Mandatory adoption of IFRS and its effect on international stock listings in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate if non-US/non-Canada (international) equity listings in the Canadian stock exchanges increased with the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Canada. A question of interest is whether the adoption of common global accounting standards (IFRS) was beneficial in attracting international firms to the Canadian exchanges. Design/methodology/approach The authors use difference-in-difference ordinary least square methodology to conduct inter-country (between Canada and the USA) and intra-country (between the Toronto Stock Exchange [TSX] and the TSX Venture Exchange [TSXV]) tests to investigate whether there is increased listings of international firms on Canada’s exchanges associated with mandatory adoption of IFRS in Canada compared to such listings in the American exchanges. Findings The authors did not find evidence of a relative increase in listings by international firms on the TSX and the TSXV after Canadian adoption of IFRS, but they did find that listings by international firms on the TSX, Canada’s primary exchange, increased when the authors include the year before mandatory Canadian adoption as part of the IFRS adoption period. The authors also find that international listings from outside the North American, European and Australasian regions increased on the TSXV, consistent with IFRS adoption making the smaller Canadian exchange more attractive to listers from these regions. Originality/value With the increasing use of IFRS throughout the world, US regulators, the US Congress and other capital market participants seek to understand the costs and benefits of potential IFRS adoption in the USA. The authors contribute to this debate by examining the effect of Canada’s adoption of IFRS on growth in international stock listings in the Canadian stock exchanges.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".