MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741276686 · doi:10.5430/afr.v6n3p56

LIFO Distortion in the Oil Industry – Revisited

2017· article· en· W2741276686 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
June Li, Megan Y. Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting and Finance Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFIFO and LIFO accountingInventory valuationBusinessRepealInventory analysisAccountingEconomicsFIFO (computing and electronics)Production (economics)Computer scienceMicroeconomicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LIFO (Last in First out) inventory method has been widely used by US publicly traded companies for its tax advantages in many years. However, LIFO is expected to be repealed with the impending acceptance ofIFRS(the International Financial Reporting Standards) by theSEC. The repeal of LIFO will significantly increase the tax liabilities of those companies previously using LIFO. One hardest hit industry by repeal of LIFO is oil industry. Our study investigates the use of LIFO inventory method in oil industry from 2008 through 2015. The primary focus of this study is the accounting information distortion as a result of using LIFO. We document severe accounting information distortion in the areas of working capital and inventory turnover. Though not as severe, we also observe very significant distortions in the areas of gross profit and current ratio. The accounting information gets increasingly distorted from 2008 to 2011. However the trend reverses from 2012 to 2015. Each of the Obama administration’s budgets proposals proposed the elimination of LIFO for inventories. We believe the findings of our research have significant implications for the policy makers. In addition, a full adoption ofIFRS, which prohibits LIFO, is unlikely in the near future. Non-public companies who are not under the jurisdiction of theSECmay still continue to use LIFO after the adoption of IFRS.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting and Finance ResearchSame topicCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceFrench-language works237,207