Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding the Reporting of Intangibles from a Business Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Intangibles in the World of Transfer Pricing

Abstract

In the knowledge-based economy, the intangibles of firms have become the most important strategic resources and key drivers of firm value and business success. Traditional financial disclosures are no longer sufficient to convey a firm’s wealth-creation potential to stakeholders. Instead, intellectual capital reports have gained increasing importance to ensure transparency and reduce information asymmetries. Tax departments rely on these reports as a starting point for the identification and valuation of intangibles that are relevant for the transfer pricing process. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of a firm’s opportunities for reporting intangibles internally and externally. It also includes a description of suitable tools for internal reporting, such as an intellectual capital statement, and explains the German reporting regulations for intangibles as well as further approaches to voluntary external disclosure of intangible values.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Barney (1991), p. 105, Hall (1992), p. 135.

  2. 2.

    OECD (2015), p. 67.

  3. 3.

    Lev (2001), p. 5, WGARI (2004), p. 225.

  4. 4.

    Marr and Schiuma (2001), p. 3.

  5. 5.

    E.g., Ellis and Seng (2015).

  6. 6.

    WGARI (2004), p. 225.

  7. 7.

    Fischer et al. (2015), p. 597, Coenenberg et al. (2016, p. 1203, 2018), p. 1229.

  8. 8.

    Lev (2001), p. 6.

  9. 9.

    The reputation of a firm has to be distinguished from the corporate brand. While brands describe a set of associations that customers have with a firm’s products (including awareness and functional appeal), reputation is formed through stakeholders’ assessments of a firm’s ability to meet their expectations (Fombrun and van Riel 2004, p. 4). Hence, firms can have a strong brand, but simultaneously a weak reputation or vice versa.

  10. 10.

    Fortune (2019).

  11. 11.

    Debruyne (2014), pp. 207–209.

  12. 12.

    New York Times (2013).

  13. 13.

    OECD (2015), p. 67.

  14. 14.

    Duhr and Haller (2013), p. 23.

  15. 15.

    Andriessen (2004), p. 232.

  16. 16.

    Levin and Weise (2013), p. 57.

  17. 17.

    Lev and Gu (2016).

  18. 18.

    Bhasin (2016), p. 5.

  19. 19.

    Andriessen (2004), p. 234.

  20. 20.

    Rylander et al. (2000), Vergauwen and van Alem (2005), p. 92.

  21. 21.

    Duhr and Haller (2013), p. 24.

  22. 22.

    Duhr and Haller (2013), p. 44.

  23. 23.

    Kaplan and Norton (2000), pp. 168–169.

  24. 24.

    Kaplan and Norton (1996b), p. 75.

  25. 25.

    Duhr and Haller (2013), p. 76.

  26. 26.

    Kaplan and Norton (1996a), pp. 25–29.

  27. 27.

    Kaplan and Norton (1996b), p. 76.

  28. 28.

    Kaplan and Norton (1996a), p. 25.

  29. 29.

    Kaplan and Norton (2000), p. 168.

  30. 30.

    Kaplan and Norton (2000), p. 172.

  31. 31.

    Kaplan and Norton (2004), p. 12.

  32. 32.

    Kaplan and Norton (2000), p. 175.

  33. 33.

    Duhr and Haller (2013), p. 78.

  34. 34.

    Kaplan and Norton (2004), p. 13; see also Sect. 2.1.2.

  35. 35.

    See Osterwalder et al. (2015).

  36. 36.

    BMWi (2008), pp. 15–16.

  37. 37.

    Choong (2008), p. 622.

  38. 38.

    BMWi (2008), p. 18.

  39. 39.

    Sveiby (1997), p. 10.

  40. 40.

    Marr and Gray (2004), p. 103.

  41. 41.

    MERITUM (2002).

  42. 42.

    MERITUM (2002).

  43. 43.

    BMWi (2008), p. 18.

  44. 44.

    BMWi (2008), p. 21.

  45. 45.

    BMWi (2008), p. 22.

  46. 46.

    Danish Ministry of Science (2003), BMWi (2008), p. 27.

  47. 47.

    Fischer and Baumgartner (2013), p. 29.

  48. 48.

    Fischer and Baumgartner (2013), p. 199.

  49. 49.

    BMWi (2008), pp. 34–35.

  50. 50.

    BMWi (2008), p. 37.

  51. 51.

    BMWi (2008), p. 44.

  52. 52.

    BMWi (2008), p. 48.

  53. 53.

    Fischer and Baumgartner (2014), p. 124.

  54. 54.

    Young and O’Byrne (2001), p. 36, Stern (2007), p. 116.

  55. 55.

    E.g., Coenenberg et al. (2016), pp. 884–887.

  56. 56.

    E.g., Chen et al. (2005).

  57. 57.

    Fischer and Baumgartner (2014), p. 129.

  58. 58.

    E.g., Su et al. (2016), Walsh et al. (2009).

  59. 59.

    Coenenberg et al. (2018), pp. 183–197.

  60. 60.

    According to §289b of the HGB a firm has to be classified as large (see §267.III of the HGB) and a capital-market oriented corporation (see §264d of the HGB) with an annual average number of employees of over 500. §315b of the HGB concerns groups whereby the parent company has to be a capital-market oriented corporation (see §264d of the HGB) and the consolidated companies must not exercise the exemption option that is available pursuant to §293.I of the HGB as well as have an annual average number of employees of over 500.

  61. 61.

    Coenenberg et al. (2018), pp. 963–964.

  62. 62.

    WAGRI (2004), pp. 240–241.

  63. 63.

    Wulf and Rentzsch (2013), pp. 51–52.

  64. 64.

    Wulf and Rentzsch (2013), pp. 52–54.

  65. 65.

    WGARI (2005), pp. 87–88.

  66. 66.

    Wulf and Rentzsch (2013), p. 54.

  67. 67.

    Lev and Gu (2016), pp. 45–46.

  68. 68.

    Barney (1991), Barney and Clark (2007).

  69. 69.

    Lev and Gu (2016), pp. 121–126.

  70. 70.

    Lev and Gu (2016), pp. 133–142.

  71. 71.

    IIRC (2013), p. 7.

  72. 72.

    IIRC (2013), pp. 11–12.

  73. 73.

    IIRC (2013), p. 16.

  74. 74.

    Barth et al. (2017), p. 10.

  75. 75.

    Zhou et al. (2017), p. 103.

  76. 76.

    Zhou et al. (2017), pp. 103, 116.

  77. 77.

    Lee and Yeo (2016), p. 1226.

  78. 78.

    Serafeim (2015), p. 40.

  79. 79.

    PwC (2016), p. 14.

  80. 80.

    SAP SE (2018a), p. 216.

  81. 81.

    SAP SE (2018a), p. 217.

  82. 82.

    SAP SE (2018a), pp. 217–218.

  83. 83.

    SAP SE (2018a), pp. 217–218.

  84. 84.

    See also Secundo et al. (2017).

  85. 85.

    See also Goebel (2015), p. 704.

  86. 86.

    Brüggen et al. (2009), p. 240.

  87. 87.

    Bozzolan et al. (2003), p. 550, Bukh et al. (2005), p. 717.

  88. 88.

    E.g., Bukh et al. (2005), p. 726.

  89. 89.

    E.g., Cerbioni and Parbonetti (2007), pp. 807, 815.

  90. 90.

    E.g., Bukh et al. (2005), p. 726.

  91. 91.

    E.g., Vergauwen and van Alem (2005), p. 92.

  92. 92.

    E.g., Ferraro and Veltri (2011).

  93. 93.

    Secundo et al. (2017).

  94. 94.

    Abhayawansa (2014), p. 130, Zhou et al. (2017), pp. 94–95.

References

  • Abdolmohammadi, M. J. (2005). Intellectual Capital Disclosure and Market Capitalization. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(3), 397–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abhayawansa, S. A. (2014). A Review of Guidelines and Frameworks on External Reporting of Intellectual Capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(1), 100–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alfraih, M. M. (2017). The Value Relevance of Intellectual Capital Disclosure: Empirical Evidence from Kuwait. Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 25(1), 22–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anam, O. A., Fatima, A. H., & Majdi, A. R. H. (2011). Effects of Intellectual Capital Information Disclosed in Annual Reports on Market Capitalization: Evidence from Bursa Malaysia. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 15(2), 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andriessen, D. (2004). IC Valuation and Measurement: Classifying the State of the Art. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2), 230–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B., & Clark, D. N. (2007). Resource-Based Theory—Creating and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, M. E., Cahan, S. F., Chen, L., & Venter, E. R. (2017). The Economic Consequences Associated with Integrated Report Quality: Capital Market and Real Effects. Working Paper. Retrieved May 5, 2017, from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2699409.

  • Bhasin, M. L. (2016). Intellectual Capital Measurement and Disclosure: A New ‘Paradigm’ in Financial Reporting. Journal of Economics, Marketing, and Management, 4(4), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bontis, N. (2003). Intellectual Capital Disclosure in Canadian Corporations. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 7(1/2), 9–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boujelbene, M. A., & Affes, H. (2013). The Impact of Intellectual Capital Disclosure on Cost of Equity Capital: A Case of French Firms. Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, 18(34), 45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozzolan, S., Favotto, F., & Ricceri, F. (2003). Italian Annual Intellectual Capital Disclosure: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(4), 543–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brüggen, A., Vergauwen, P., & Dao, M. (2009). Determinants of Intellectual Capital Disclosure: Evidence from Australia. Management Decision, 47(2), 233–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bukh, P. N., Nielsen, C., Gormsen, P., & Mouritsen, J. (2005). Disclosure of Information on Intellectual Capital in Danish IPO Prospectuses. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18(6), 713–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi) (eds.). (2008). Wissensbilanz—Made in Germany. Leitfaden 2.0 zur Erstellung einer Wissensbilanz. Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerbioni, F., & Parbonetti, A. (2007). Exploring the Effects of Corporate Governance on Intellectual Capital Disclosure: An Analysis of European Biotechnology Companies. European Accounting Review, 16(4), 791–826.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M.-C., Cheng, S.-J., & Hwang, Y. (2005). An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Intellectual Capital and Firms’ Market Value and Financial Performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(2), 159–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choong, K. K. (2008). Intellectual Capital: Definitions, Categorization and Reporting Models. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 9(4), 609–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coenenberg, A. G., Fischer, T. M., & Günther, T. (2016). Kostenrechnung und Kostenanalyse (9th ed.). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coenenberg, A. G., Haller, A., & Schultze, W. (2018). Jahresabschluss und Jahresabschlussanalyse (25th ed.). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Ministry of Science. (2003). Intellectual Capital Statements—The New Guideline. Retrieved May 3, 2017, from https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/32340329/guideline_uk.pdf.

  • De Silva, T.-A., Stratford, M., & Clark, M. (2014). Intellectual Capital Reporting: A Longitudinal Study of New Zealand Companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(1), 157–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debruyne, M. (2014). Customer Innovation: Customer-Centric Strategy for Enduring Growth. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duhr, A., & Haller, A. (eds.) (2013). Management Control and Reporting of Intangibles. Schmalenbach Business Review, Special Issue 4/13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, H., & Seng, D. (2015). The Value Relevance of Voluntary Intellectual Capital Disclosure: New Zealand Evidence. Corporate Ownership & Control, 13(1), 1071–1087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, O., & Veltri, S. (2011). The Value Relevance of Intellectual Capital on the Firm’s Market Value: An Empirical Survey on the Italian Listed Firms. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 2(1), 66–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, T. M., & Baumgartner, A. (2013). Immaterielle Werte als Erfolgsfaktoren von KMU. In T. M. Fischer & I. Wulf (eds.), Wissensbilanzen im Mittelstand (pp. 17–36). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, T. M., & Baumgartner, A. (2014). Integration von Wissensbilanzen in das operative und strategische Wertmanagement. Controlling—Zeitschrift für erfolgsorientierte Unternehmenssteuerung, 26(2), 124–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, T. M., Möller, K., & Schultze, W. (2015). Controlling—Grundlagen, Instrumente und Entwicklungsperspektiven (2nd ed.). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. J., & Van Riel, C. B. M. (2004). Fame & Fortune—How Successful Companies Build Winning Reputations. Upper Saddle River, New York: Pearson Education LTD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forbes. (2019). The World’s Most Valuable Brands. Retrieved July 15, 2019, from https://www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/#tab:rank.

  • Fortune. (2019). The World’s Most Admired Companies. Retrieved July 15, 2019, from http://fortune.com/worlds-most-admired-companies/2019/search/.

  • Gamerschlag, R. (2013). Value Relevance of Human Capital Information. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(2), 325–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garania, T., & Dumay, J. (2017). Forward-looking Intellectual Capital Disclosure in IPOs: Implications for Intellectual Capital and Integrated Reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(1), 128–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goebel, V. (2015). Intellectual Capital Reporting in a Mandatory Management Report: The Case of Germany. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(4), 702–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J., Petty, R., & Ricceri, F. (2006). The Voluntary Reporting of Intellectual Capital: Comparing Evidence from Hong Kong and Australia. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7(2), 254–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. (1992). The Strategic Analysis of Intangible Resources. Strategic Management Journal, 13(2), 135–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IASB. (2010). IFRS Practice Statement—Management Commentary: A Framework for Presentation. London: IFRS Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • IIRC. (2013). The International Framework. Retrieved June 1, 2017, from http://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK-2-1.pdf.

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996a). The Balanced Scorecard—Translating Strategy into Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996b). Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2000). Having Trouble with Your Strategy? Then Map It. Harvard Business Review, 78(5), 167–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2004). Strategy Maps—Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2006). Alignment—Using the Balanced Scorecard to create Corporate Synergies. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2017). Accounting News—Aktuelles zur Rechnungslegung nach HGB und IFRS. Retrieved June 1, 2017, from https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/de/pdf/Themen/2017/accounting-newsletter-april-2017.pdf.

  • Lee, K.-W., & Yeo, G. H.-H. (2016). The Association between Integrated Reporting and Firm Valuation. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 47(4), 1221–1250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lev, B. (2001). Intangibles—Management, Measurement, and Reporting. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lev, B., & Gu, F. (2016). The End of Accounting and the Path Forward for Investors and Managers. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, N., & Weise, J. (2013). Bridging the Divide between Financial Reporting & Transfer Pricing Valuations. FinancialExecutive, July/August, 56–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangena, M., Pike, R., & Li, J. (2010). Intellectual Capital Disclosure Practices and Effects on the Cost of Equity Capital: UK Evidence. Edinburgh: The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marr, B., & Gray, D. (2004). The Three Reasons why Organizations Measure Their Intellectual Capital. In P. Horváth & K. Möller (eds.), Intangibles in der Unternehmenssteuerung—Strategien und Instrumente zur Wertsteigerung des immateriellen Kapitals (pp. 99–126). München: Vahlen Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marr, B., & Schiuma, G. (2001). Measuring and Managing Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Assets in New Economy Organizations. In M. Bourne (ed.), Handbook of Performance Measurement(Chapter C4B). London: Gee Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • MERITUM. (2002). Guidelines for Managing and Reporting on Intangibles(Intellectual Capital Report). Madrid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, K., Hattrup, K., Spiess, S.-O., & Lin-Hi, N. (2012). The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Employees’ Affective Commitment: A Cross-cultural Investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1186–1200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OCEAN TOMO, LLC. (2015). Annual Study of Intangible Asset Market Value from Ocean Tomo, LLC. Retrieved July 19, 2017, from http://www.oceantomo.com/2015/03/04/2015-intangible-asset-market-value-study/.

  • OECD. (2015). Aligning Transfer Pricing Outcomes with Value Creation, Actions 8-10, 2015 Final Reports, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project. OECD Publishing, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orens, R., Aerts, W., & Lybaert, N. (2009). Intellectual Capital Disclosure, Cost of Finance and Firm Value. Management Decision, 47(10), 1536–1554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Bernarda, G., & Smith, A. (2015). Entwickeln Sie Produkte und Services, die Ihre Kunden wirklich wollen, mit Value Proposition Design. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). (2016). Integrated Reporting in Germany—The DAX 30 Benchmark Survey 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramanauskaite, A., & Laginauskaite, M. R. (2014). Disclosure of Intellectual Capital in Annual Reports of NADAQ OMX Baltic-listed Companies. Ekonomika, 93(4), 135–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rappaport, A. (1998). Creating Shareholder Value: A Guide for Managers and Investors. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rylander, A., Jacobsen, K., & Roos, G. (2000). Towards Improved Information Disclosure on Intellectual Capital. International Journal of Technology Management, 20(5–8), 715–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sangiorgi, D., & Siboni, B. (2017). The Disclosure of Intellectual Capital in Italian Universities: What has Been Done and What Should be Done. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(2), 354–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAP SE. (2018a). SAP Integrated Report 2018. Retrieved July 9, 2019, from https://www.sap.com/docs/download/investors/2018/sap-2018-integrated-report.pdf.

  • SAP SE. (2018b). Connectivity of Financial and Non-Financial Indicators. Retrieved July 9, 2019, from https://www.sap.com/integrated-reports/2018/en/connectivity.html.

  • Secundo, G., Del Vecchio, P., Dumay, J., & Passiante, G. (2017). Intellectual Capital in the Age of Big Data: Establishing a Research Agenda. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(2), 242–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serafeim, G. (2015). Integrated Reporting and Investor Clientele. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 27(2), 34–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speckbacher, G., Güldenberg, S., & Ruthner, R. (2004). Externes Reporting über immaterielle Vermögenswerte. In P. Horváth & K. Möller (eds.), Intangibles in der Unternehmenssteuerung—Strategien und Instrumente zur Wertsteigerung des immateriellen Kapitals (pp. 435–453). München: Vahlen Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, H. J. (2007). Marktorientiertes Value Management. Wiley-VCH Verlag: Weinheim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, J. M., Stewart, G. B., & Chew, D. H. (1995). The EVA Financial Management System. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 8(2), 32–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su, L., Swanson, S. R., Chinchanachokchai, S., Hsu, M. K., & Chen, X. (2016). Reputation and Intentions: The Role of Satisfaction, Identification, and Commitment. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3261–3269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The New Organizational Wealth—Managing & Measuring Knowledge-based Assets. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • The New York Times. (2013). Giving Viewers What They Want. Retrieved May 4, 2017, from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/25/business/media/for-house-of-cards-using-big-data-to-guarantee-its-popularity.html.

  • Vafaei, A., Taylor, D., & Ahmed, K. (2011). The Value Relevance of Intellectual Capital Disclosures. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(3), 407–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vergauwen, P., Bollen, L., & Oirbans, E. (2007). Intellectual Capital Disclosure and Intangible Value Drivers: an Empirical Study. Management Decision, 45(7), 1163–1180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vergauwen, P. G. M. C., & van Alem, F. J. C. (2005). Annual Report IC Disclosures in the Netherlands, France and Germany. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(1), 89–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, G., Mitchell, V.-W., Jackson, P. R., & Beatty, S. E. (2009). Examining the Antecedents and Consequences of Corporate Reputation: A Customer Perspective. British Journal of Management, 20(2), 187–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., Sharma, U., & Davey, H. (2016). Intellectual Capital Disclosure by Chinese and Indian Information Technology Companies: A Comparative Analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17(3), 507–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Working Group “Accounting and Reporting of Intangible Assets” (WGARI). (2004). Erfassung immaterieller Werte in der Unternehmensberichterstattung vor dem Hintergrund handelsrechtlicher Rechnungslegungsnormen. In P. Horváth & K. Möller (eds.), Intangibles in der Unternehmenssteuerung—Strategien und Instrumente zur Wertsteigerung des immateriellen Kapitals (pp. 221–250). München: Vahlen Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Working Group “Accounting and Reporting of Intangible Assets” (WGARI). (2005). Corporate Reporting on Intangibles—A proposal from a German Background. In W. Ballwieser (ed.), Current Issues in Financial Reporting and Financial Statement Analysis (pp. 65–100). Schmalenbach Business Review, Special Issue 2/05, Düsseldorf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, I., & Rentzsch, N. (2013). Lageberichterstattung von immateriellen Werten insbesondere in KMU. In T. M. Fischer & I. Wulf (eds.), Wissensbilanzen im Mittelstand (pp. 37–58). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yi, A., & Davey, H. (2010). Intellectual Capital Disclosure in Chinese (mainland) Companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11(3), 326–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, S. D., & O’Byrne, S. F. (2001). EVA and Value-Based Management—A Practical Guide to Implementation. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, S., Simnett, R., & Green, W. (2017). Does Integrated Reporting Matter to the Capital Market? Abacus, 53(1), 94–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany

    Thomas M. Fischer & Kim T. Baumgartner

Authors
  1. Thomas M. Fischer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kim T. Baumgartner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kim T. Baumgartner .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Deloitte GmbH, Hamburg, Germany

    Björn Heidecke  & Marc C. Hübscher  & 

  2. Deloitte GmbH, Munich, Germany

    Richard Schmidtke

  3. Deloitte GmbH, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

    Martin Schmitt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fischer, T.M., Baumgartner, K.T. (2021). Understanding the Reporting of Intangibles from a Business Perspective. In: Heidecke, B., Hübscher, M.C., Schmidtke, R., Schmitt, M. (eds) Intangibles in the World of Transfer Pricing. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73332-6_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation