Journal articles on the topic 'Intangible Assets'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Intangible Assets.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Intangible Assets.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Ji, Xu-Dong, and Wei Lu. "The value relevance and reliability of intangible assets." Asian Review of Accounting 22, no. 3 (August 26, 2014): 182–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ara-10-2013-0064.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the value relevance of intangible assets, including goodwill and other types of intangibles in the pre- and post-adoption periods of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Most importantly, this paper investigates whether the value relevance of reported intangible assets is associated with their value reliability. Furthermore, this paper reports whether the adoption of IFRS improves the value relevance of intangible assets and alters the relationship between value relevance and reliability. Design/methodology/approach – Both price and return models based on Ohlosn theory (1995) are employed to test the value relevance and value reliability of intangibles. Australian-listed firms with capitalised intangibles from 2001 to 2009 are selected in this study. The sample includes 6,650 firm-year observations. Findings – The main result shows that capitalised intangible assets are value relevant in Australia, in both the pre- and post-adoption of IFRS periods. Value relevance is higher in firms with more reliable information on intangible assets. This study finds that the value relevance of intangibles has declined in the post-adoption period of IFRS. However, the positive relationship between the value relevance and the reliability of intangibles has remained unchanged in the post-adoption period. Originality/value – The paper contributes a new measurement of value reliability of accounting information about intangibles. This paper is one of few studies on the relationship between value relevance and reliability of intangible assets. The results show that value relevance is positively associated with value reliability. This suggests that, when accounting standard setters assess whether the existing IFRS of intangibles should be improved in the future, they need to think not only in terms of whether the standard can provide more relevant information of intangibles to investors but also whether the standard can make the information of intangibles more reliable.
2
Davidson, Steven J. "Intangible Assets." Emergency Medicine News 24, no. 5 (May 2002): 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00132981-200205000-00022.
Full text
3
Roberts, Diane. "Intangible Assets." Critical Perspectives on Accounting 13, no. 5-6 (October 2002): 742. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/cpac.2001.0111.
Full text
4
Haji, Abdifatah Ahmed, and Nazli Anum Mohd Ghazali. "The role of intangible assets and liabilities in firm performance: empirical evidence." Journal of Applied Accounting Research 19, no. 1 (February 12, 2018): 42–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jaar-12-2015-0108.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is primarily to explore the extent of intangible assets and liabilities of large Malaysian companies. The authors also examine whether intangible assets and liabilities of a firm have similar or contrasting roles in firm performance. Design/methodology/approach Using a direct and straightforward measure of intangible assets and liabilities, the authors examine a large pool of data from large Malaysian companies over a six-year period spanning from 2008 to 2013. Findings The longitudinal analyses show a significant number of the sample companies, between 34 and 59.33 percent, have a consistent pattern of intangible liabilities. The authors also find firms with intangible liabilities have significantly underperformed financially than a control group of firms. In addition, the authors find that intangible liabilities have significant negative impact on firm performance whereas intangible assets have a contrasting positive impact on firm performance. Research limitations/implications One limitation of this study is that the authors have only used a single measure of intangible assets and liabilities. Albeit the measures used are straightforward and more objective, there could be other measures to capture intangibles. Practical implications The research findings have several theoretical as well as policy implications. Theoretically, the authors extend the resource-based view to the intangible asset-liability mix, affirming the crucial role of intangible resources in financial performance whilst introducing the unfavorable role of intangible liabilities in corporate financial performance. In terms of policy implications, the research findings provide initial empirical input to emerging calls for broader perspectives of intangibles, beyond intangible assets to include intangible liabilities, and therefore belong to an emerging paradigm toward the nature of intangibles. Originality/value This study documents a rare empirical account of the contrasting roles of intangible assets and liabilities in corporate financial performance.
5
Green, Annie. "Intangible asset knowledge." VINE 38, no. 2 (June 20, 2008): 184–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03055720810889824.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present the culmination of an engineering concept of a knowledge valuation system that identifies the name of intangible assets.Design/methodology/approachThe paper employs the methodology or approach of identifying or naming intangible assets within the business environment.FindingsThe paper finds that knowing what to capture is fundamental to alignment with measures and indicators inherent in a business operational data.Originality/valueThe paper tackles the elusiveness of intangibles and attempts to bring structure and identification to a complex and confusing discipline. The decomposition of an intangible assets system that names intangibles could be the first step to measuring, valuing and managing them.
6
Frey, Hannes, and Andreas Oehler. "Intangible assets in Germany." Journal of Applied Accounting Research 15, no. 2 (September 2, 2014): 235–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jaar-07-2014-0068.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – Intangible assets are regarded as the future value drivers of company performance. However, hardly anything is known about the actual importance and influence of intangible assets. The purpose of this paper is to fill this gap, so the authors analyse the German stock market index DAX and accomplish a survey among the German Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) concerning intangible assets. Design/methodology/approach – In a first step, the authors analyse the balance sheet data and the corresponding notes of the companies with regard to reported values of intangible assets and applied valuation methods. The sample period covers the years from 2005 to 2008. In a second step, the authors analyse the statements of the German CPAs with regard to intangible assets. The authors sent a standardised questionnaire to all 180 offices of the top ten German auditing firms. Findings – The results indicate that intangible assets have gained in importance, while information on valuation methods is still scarce. According to the German CPAs, the current influence of intangible assets on company performance is on a high level and even will increase during the next few years. The mostly used valuation approach for the fair value measurement of patented technologies is the income approach. Furthermore, the accounting standards leave room for accounting policy – a result which casts doubt on the reliability of financial statements. Originality/value – For the first time not only annual balance sheet data but also corresponding notes regarding intangible assets are analysed. The findings are connected with a survey of an expert group for the valuation of intangibles.
7
Voyko, D. V., and A. V. Voyko. "INTANGIBLE ASSETS: ISSUES OF ACCOUNTING AND MANAGEMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF DIGITALIZATION OF THE ECONOMY." Vestnik Universiteta, no. 9 (October 26, 2019): 112–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.26425/1816-4277-2019-9-112-117.
Full textAbstract:
The issues of classification and approaches to management of intangible assets of companies have been considered. Main features of intangible assets have been examined, as well as normative regulation of financial accounting of them. The important point of intangible assets management is their classification and distribution to homogeneous groups, that allows us create and clarify intangibles’ management policy in terms of digitalization. In addition, the authors have paid attention in the article to the issues of intangible assets valuation. Basic stages of intangible`s assessment have been analyzed, as well as current problems of estimation of true value of intangible assets.
8
Kimouche, Bilal. "Intangible Assets, Goodwill and Earnings Management: Evidence from France and the Uk." Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia 22, no. 1 (June 1, 2022): 111–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/foli-2022-0006.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Research background: The literature has argued that accounting for intangible assets and goodwill provides a wide range for managers to manipulate earnings. Purpose: This paper aims to investigate the impact of accounting treatment of intangible assets and goodwill on earnings management. Research methodology: The study included 115 French companies and 100 UK companies, during 2011–2019, employing multiple regression, where earnings management was measured through discretionary accruals; while accounting for intangibles and goodwill was divided into the capitalization and decapitalization of intangible assets, recognition and derecognition of goodwill, and depreciation and impairment of intangible assets and goodwill. Results: According to the results, accounting for intangible assets and goodwill has an impact on earnings management, while it is used differently between French and UK companies. In France, companies employ intangible assets capitalization to manipulate earnings, while UK companies use intangible assets capitalization and goodwill recognition. Novelty: This study provides supplementary evidence for standards setters, managers, and auditors about the contribution of accounting for intangible assets and goodwill in the quality of financial reporting and explores the new tools and practices of earnings management.
9
Stepnov, Maksym, and Nataly Amalyan. "MANAGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL AS AN INGREDIENT OF INTANGIBLE ASSETS IN HOTEL INDUSTRY." Business, Economics, Sustainability, Leadership and Innovation, no. 8 (June 1, 2022): 37–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.37659/2663-5070-2022-8-37-46.
Full textAbstract:
In the period of accelerated development of the knowledge-based economy, intangible assets are increasingly viewed as a critical element of the growth of almost any existing business sphere. Despite the fact that intangible assets cannot be seen or touched, they nonetheless have value and are critical to a company’s success and growth. Intangibles as a whole and intellectual capital in particular can also add to the value of a company’s equity. As a result, intangible asset maintenance and management might be the difference between success and failure. Hence, identifying and developing a solid strategy to generate intangible assets and reduce risks is crucial. The paper provides an observational study of the hotel industry’s development alongside with the analysis of the difficulties in intangible asset management and intellectual capital in this sphere. Based on past internship experience as a hotel administrator, the thesis paper explores the value and importance of intangible assets in the industry.
10
Ghamari, Maryam, Mojtaba Saeidinia, Mehrsa Hashemi, and Mohammadreza Aghaei. "INTANGIBLE ASSETS REPORTING." Australian Journal of Business and Management Research 01, no. 11 (June 22, 2012): 70–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.52283/nswrca.ajbmr.20120111a08.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this study is to investigate concerning intangible assets reporting, it is stable roots of organization’s success, and how they evaluate and report in the accounting. There are some of the problems in reporting of intangible assets causes for some of the investors, regulators, analysts and etc. in this survey mentioned to some of the recommendations for system of intangible assets reporting. It purposes that companies should measure information relevant to their intangible assets accurately. In this study explore set of intangible assets very valuable such as research and development (R&D), human capital; brand equity and innovation capital that focus on every which can enhance sustainable of the companies.
11
Budworth, D. W. "Intangible assets evaluated." Science and Public Policy 16, no. 6 (December 1989): 372–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/spp/16.6.372.
Full text
12
Schoemaker, Michiel, and Jan Jonker. "Managing intangible assets." Journal of Management Development 24, no. 6 (July 2005): 506–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621710510600964.
Full text
13
Pacheco, Juliane, and Suliani Rover. "Value Relevance of Intangible Assets Recognized in a Business Combination." Contabilidade Gestão e Governança 24, no. 2 (August 31, 2021): 167–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.51341/1984-3925_2021v24n2a2.
Full textAbstract:
Objective: To verify the value relevance of intangible assets recognized in a business combination of Brazilian publicly traded companies.Method: The sample of 165 companies, covering 962 observations, from 2010 to 2017, was analyzed using five panel data regressions based on Ohlson’s model (1995; 2005) to test four research hypotheses.Originality/Relevance: Value relevance studies have analyzed goodwill, but there are gaps this study seeks to fill. The study addresses the value relevance of intangibles assets recognized in a business combination for the stock market, exploring goodwill and other types of intangibles recognized in a business combination. Also, IFRS 3 was discussed in 2015, bringing the stock market’s perspective and the standard application to the center of accounting research.Results: The results showed that goodwill represents 23% to 30% of intangible assets recorded in the balance sheet, while other intangibles identified represent around 5.6%. As for value relevance, it was observed that both the recognized value of the intangible assets and, when segregated in goodwill and in identified intangible assets, were significant and positively related to the market value. Concerning the nature of intangibles recognized in business combinations, some of them were related to market value.Theoretical/Methodological contributions: The research contributes to value relevance literature on business combinations, allowing us to understand that they are relevant to the stock market and contribute to Brazilian companies’ market value.
14
Cabral, Rafael de Oliveira, Gracielly Pereira Da Silva, Robelius De-Bortoli, and Gabriel Francisco Da Silva. "Certification seal to value tangible and intangible assets." Concilium 23, no. 6 (April 30, 2023): 440–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.53660/clm-1144-23d34.
Full textAbstract:
Valuing Intangible Assets is an advantage for companies and institutions that want to keep in constant evolution and development. This scientific article aims to demonstrate and explain the difference between tangible and intangible assets. Check why and how the certification seal values tangible and intangible assets, as well as its contribution to avoiding the process of degradation and amortization. In this work, we focused on the intangibles, mainly the Certification Seals, as they are part of the work group's project. We conclude that value management must be done through special control of Intellectual Property Sciences and Technological Prospecting.
15
Yasyshena, Valentyna. "Analysis of dissertations addressing issues of accounting, analysis, and audit of intangible assets in Ukraine." Herald of Ternopil National Economic University, no. 3(89) (October 10, 2018): 79–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.35774/visnyk2018.03.079.
Full textAbstract:
The paper presents an analysis of dissertations defended in Ukraine during the years 1998-2018 in specialty 08.00.09 (08.06.04) “Accounting, analysis, and audit (by types of economic activity)”, in which issues of accounting, analysis, and audit of intangible assets were discussed. The dissertation projects are systematized thematically according to fifteen research areas, namely: economic essence, meanings, and definitions of terms; identification and recognition; classification; evaluation; documenting; accounting; depreciation issues; assets inventory; reporting; legislation; analysis; audit; control; computer technology and information systems; modeling. It is revealed that the major trends in the latest studies on accounting, analysis, audit and control of intangible assets, are related to matters of assigning intangibles to particular reporting units and defining intangible scores. It is found that issues of intangible assets are mostly addressed in the following areas: accounting; economic essence, meanings, and definitions of terms; classifications; evaluation; documenting; analysis; modeling; computer technology and information systems. Fewer studies are related to the development of reporting indicators, audit, identification and recognition, control, depreciation issues, assets inventory, legislation. The necessity for further in-depth study is shown and the issues to be addressed are the following: information disclosure on intangible assets in accounting; specification of alternative approaches to recognition, evaluation and consolidation in accounting; application of computer technology and information systems; application of the modeling method; increase of business value through effective use of intangible assets; development of the evaluation model for trademark effectiveness; development of customer base and the procedure for its assessment as an intangible asset; improvement of methods of depreciation; taxation of intangible assets operations; improvement of the current legislative background; methods of analysis, audit and control of availability, movement and efficiency of intangible assets; methodology and arrangements for management accounting of intangible assets; ways to build accounting and analytical information system for managing intangible assets.
16
Toro, Lina María Maya, and Vicente Ripoll Ripoll. "Valuation of Environmental Intangible Assets: A Bibliometric and Systematic Analysis." Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental 18, no. 8 (April 17, 2024): e05136. http://dx.doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n8-026.
Full textAbstract:
Objective: This paper presents a systematic bibliometric analysis of the literature on intangible valuation, especially environmental intangibles, to analyze the relevance of the subject, the state of scientific knowledge, and research opportunities. Theoretical Framework: Intangible assets are relevant for companies because they can contribute to higher company valuation. Some research studies have successfully classified the different types of intangible assets and developed models to value companies that include them. However, diverse results have not allowed reaching a consensus on their use in company valuation. Method: The Knowledge Development Process-Constructivist (ProKnow-C) methodology was used; articles on intangible assets were analyzed with the VOSViewer® software, while an analysis of the articles for environmental assets was performed with the lens.org platform. Results and Discussion: It was determined that most intangible asset valuation models are empirical and use regressions to perform the valuation. Intellectual capital is one of the intangible assets that has been proposed by more models. Research Implications: Some opportunities for future research on this topic are identified; these are adjusted to models that consider the main environmental assets and are easily applied by companies.
17
Amano, Yoshiaki. "Real Effects of Intangibles Capitalization—Empirical Evidence from Voluntary IFRS Adoption in Japan." Journal of International Accounting Research 19, no. 3 (August 24, 2020): 19–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/jiar-19-539.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACT This study examines how firm behaviors are affected by the voluntary adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Japan, which has expanded the scope for the capitalization of intangible assets compared with the Japanese Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Prior research suggests that capitalization of intangibles is preferred by firms with larger intangibles and that it enables them to increase intangible investments. Using empirical data from Japanese IFRS adopters, this study analyzes the relationship between firms' intangible asset amounts and their voluntary adoption of IFRS. The results show that (1) the more intangibles firms possess, the more likely they are to adopt IFRS, and (2) once firms decide to adopt IFRS, their intangible assets increase compared with matched non-adopters. Additional analysis shows that this increase is partly attributable to an increased volume and value of mergers and acquisitions after IFRS adoption, suggesting that the real actions of the adopters changed.
18
Russell, Mark. "The valuation of pharmaceutical intangibles." Journal of Intellectual Capital 17, no. 3 (July 11, 2016): 484–506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jic-10-2015-0090.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to value the patents of pharmaceutical companies using discounted cash flows, and compare the value-relevance of these assets against alternative intangible asset measures such as reported intangible assets and R & D capital. Design/methodology/approach – The study values pharmaceutical intangibles using three methods: an income method; the sum of unamortised R & D expenditures; the firm’s reported intangible assets. Value-relevance tests use ordinary least squares regression and Vuong and Clarke tests. Findings – First, the study finds that the discounted cash-flow valuation of pharmaceutical patents is value-relevant. Second, the value of pharmaceutical patents explains market value better than reported intangible assets but not R & D capital. However, the valuation of pharmaceutical patents is more consistent with the risks of R & D than the valuation of R & D capital which assumes recovery of R & D expenditure. Originality/value – This is the first known study that values patents using an income method and compares those valuations with reported intangible assets and R & D capital valuation models.
19
Zhang, Ivy Xiying, and Yong Zhang. "Accounting Discretion and Purchase Price Allocation After Acquisitions." Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 32, no. 2 (July 27, 2016): 241–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0148558x15598693.
Full textAbstract:
The recent movement in standards setting toward fair-value-based accounting beyond financial assets and liabilities calls for more empirical evidence on fair-value measurement, especially that of intangible assets. This article studies the initial valuation of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets after acquisitions. We find that the allocation of purchase price to goodwill and identifiable intangible assets is related to the economic determinants of the valuation. However, it is also significantly affected by managerial incentives arising from the differential treatments of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) 142. The same managerial discretions are not exhibited in the purchase price allocation prior to SFAS 142, when goodwill and other intangibles are both amortized. These findings suggest that unverifiable fair value measures are associated with the underlying economics but also deviate from the true values in the presence of management reporting incentives. Further analysis suggests that external appraisers constrain managerial discretion in intangible asset valuation to an extent but do not completely eliminate it.
20
Pastor, Damián, Jozef Glova, František Lipták, and Viliam Kováč. "Intangibles and methods for their valuation in financial terms: Literature review." Intangible Capital 13, no. 2 (February 10, 2017): 387. http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.752.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to review literature devoted to intangibles and their valuation and give examples of the methods that can be used for valuation of individual intangibles in financial terms.Design/methodology/approach: Paper presents a systematic review of articles dedicated to intangibles and their valuation.Findings: This review shows that there is a need for consensus in definitions of intangibles, intangible assets, knowledge assets and other related terms. These terms are used interchangeably in spite of their different meanings. Many methods for valuation of intangibles can be found in the literature, but widely accepted list of basic intangibles with suggested methods for their valuation in financial terms is still missing.Research limitations/implications: Not all the papers related to this topic could be covered in this paper. Presented list of important intangible components may be enhanced and examples of some other methods for their valuation may be added in the future.Practical implications: Paper calls for development of framework comprising list of the most important intangibles, proposals of methods used for their valuation and examples of their use. This framework can be helpful for organization, which are confronted with a difficult task of intangibles valuation.Originality/value: Basic definitions and differences between intangibles, intangible assets, identifiable intangible assets, knowledge assets and intellectual capital have not been mentioned in one paper yet. List of intangibles and methods for their valuation gives a direction for future work that can be fruitful for valuation of intangibles.
21
Jones, Stewart. "Does the Capitalization of Intangible Assets Increase the Predictability of Corporate Failure?" Accounting Horizons 25, no. 1 (March 1, 2011): 41–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/acch.2011.25.1.41.
Full textAbstract:
SYNOPSIS: The value relevance of intangible assets is now well documented in the literature, leading to calls for standard setters to adopt more flexible reporting rules for these assets. In this study, I evaluate the merits of intangibles capitalization from a bankruptcy and default risk perspective, which has not been previously considered in the literature. The study is conducted in a unique reporting environment, where managers have had considerable discretion to capitalize a wide range of intangibles over an extended period. Three main results are reported. First, failing firms capitalize intangible assets more aggressively than non-failed firms over the 16-year sample period, but particularly over the five-year period leading up to firm failure. Second, drawing on the accounting choice literature, I find that managers’ propensity to capitalize intangible assets has a strong statistical association with earnings management proxies, particularly among failing firms. Finally, voluntary capitalization of intangibles has strong discriminating and predictive power in a firm failure model, even after controlling for several other factors.
22
Hintzmann, Carolina, Josep Lladós-Masllorens, and Raul Ramos. "Intangible Assets and Labor Productivity Growth." Economies 9, no. 2 (May 24, 2021): 82. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/economies9020082.
Full textAbstract:
We examine the contribution to labor productivity growth in the manufacturing sector of investment in different intangible asset categories—computerized information, innovative property, and economic competencies—for a set of 18 European countries between 1995 and 2017, as well as whether this contribution varies between different groups of countries. The motivation is to go a step further and identify which single or combination of intangible assets are relevant. The main findings can be summarized as follows. Firstly, all the three different categories of intangible assets contribute to labor productivity growth. In particular, intangible assets related to economic competences together with innovative property assets have been identified as the main drivers; specifically, advertising and marketing, organizational capital, research and development (R&D) investment, and design. Secondly, splitting the sample of European Union (EU) member states into three groups—northern, central and southern Europe—allows for the identification of a significant differentiated behavior between and within groups, in terms of the effects of investment in intangible assets on labor productivity growth. We conclude that measures promoting investment in intangibles at EU level should be accompanied by specific measures focusing on each country’s needs, for the purpose of promoting labor productivity growth. The obtained evidence suggests that the solution for the innovation deficit of some European economies consist not only of raising R&D expenditure, but also exploiting complementarities between different types of assets.
23
Peng, Yi-Ting, Jia-Ying Zhang, and Justine S. Chang. "Exploring the Relevance of Intangible Assets and Capital Structure." International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance 12, no. 6 (December 2021): 144–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.18178/ijtef.2021.12.6.709.
Full textAbstract:
With the rapid development of technology, intangible assets play an increasingly important role in company nowadays. In the past, the reason why intangible assets were less used by companies as financing tools is largely because intangible assets have higher risks than tangible assets. This study focuses on publicly listed companies in Taiwan from 2013 to 2019 as the research object, and primarily explores whether intangible assets can be used as a company's guarantee, financing, and mortgage tool, and whether intangible assets will affect the composition of companies' capital structure. The empirical results showed that intangible assets have significant positive correlation with the company’s capital structure, indicating that intangible assets can be an additional choice to companies as a financing tool when companies face financial difficulties. Therefore, in the era of knowledge economy, intangible assets are like tangible assets that can be used as collateral for loans.
24
Hatch, John A. "Valuing Routine Intangible Assets." Business Valuation Review 23, no. 4 (December 2004): 192–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.5791/0882-2875-23.4.192.
Full text
25
Fomina, O. V., O. O. Avhustоva, and I. K. Shushakova. "Assessing the Intangible Assets." Business Inform 4, no. 519 (2021): 154–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.32983/2222-4459-2021-4-154-160.
Full textAbstract:
The article is concerned with the issues of assessing the intellectual property rights as part of intangible assets of enterprises. The article is aimed at substantiating the theoretical principles and improving methodological approaches to the assessment of intangible assets in the process of formation of the value of enterprise. The normative-legal regulation of valuation of intangible assets in order to determine the value of intangible assets of enterprises in monetary terms for the purposes of accounting and in the field of professional valuation activity is studied. The interrelationship of approaches of independent professional estimation and accounting valuation in order to apply it to the needs of accountance is specified. Described are the cost (based on determining the cost of expenses, necessary for the reproduction or substitution of the valuation object), profit (used to determine the valuation of intellectual property rights, based on the application of assessing procedures for transferring the expected profit to the value of the assessed object) and comparative (determines the market value of an intangible asset, when there is sufficient reliable information on prices in the market of such objects and the terms of contracts for the disposal of property rights to such objects) approaches to the valuation of intangible assets. The formulas for computing the value of intangible assets based on the cost approach are provided. The assessment of intangible assets is carried out according to the above specified formulas of the cost approach on the example of a patent for invention. It is determined that in the absence of an active market to determine the fair value of intangible assets, it is advisable to apply the cost approach, namely: the method of direct reproduction.
26
Chrobak, Wojciech. "Valuation of Intangible Assets." Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego Finanse Rynki Finansowe Ubezpieczenia 82 (2016): 347–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.18276/frfu.2016.4.82/2-30.
Full text
27
ERIK SVEIBY, KARL. "The Intangible Assets Monitor." Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting 2, no. 1 (January 1997): 73–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb029036.
Full text
28
Joia, Luiz Antonio. "Measuring intangible corporate assets." Journal of Intellectual Capital 1, no. 1 (March 2000): 68–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14691930010371636.
Full text
29
St‐Pierre, Josée, and Josée Audet. "Intangible assets and performance." Journal of Intellectual Capital 12, no. 2 (April 19, 2011): 202–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14691931111123395.
Full text
30
Trent, William A. "Valuing Routine Intangible Assets." CFA Digest 35, no. 3 (August 2005): 49–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.2469/dig.v35.n3.1722.
Full text
31
Müller, Armin. "Controlling von intangible assets." Controlling und Management 48, no. 6 (November 2004): 396–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf03254250.
Full text
32
Ovchinnikova, O. "Audit of intangible assets." Auditor, no. 15 (August 13, 2015): 21–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.12737/12655.
Full text
33
Shlyapnikovа, E. A., I. P. Seleznevа, I. A. Seleznevа, and V. I. Khoruzhy. "Intangible assets: accounting policies." Buhuchet v sel'skom hozjajstve (Accounting in Agriculture), no. 3 (March 21, 2023): 147–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.33920/sel-11-2303-02.
Full textAbstract:
The article reveals the features of the formation of an accounting policy in terms of organizing accounting, recognition, control over the presence and movement, assessment, revaluation and depreciation of the value of intangible assets in accordance with FSBU 14/2022 «Intangible assets». The technical and methodological aspects of accounting of intangible assets are considered.
34
Dancaková, Darya, Jakub Sopko, Jozef Glova, and Alena Andrejovská. "The Impact of Intangible Assets on the Market Value of Companies: Cross-Sector Evidence." Mathematics 10, no. 20 (October 16, 2022): 3819. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/math10203819.
Full textAbstract:
The impact of corporate intangibles on a company’s market value has been a widely debated topic. A large body of literature has separately examined the industry’s effect- or firm-specific attributes, such as industry type, company size, company age, or indebtedness and profitability, on the motivation to disclose information on intangible assets, but without considering a comprehensive view. This paper examines the role intangible assets play in a firm’s market valuation besides other firm-specific characteristics. The reducted dataset we use in this study comprises 250 publicly traded companies operating in four different business sectors in France, Germany, and Switzerland for the ten years from 2009 to 2018. Based on the panel data regression models, the study provides an extension of previous knowledge about the effect intangible assets may have on the investors’ view of a company’s value, where the value added of this paper is the empirical evidence of a possible link between the intangible assets’ disclosure and the market value of German, French, and Swiss enterprises. The importance of our contribution lies in a comparative analysis carried out to reveal substantial differences in the impact of intangible assets and innovation activity on the market value firms in three European countries and across four industry sectors. Although the results show the positive impact of intangible assets on the companies’ market value, we suggest that investors still assess companies based on their profitability rather than considering the information on intangible assets the enterprises disclose in their financial statements.
35
Gatuyu, Justice. "Taxing a Digital Economy: Exploring Intangible Assets to Broaden Revenue Base in Kenya." Strathmore Law Review 4, no. 1 (June 1, 2019): 103–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.52907/slr.v4i1.112.
Full textAbstract:
The world economy has shifted from brick and mortar industries to a knowledge and service economy. In the age of digital evolution, intangible assets have become the new drivers of corporate profit and restructured business models of leading firms. Creators of these assets look forward to monetising and making gains from them. Equally, governments expect to extract revenues by way of taxation. As cross-border trade broadens with the rise of globalisation, intangible assets have increasingly become an area of concern in relation to tax avoidance schemes especially by global firms. In Kenya, appreciation of intangible assets has been rising. This study surveys the prospects of expanding Kenya’s revenue base by tapping intangible assets. The digital economy in Kenya is generally inadequately regulated. This leaves tax loopholes which this study explores in order to identify where revenue can be imposed. In order to make recommendations, the study equally focuses on accounting, valuation, and transfer pricing of intangible assets for tax purposes. To this extent, numerous reforms are necessary to ensure that the taxation of intangibles is optimal and does not distort the rise of a digital economy.
36
Costa, Roberta, and Simonluca Evangelista. "An AHP approach to assess brand intangible assets." Measuring Business Excellence 12, no. 2 (May 30, 2008): 68–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13683040810881207.
Full text
37
Sanchez-Segura, Maria-Isabel, Alejandro Ruiz-Robles, Fuensanta Medina-Dominguez, and German-Lenin Dugarte-Peña. "Strategic characterization of process assets based on asset quality and business impact." Industrial Management & Data Systems 117, no. 8 (September 11, 2017): 1720–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/imds-10-2016-0422.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present the strategic intangible process assets characterization (SIPAC) methodology illustrated by an example of its application to the field of information technology (IT). This is a pioneering methodology for characterizing the impact and quality of intangible process assets and intellectual capital as levers to achieve organizational objectives. This strategic intellectual capital approach will help to identify both intangible assets and indicators geared to meeting organizational objectives. This is of vital importance since the success of an organization can be construed in terms of goal achievement. Design/methodology/approach The paper illustrates an example of the step-by-step application of the proposed methodology at an IT company. The aim is to describe its use in a real case so that other companies can benefit from the replication of the methodology used. Findings The proposed methodology (SIPAC) that the authors have designed and applied has been found to be useful and provide an insightful new point of view for strategic decision making in the IT industry taking into account intangible process assets. Practical implications The proposed methodology has been exemplified in a real case. This should help organizations to use the methodology to replicate the results. Originality/value Each and every organization has know-how represented by intangible assets. This paper meets an identified need to use intangible process assets as levers to help organizations achieve their business goals.
38
Seo, Hyeon Sik, and YoungJun Kim. "INTANGIBLE ASSETS INVESTMENT AND FIRMS’ PERFORMANCE: EVIDENCE FROM SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES IN KOREA." Journal of Business Economics and Management 21, no. 2 (March 3, 2020): 421–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2020.12022.
Full textAbstract:
While many studies have examined the relationship between investment in intangibles assets and performance in large corporations, current research is lacking in regard to intangible investments in small and medium enterprises (SMEs). This study looks at SMEs in which intangible investments would usually be minor because they tend to consider intangible investment as an inefficient cost and concentrate on investments in tangible assets. This paper aims to contribute to the current literature and suggests that investment in the intangible assets of (human capital, advertising, R&D) is essential for SMEs pursuing superior firm performance. Actual data collected from 173 SMEs in Korea were analyzed employing hierarchical regression methodology. Results indicate that all three intangible resources have a positive effect on a firm’s profitability and value. Interestingly, this research finds that investment in advertising has the most influential impact on a firm’s profitability and value. This study has implications for SMEs in achieving their profitability and value. The results in this study highlight that intangible investment is not a waste of money for SMEs, and that business managers could strategically utilize these three key contributors (human capital, advertising, R&D) and adopt investment in intangible assets to accomplish their managerial goals.
39
Orhangazi, Özgür. "The role of intangible assets in explaining the investment–profit puzzle." Cambridge Journal of Economics 43, no. 5 (November 25, 2018): 1251–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cje/bey046.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Starting around the early 2000s, and especially after the 2008 crisis, the rate of capital accumulation for US nonfinancial corporations has slowed down despite relatively high profitability; indicating a weakening of the link between profitability and investment. While the literature mostly focuses on financialisation and globalisation as the reasons behind this slowdown, I suggest adding another layer to these explanations and argue that, in conjunction with financialisation and globalisation, we need to pay attention to the increased use of intangible assets by nonfinancial corporations in the last two decades. Intangibles such as brand names, trademarks, patents and copyrights play a role in the widening of the profit–investment gap as the use of these assets enables firms to increase market power and profitability without necessarily generating a corresponding increase in fixed capital investment. After discussing the ways nonfinancial corporations use intangible assets, I look at large corporations in the USA and find the following: (i) The ratio of intangible assets to the capital stock increased in general. This increase is highest for firms in high-technology, healthcare, nondurables and telecommunications. (ii) Industries with higher intangible asset ratios have lower investment to profit ratios. (iii) Industries with higher intangible asset ratios have higher markups and profitability. (iv) The composition of the nonfinancial corporate sector has changed and the weight of high-technology and healthcare firms has increased; but this increase did not correspond to an equal increase in their investment share. The decline in the investment share of durables, nondurables and machinery is matched by an increase in the investment share of location-specific industries with low intangible asset use, most notably firms in energy extraction. In general, these firms have steadier markups and higher investment to profit ratios. (v) Yet, intangible-intensive industries’ profitability has increased faster than their share of investment or total assets. All in all, these findings are in line with the suggestion that the increased use of intangible assets enables firms to have high profitability without a corresponding increase in investment.
40
Bolek, Monika, and Katerina Lyroudi. "Is There Any Relation between Intellectual Capital and the Capital Structure of a Company? The Case of Polish Listed Companies." e-Finanse 11, no. 4 (December 1, 2015): 23–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/fiqf-2016-0126.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This study investigates the relationship of the intellectual capital of a company (proxied by its intangible assets), with leverage and equity and capital structure. Our empirical results indicate that there is a negative relation between the intellectual capital (intangible assets) of a company and its leverage based on the Warsaw Stock Exchange main market and NewConnect alternative market. Moreover, the equity capital is found positively related to the level of intangibles in each of the two markets. These results support the thesis that intellectual capital (intangible assets) influences the capital structure of a company.
41
Durst, Susanne. "The relevance of intangible assets in German SMEs." Journal of Intellectual Capital 9, no. 3 (July 25, 2008): 410–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14691930810892018.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to study the perceptions of the advisors and valuers of German associations regarding the relevance of intangible assets in general, and for the purpose of company succession in particular.Design/methodology/approachTo perform this study German associations were examined, which play an essential role in company succession in Germany, from both sides of the process. Conducting a web‐survey, 51 answers were received (response‐rate = 42.5 per cent) which could be used for the analyses.FindingsAmongst others, the study showed that intangible assets are of a moderate relevance. However, a large proportion of respondents expect intangible assets to be of greater relevance in the future. The study highlighted that intangibles do have a great impact on the decision‐making process of an investor.Research limitations/implicationsThe total population of German Association is 135. The author received answers from 51 associations, which did not fulfil the statistical size to conduct advanced statistical methods. The specific relationship of German associations with small‐ to medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) is rather unique compared to similar institutions around the world, therefore, the results may not be replicable in other countries.Practical implicationsThe results of this study will help practitioners as well as academics to better understand the relevance of intangible assets in SMEs.Originality/valueThis paper is pioneering in the analysis of the influence of intangible assets in German SMEs for the purpose of company succession.
42
Marques, Maria da Conceiçâo da Costa. "Os activos intangíveis nas contas das empresas do PSI 20 : uma evidência empírica." Pecvnia : Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de León, no. 8 (June 1, 2009): 183. http://dx.doi.org/10.18002/pec.v0i8.679.
Full textAbstract:
En la actualidad podemos enumerar como activos intangibles contables las patentes, marcas, derechos de autor, etc. Sin embargo, hay otros cuya existencia se reconoce ampliamente y que, a pesar de no estar identificados o medidos, también contribuyen a los resultados de una entidad, como el goodwi II o el capital intelectual, entre otros.La Contabilidad de activos intangibles ha cobrado impulso en las últimas décadas debido a los cambios que se han producido en el mundo de los negocios. Los avances en la industria y, en concreto la sociedad de la información, disponen de activos intangibles que son de aplicación en el mundo de los negocios.El reconocimiento de los activos intangibles en los libros de las entidades puede ser el siguiente paso, en concreto en lo que se refiere a ciertos tipos de negocios, como el de la industria del conocimiento.En el presente estudio se analizan los factores que influyen en la divulgación e información de activos intangibles voluntarios y obligatorios de un número de empresas portuguesas que cotizan en bolsa. Asimismo, exploramos la línea de pensamiento actual sobre activos intangibles y cómo se evalúan, reconocen y presentan estos recursos en los estados financieros de las empresas portuguesas.<br /><br />Today, as intangible assets recognized by the accounting, we can list the patents, trademarks, copyrights, etc. But there are other intangible assets whose existence is widely acknowledged that although they have not yet been identified or measured, also contribute to the results of an entity such as Goodwill or the Intellectual Capital, among others.Accounting for intangible assets gained prominence in the past decades due to changes that are occurring in the business world. The industrial revolution and, in particular, the information society, have the resources in front of the intangible world of business.The recognition of intangible assets on the books of the entities can be the next step forward especially for certain types of business such as the industry of knowledge. In this study we analyze the factors influencing the disclosure and information, mandatory and voluntary (intangible assets), of a number of Portuguese companies whose securities are traded on stock exchange. We also explore the current state of thinking on intangible assets and how those resources are being evaluated, recognized and presented in financial statements of Portuguese companies.
43
Rodríguez-Pérez, Carlos, and María José Canel. "Exploring European Citizens’ Resilience to Misinformation: Media Legitimacy and Media Trust as Predictive Variables." Media and Communication 11, no. 2 (April 28, 2023): 30–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/mac.v11i2.6317.
Full textAbstract:
Building on the notion of an intangible resource, this research conceptualizes resilience as an intangible resource that can be ascribed to countries (governments and media) and explores its sources. After presenting the conceptual framework, the study uses cross-national comparable data from Eurobarometer to (a) determine whether a factor called “resilience to misinformation” can be composed of citizens’ attitudes and behaviors toward misinformation and be conceptualized and operationalized as an intangible asset, and (b) determine the extent to which other intangible assets regarding the media (legitimacy and trust) help predict resilience to misinformation. Based on statistical techniques, findings show that (a) it is possible to conceptualize “resilience to misinformation” as an intangible asset comprised of several items related to citizens’ awareness of misinformation, acknowledgment of the negative impact, and the development of skills to identify misinformation; (b) this intangible asset can be analyzed in relation to intangibles that derive from media performance, such as media legitimacy and trust in the media; and (c) media’s intangible assets seem to be more predictive of “resilience to misinformation” than sociodemographic variables. Based on the findings, this research proposes a conceptualization of “resilience to misinformation” as an intangible resource in the public sector. In addition, it highlights recommendations for the mainstream media on how to manage their intangible value while contributing to resilience to misinformation.
44
Shinkareva, O. V., and M. V. Korobkova. "Amortization of intangible assets: innovations of Federal Accounting Standard 14/2022 “Intangible assets”." Buhuchet v sel'skom hozjajstve (Accounting in Agriculture), no. 10 (October 22, 2022): 23–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.33920/med-17-2210-03.
Full textAbstract:
Starting from the financial statements for 2024, all private organizations, including medical ones, will accrue depreciation of intangible assets in a new way in connection with the entry into force of the new Federal Accounting Standard 14/2022 “Intangible Assets”. The article is devoted to the analysis of each of the three possible methods ща amortization — linear, the method of the reduced balance and in proportion to the amount of products (volume of works (services)). The peculiarities of amortization of intangible assets were revealed when using each of these methods, it was noted that the Federal Accounting Standard introduces a new concept for intangible assets — the liquidation value of an intangible asset object, the amount of which directly affects the amount of depreciation deductions. Practical examples of calculation of the depreciation amount according to Federal Accounting Standard 14/2022 were considered.
45
Casado-Molina, Ana-María, Celia M. Q. Ramos, María-Mercedes Rojas-de-Gracia, and José Ignacio Peláez Sánchez. "Reputational intelligence: innovating brand management through social media data." Industrial Management & Data Systems 120, no. 1 (November 7, 2019): 40–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/imds-03-2019-0145.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose Companies are currently facing the challenge of understanding how their business is affected by the large volume of opinions continually generated by their stakeholders in social media regarding their intangible assets (experiences, emotions and attitudes). With this in mind, the purpose of this paper is to present an innovative management model, named E2AB, to measure and analyse reputational intangibles from digital ecosystems and their impacts on tangible assets. Design/methodology/approach The methodology applied was big data and business intelligence techniques. These methods were used in the computing process to obtain daily data from every asset guarantees that the model is validated with robust data. This model has been corroborated using data from the banking sector, specifically 402,383 net data inputs from the digital ecosystems. Findings This study illustrates the existence of a holistic influence of intangible assets over tangible assets. The findings demonstrate complex relationships between tangible and intangible assets, determined not only by the type of variable but also by its valence and intensity. Practical implications These findings may help chief communication officers and general managers a better understanding of how intangible assets extracted from online users’ opinions are related to their organisation’s tangible assets plus a chance to find out about their impact and how to manage them for a practical and agile decision making in real time. Originality/value It is a pioneering work in establishing a model, which demonstrates transversal and holistic relationships between relational intangible and tangible assets of firms from digital ecosystems, using business intelligence techniques.
46
Maaloul, Anis, Walid Ben Amar, and Daniel Zeghal. "Voluntary disclosure of intangibles and analysts’ earnings forecasts and recommendations." Journal of Applied Accounting Research 17, no. 4 (November 14, 2016): 421–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jaar-10-2014-0105.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between voluntary disclosure of intangibles and financial analysts’ earnings forecasts properties. Design/methodology/approach Disclosures about intangible assets were hand-collected through content analysis of annual reports of a sample of US non-financial firms, while analysts’ earnings forecasts properties were collected from Bloomberg Professional database. The authors relied on correlation and multivariate regression analyses to test the research hypotheses. Findings The results show that increased intangible disclosures affect analysts’ earnings forecasts accuracy, dispersion, and favourable consensus recommendations. However, this effect varies according to the nature of intangible assets. Practical implications The results may be of interest to different market participants such as corporate managers, financial analysts, and standards setting bodies that recently published guidelines on voluntary disclosure of intangibles. Originality/value This study develops a new comprehensive index to measure the content of narrative disclosures about a large number of intangibles, such as human, structural, and relational assets. The findings contribute to the current debate on the value-relevance of narrative disclosures on intangibles to investors and financial analysts.
47
Gao, Wei. "Protection and Management of Intangible Assets of Scientific Research Institutions." Scientific and Social Research 3, no. 2 (July 13, 2021): 185–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.36922/ssr.v3i2.1131.
Full textAbstract:
In view of the scientific protection and management of intangible assets of scientific research institutions, the importance of protection and management is expounded, and the significance of intangible assets to scientific research institutions is understood. In view of the problems existing in the management of intangible assets, the paper puts forward suggestions on three aspects: paying attention to the management of intangible assets property rights, optimizing the management mechanism of intangible assets and improving the specialty of intangible assets management. The purpose is to change the ideology of all managers, realize the value of intangible assets, and improve the protection and management system of intangible assets.
48
Esposito, Gaetano Fausto, and Marco Pini. "The Intangible Assets in the Green Transition of Firms: Empirical Insights from Italy." Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, no. 2 (December 20, 2022): 80–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.4468/2022.2.07.esposito.pini.
Full textAbstract:
We empirically investigate the simultaneous relationship between the various types of intangible assets and their effects on eco-innovation adoption through a sample of Italian manufacturing firms. The results highlight a positive influence of the intangibles on the likelihood to invest in eco-innovation. We observe, when focusing on the human capital, that while investments in only employee training only directly affect eco-innovation, the investments in management training for new business models indirectly influence eco-innovations by triggering the other intangible assets (R&D and intellectual property, Organizational capital, Open innovation).
49
Wan, Xinya, and Yonghai Li. "Evaluation and Management of Intangible Assets of High-Tech Enterprises from the Perspective of Monte Carlo and Network Security." Mobile Information Systems 2021 (June 30, 2021): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/9661531.
Full textAbstract:
High-tech enterprises are knowledge- and technology-intensive economic entities. These entities are considered intangible assets and an essential part of the enterprises. The fast and effective development of high-tech enterprises requires scientific evaluation of intangible assets. Therefore, the evaluation of intangible assets of high-tech enterprises has become more significant in the evaluation industry. This article uses the Monte Carlo method to evaluate the intangible assets of high-tech enterprises from the perspective of network security. This paper combines the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) with the capital asset pricing model (CAPM) to determine the rate of return. It uses the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method to determine the weight. It determines the value of various intangible assets based on the contribution of various intangible assets to the overall intangible asset value. Moreover, the Monte Carlo model is used in the probability determination process to evaluate intangible assets. In practical applications of a high-tech enterprise, the advancement and practicability of this method are verified by comparing it with the income method.
50
MUNDSTOCK, GEORGE. "FRANCHISES, INTANGIBLE CAPITAL, AND ASSETS." National Tax Journal 43, no. 3 (September 1, 1990): 299–305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/ntj41788848.
Full text