Beeye planification

The central assumption underlying such analyzes is the idea that there would be less room for maneuver when it comes to determining taxable income (Hanlon, 2005), the latter therefore offering a benchmark for detecting a possible overvaluation. of the accounting result. In particular, taxable income generally excludes discretionary adjustments to accrual accounts that may be used to manipulate accounting income (Lev and Nissim, 2004); as such, McNichols and Wilson (1988) showed that provisions for bad debts could be mobilized to smooth accounting results.planification fiscale 22Therefore, taxable income can prove to be a useful reference when it comes to investors anticipating the future performance of the company. In the methodological framework proposed by Jonas and Blanchet (2000) to assess the accounting quality of a company, the persistence of income is one of the indicators used to assess forecast profits; also, with regard to the preceding developments, any difference observed between the taxable income and the accounting result can provide essential information as to the persistence of the company's profits and therefore contribute to the appreciation of the latter's value. by investors. The work carried out by Lev and Nissim (2004), using data relating to American companies covering the period 1973-2000, established a correlation between, on the one hand, the difference between taxable income and the accounting result a given year and, on the other hand, the evolution of corporate profits over the following five years. As a result, the observed gap would make it possible to predict the evolution of a company's profits over almost five years, it being understood that a significant gap would be accompanied by a future deterioration in profits. The results of a study conducted by Hanlon (2005) corroborate this thesis, showing that the persistence of profits would be less in the case of firms displaying a gap between taxable income and the significant accounting result,