures. They find that the association is less positive for firms with high quality disclosures. This result provides an indication that although the market views tax planning positively, it is concerned with the potential costs of disclosure related to this tax planning.
While these results are interesting, there are a number of potential problems. First, both papers only examine the market reaction during the 1st quarter of 2007 (i.e., the first quarter firms provided FIN 48 disclosures). It is unclear whether these results hold in subsequent periods after the market had time to process the implications of this complex standard. Second, since the returns are computed around the release of the 10-Q, the market could be reacting to other information, much of which could be correlated with the contingency balance. Third, both papers use the contingency balance, rather than the unexpected contingency balance, the latter of which is more relevant when considering market reactions. The implicit assumption is that the market expects a balance of zero; thus, the entire realized balance is unexpected. This assumption limits our ability to interpret the results.