【作者】 李宜；

【导师】 杜兴强；

【作者基本信息】 厦门大学 ， 会计学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 始于《萨班斯——奥克斯利法案》的内部控制信息披露和监管制度变革,引发了世界各国证券监管部门对自身内控信息披露制度进行以强化监管为核心的重新调整。2006年,我国启动了对上市公司年报内部控制信息的披露管制,旨在提高上市公司内部控制的透明度。那么,“中国式”上市公司年报内部控制信息披露的状况如何?年报中披露的内控信息的有效性如何?是否反映上市公司质量、内部控制质量以及管理者意图?股票市场对此信息是否有反应?披露管制是否见到成效?针对这些信息使用者、上市公司和证券监管者迫切想要答案的问题,本文运用实证研究方法进行了系统研究。文章首先按照披露非管制期(2001～2005年)与披露管制期(2006年),分别对上市公司年报内部控制信息进行整理归类、图解分析,透视我国上市公司年报内部控制信息披露状况;其后,分别披露非管制期与管制期,对“是否披露”、“是否合规披露”、以及“是否双重披露”三种类别同时进行内在动因的比较研究;最后,依据同样的分期分类方法,采用超额收益分析进行市场效应的比较研究,对EE样本还进行了配对后的超额收益检验和多元回归分析。此外,通过披露非管制期与管制期研究结论的比较,也考察了披露管制的效应。本文主要的研究发现有:(1)2006年披露管制后,年报“披露”和“合规披露”内控信息的比例显著提高,内控情况披露的详尽程度、措辞的严谨性明显改观,一定程度上改进了上市公司内部控制状况的透明度,具有较明显的政策效应;(2)内在动因研究发现,2001～2005年,只有“披露”样本组在客观内控状况和管理层动因方面显著异于“未披露”样本组;2006年披露管制后,“披露”、“合规披露”、“双重披露”和“提供内控报告”各类别影响因素明显增多,内部控制信息的信号作用渐渐突显;(3)市场效应研究表明,运用超额收益分析,没有发现披露非管制期市场对年报内控信息披露及不同披露程度做出反应;而市场对披露管制期年报内部控制信息的披露有显著的反应,能识别不同的内部控制信息披露程度,并进行价格调整,但是多元回归分析没有为这一结论提供支持。更多还原

【Abstract】 The Sarbanes-Oxley Act has caused great change in internal control disclosure and supervision institutions, and also promoted many securities regulatory commissions or departments in other countries to readjust their disclosure system to strengthen their supervision-oriented aim. In 2006, in order to improve the transparency of internal control, China launched the disclosure regulation to the internal control of listed companies, too. How about the disclosures status of internal control in China presently? How effective these disclosures are? Can such disclosures reflect the quality of the companies, the quality of the internal control and the intention of management? How do the share markets react to the disclosures? Is the disclosure regulation effective? In regard to above-mentioned questions to which various stakeholders urgently want to know the key, this dissertation systematically carries out empirical researches.Firstly, this dissertation studies the status of disclosure by classifying and analyzing the internal control information disclosure in annual financial reports according to two separate periods—the period without disclosure regulation (2001-2005), and the period with disclosure regulation (2006). Secondly, based on two periods separately, we probe into whether there are "disclosure", "disclosure according to regulation" and "dual disclosures", while we study the internal agent of disclosure. Finally, we apply the same classification approach to compare the share market effects by way of abnormal return analysis, and we implement abnormal return test and multi-variable regression analysis on EE samples and their matching. In addition, we also explore the effects of disclosure regulation by comparing the conclusions of two different periods.In summary, we get some findings. First, after disclosure regulation in 2006, the percentage of "disclosure" and "disclosure according to regulation" of internal control in annual financial reports have been enhanced obviously, and the degree of elaboration in internal control disclosure and the preciseness of wording have been improved, which to a certain degree improves the transparency of internal control of listed companies. The effect of policy change is clear. Second, according to the study of internal agent, only the control status and management agent in the "disclosure" samples obviously differ from the "non-disclosure" samples in 2001-2005. After disclosure regulation in 2006, the varied determinants of "disclosure", "disclosure according to regulation", "dual disclosure" and "presentation of internal control report" increase largely, and the signaling effects of internal control information become clearer gradually. Third, by way of abnormal return analysis, the market effects study shows that the markets in the periods without disclosure regulation do not react to the annual internal control disclosure and the degree of disclosure, and that the markets in the periods with disclosure regulation significantly react to the annual internal control disclosure and the markets can identify the degree of internal control disclosure and adjust the share prices. However, the multi-variable regression analysis does not support the conclusion.更多还原