2008
DOI: 10.1515/zgre.2008.361
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

IFRS und Mittelstand – Auswirkungen der GmbH-Reform und Zukunft der Kapitalerhaltung

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The arithmetic mean value is 3.46 with a standard deviation of 1.37 for non-publicly traded mid-sized corporations and 3.87 with a standard deviation of 1.48 for publicly traded mid-sized corporations, whereas the mean values do differ significantly. In respect of dividend assessment (criteria 1.b), findings are closely similar but-as expected (according to prevailing opinion in Germany IFRS aren't suitable for dividend assessment [90]- [96])-more obvious. 36.30% of the non-publicly traded mid-sized corporations prefer German-GAAP and only 8.67% expect IFRS to be more qualified for criteria fulfillment.…”
Section: German-gaap and (Full-)ifrssupporting
confidence: 76%
“…The arithmetic mean value is 3.46 with a standard deviation of 1.37 for non-publicly traded mid-sized corporations and 3.87 with a standard deviation of 1.48 for publicly traded mid-sized corporations, whereas the mean values do differ significantly. In respect of dividend assessment (criteria 1.b), findings are closely similar but-as expected (according to prevailing opinion in Germany IFRS aren't suitable for dividend assessment [90]- [96])-more obvious. 36.30% of the non-publicly traded mid-sized corporations prefer German-GAAP and only 8.67% expect IFRS to be more qualified for criteria fulfillment.…”
Section: German-gaap and (Full-)ifrssupporting
confidence: 76%
“…The pros and cons have been considered in depth in numerous articles and books (apart from the literature mentioned in the introduction, the following can be named: Wagner, 1998Wagner, , 2000Hennrichs, 1999Hennrichs, , 2005Treptow, 1999;Euler, 2000Euler, , 2002Herzig, 2000;Kirchhof, 2000;Sigloch, 2000Sigloch, , 2004Heyd, 2001;Kahle, 2001Kahle, , 2003Kahle, , 2006Freedman, 2004;Herzig and Hausen, 2004;Eberhartinger, 2005;Kußmaul and Zabel, 2005;Schön, 2005;Jensen-Nissen and Lochmann, 2006;Spengel, 2006). Many of them are of German or Austrian origin which is not surprising considering the close tax link in those countries.…”
Section: Ifrs As a Tax Basementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, legal and political arguments against IFRS as a tax base exist. On the one hand the constitutionality of using standards set by a multinational, democratically not legitimated body for taxation is more than doubtful (Weber-Grellet, 2003;Van Hulle, 2004;Hennrichs, 2005). 9 On the other hand, one can assume that the political will to surrender parts of fiscal sovereignty to the IASB is limited.…”
Section: Ifrs As a Tax Basementioning
confidence: 99%