摘要
多年前，在統一會計準則的浪潮下，臺灣於2013年強制上市櫃公司導入國際財務報導準則（IFRS），並改採合併報表為主，母公司單獨報表為輔的制度。在學理上，相較於單獨財報，合併報表更可清楚捕捉集團的現狀，此觀點亦獲諸多實證支持。然而，時過境遷，本研究以2014至2023年的資料進行檢視，實證顯示，兩報表的價值攸關性並沒有顯著差異，若模式加入非控制權益、非控制權益淨利後，合併報表方較具價值攸關性。當以股票季報酬率、月報酬率衡量市場風險時，則母公司財報的風險攸關性遠高於合併財報。再者，實證亦顯示，相較於單獨財報，合併報表資訊對負債比率的解釋力較高。整體而言，合併報表資訊對股價、負債比率較具解釋能力，但母公司單獨財報則有較高的風險攸關性，換言之，兩類報表目前均有其存在價值。
關鍵詞：合併報表、價值攸關性、風險攸關性、負債比率
Abstract
A few years ago, under the wave of unified accounting standards, Taiwan asked listed companies to introduce International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in 2013. This change emphasized consolidated statements as primary, with the parent’s separate statements as supplementary. From a theoretical point of view, compared with the separate statements, consolidated statements can more clearly capture the current situation of the group, which is also supported by a lot of considerable empirical evidence. However, this study examines the data from 2014 to 2023 and finds no significant difference between the value relevance of the two statements. If the model adds non-controlling interests and the profit attributed to non-controlling interests, the consolidated statements will be more value-relevant. When market risk is measured by quarterly or monthly stock returns, the risk relevance of the parent's financial reports is much higher than that of the consolidated financial reports. Furthermore, consolidated statements offer better explanatory power for debt ratios than separate statements. Overall, consolidated statements better reflect stock prices and debt ratios, but the parent's statements better capture risk relevance. Thus, both types of statements retain distinct value in today’s context
Keywords: Consolidated statements, Value relevance, Risk relevance, Debt ratio