Verificando o nível de adoção da “IFRS 7 / CPC 40 - instrumentos financeiros: divulgação” por empresas brasileiras

• Autor(a) principal: Turra, Francisco José
• Data de Publicação: 2016
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações do Mackenzie
• Texto Completo: http://dspace.mackenzie.br/handle/10899/23276
• topic: instrumentos financeiros; CPC 40; divulgação; nível de evidenciação; CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::ECONOMIA::ECONOMIA REGIONAL E URBANA::RENDA E TRIBUTACAO

The objective of this research was to verify the disclosure level of the financial instruments (IRFS 7/CPC 40) of Brazilian public companies during the period of 2014. For that, qualitative and quantitative methods were used, descriptive as to its objectives, and documental - content analysis. The population is composed by the 172 largest non financial companies registered at CVM, which resulted in a sample of 70 companies. The data was obtained at the CVM website and in the Economatica’s data base. A disclosure index based on regulatory CPC 40’s requiriments was used to determine the disclosure levels. To analyse the influence of each characteristic in the level of disclosure, the sample was divided in two groups, the average of disclosure for each group and its pattern deviation were calculated, and tests of averages were applied to verify the certainty of the results. The main results suggest that characteristics relating to the size and ADR influence the level of disclosure of the companies. The characteristics related to regulated industries, indebtedness, performance and profitability are not relevant to the level of disclosure. Considering the obligatority of the standard, it would be expected the full disclosure - disclosure levels of 100% - but in reality it does not occur once the overall average of disclosure is 70.45%. This fact may infer lack of investment in staff competence and operational of most companies - only 3 of the analised companies reached the level of disclosure of 100% - and, on the other hand, complacency of the audit firms to accept this situation without clarifying the explanatory notes.