Journal of Japanese Management Vo.4, No.2, May 2020

ISSN 2189-9592

Appearance Process of Relationship between Public
Financial Reports and Local Government Bond Market:
A Statistical Study Using U.S. States’ Data
Kentaro HARAGUCHI
Faculty of Commerce, Seinan-Gakuin University
Japan Accounting Association
E-mail: haraguch@seinan-gu.ac.jp

Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the time-dependent relationship between
the financial conditions and bond ratings of local governments and constructhypotheses about the process. To achieve this purpose, this study investigates thetime-series behavior of the relationship between financial indicators calculated
from net asset information of Public Financial Reports (PFRs) prepared under theGovernmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 and statebond ratings, referred to herein as the NA-BR relationship. Results of the empiricalanalysis show that the NA-BR relationship appears gradually, not immediately,
after the implementation of GASB Statement No. 34. The gradual appearance
suggests that the NA-BR relationship is caused by gradually increasing factors,
such as the variance of the financial conditions of U.S. states.
Keywords:
Public Accounting, Local Government, Financial Condition, Local Government
Bond(1) Introduction
In

2015,

local governments is an important eventtheJapanese

inInternal

autonomy for several reasons. Prior togovernment’s

Ministry

Affairs

Communications

and

of

central
(MIC)

the

the

history

earlyof2000s,

JapaneseJapanese

local
local

released uniform accounting standards

governments operated solely with afor local governments, which required

cash-basedthat public financial reports (PFRs) be

addition, PFRs lacked comparability

prepared on a full accrual basis no later

among local governments even after thethan the fiscal 2017 (MIC, 2015). This

MIC

implementation

guidelines in 2001.

of

uniform,

full

accrual-based accounting standards foraccounting

published

its

first

system.

Inaccounting

Several studies have pointed out
30that accrual-based PFRs are useful for(beforetheimplementationofassessing the financial condition of

uniform accounting standards).

thelocal governments (Wang et al ., 2007;

We would like to emphasize that

Rivenbark et al ., 2010). Of particular

uniform accrual-based PFRs were fully

importance is that PFRs enable us to

implemented in the U.S. in 1999 by themeasureGovernmental

stock-based

conditions

that

are

financialdifficult

to

be

Board

Accounting(GASB),

andStandards

the

NA-BR

measuredusingacash-based

relationship appeared in 2012. Thisaccounting

system.

Thus,

with

the

suggests the possibility of the future

implementation of accrual-based PFRs

appearance of the NA-BR relationshipin Japan, investors in bond markets are

in Japan (1) .

able

to

obtaincomparable

information

stock-basedofJapanesefinancialinterest

rates

significantly depend on bond ratings

conditions.

(Nakazato, 2008). The possibility of the

The main focus of our research is the

future appearance of the Japanese NA-

usefulness of accrual-based PFRs forBR

assessing the financial condition ofJapanese local governments with lower

local governments. In this study, we

net asset ratios should immediately

focus

assess the risk of decreasing bond

on

the

government
creditrisk,

relationshipfinancialwhich

betweenconditionisandrelationshipratings.

The

indicates

investigation

that

of

the

typically

possibility of the appearance of the NA-

represented by bond ratings. Previous

BR relationship is very important instudies on U.S. local governments shedJapan, where the uniform accrual-based

light on the relationship between PFRs

accounting

and bond ratings and showed that

implemented in 2017.

financial indicators calculated using

standard

was

just

Clarifying the factors that cause

information in the PFRs of U.S. local

thegovernments have a significant effectrelationshipon bond ratings (Plummer et al., 2007;

factors) is necessary to investigate theJohnson et al, 2012; Pridgen and Wilder,possible

2013; Callahan and Waymire, 2015).

relationship. No studies have ever tried

Haraguchi (2018a) pointed out thatto clarify these factors. This study uses

although the relationship between thea time-series analysis of the NA-BR

net asset information from PFRs andrelationship for clarification. If thebond ratings (NA-BR relationship) was

relationship appears immediately after

apparent for U.S. states, there was nothe

NA-BR relationship in Japan in 2012accounting standards, the factors must( 1) It should be also noted that the accurate

U.S. in terms of autonomy and the local government
bond markets.

prediction of this appearance is difficult because
there are many differences between Japan and the31

appearance

of

the

(hereafter,

appearance

implementation

appearance
of

of

NA-BR

the

such

a

uniform

be ones that are sufficiently present at(2) Method

the time of implementation. On the

We define a financial indicator andother hand, if the relationship appears

a bond rating indicator to numerically

gradually, the factors must be ones that

evaluate the net asset information of

are not present at implementation but

U.S. states and bond ratings in order togradually increase over time. Therefore,

analyze the NA-BR relationship.

it is necessary to elucidate whether the
relationship appears immediately or

1. Financial Indicators

gradually after implementation in ordertoclarify

theappearance

There is little agreement on what

factors.

indicators

definitively

represent

Subsequently, we must develop thefinancial condition (Wang et al ., 2007,

hypothesis to explain the appearancep.4). We use net asset ratio (NAR) to

process (appearance hypothesis) andinvestigate the NA-BR relationship, asverify it. However, as no studies havedefined in Wang et al. (2007, p.8) andever tried to conduct a time-seriesalso used in Haraguchi (2018a). The

analysis of the NA-BR relationship, thedefinitions of NAR are given below:

appearance hypothesis has never beendeveloped.

Net asset ratio (NAR)

The purpose of this study is to= Restricted and Unrestricted

develop the hypothesis through a timeseries

analysisofthe

net assets / Total assets

NA-BR= (Net assets – (Invested in capital

relationship in U.S. states and obtainassets, net of related debt))/Total

implications for Japan. The reason toassets (2)conduct this investigation in the U.S.
are as follows. First, U.S. states are

There are several reasons to use

appropriate for the benchmark because

NAR in this study, the first of which is

the

NA-BR

the importance of NAR in U.S. states.

relationship has already been clearly

To detect the NA-BR relationship, we

observed. Second, sufficient data ishave to select financial indicators thatavailable as the uniform accounting

significantly affect bond ratings. NAR

standard of PFRs was implemented 20

is adequate since the significance of theyears ago, according to Statement No.

effect of NAR on bond ratings has been

34 of the GASB (GASB34). Third, there

alreadyare(Haraguchi,

appearance

severalofthestudies

that

have

detected

in

a

past

study

2018a). Second, as

theinvestigated the relationship between

purpose of this study is to obtain

PFRs

implications for Japan through the

and

bond

ratings,

andtheaccumulated knowledge is helpful fortime-series

behavior

developing the hypothesis.

relationshipin( 2 ) “Restricted and Unrestricted net assets” iscapital assets, net of related debt)” (GASB,
1999).

equivalent with “Net assets- (Invested in

32

of

the

the

NA-BR

U.S.,

the

international comparability of NAR is

The ratings of general obligation

important. Our analysis requires us tobonds issued by S&P are used touse

sufficient

calculate RATING. A higher RATING

betweenindicates a state’s greater ability toindicatorsinternational

withcomparability

the two countries because the results of
this

study

should

be

able

to

issue bonds.

becompared with Japanese results. Thus,

3. Evaluation of the NA-BR relationshipin order to confirm comparability, theWe calculate Pearson’s correlation

indicators in this study must be verified

coefficients for each year to evaluate

to determine whether modification is

the NA-BR relationship using NAR andnecessary

RATING (COR_NAR). The correlationconsideringthecharacteristics of autonomy in eachcoefficients

country.

indicators and bond rating indicators

Using

NAR

allowsus

tobetweendevelop an argument more efficiently

havethan selecting (or developing) a newstudies (Plummer et al ., 2007; Pridgenindicator, since the comparability ofand

NAR has been already established inWaymire 2015); however, none of these

Haraguchi (2017). Third, Wang et al .

studies

examinedthe(2007) was one of the representative

behaviorof

COR_NAR.

studies that developed the method to

NARs of each year are calculated using

measurethe PFRs of the respective fiscal years.

statestheusingfinancial
PFRs.

condition

This

of

particular

The

been

financialcalculated

Wilder,2013;

states’RATINGsofinprevious

Callahan

each

and

time-series

year

The

are

study has been described as “the first

calculated using bond ratings at the end

large-scale study since the adoption ofof each year.

GASB34” (Stone et al. , 2015, p.95), anda number of studies have since made4. Datareference to it (see Kravchuk and Stone,Toexaminethetime-series

2010; Johnson et al., 2012; Clark, 2015;

behavior of the NA-BR relationship overTantardini et al. , 2017).

the long term, we selected 613 PFRs
from U.S. states for a 14-year period

2. Bond Ratings(2002–2015) in which S&P issued bondWe introduce a new indicator to

ratings for general obligation bonds.

numerically evaluate bond ratings,

Table 2 shows a list of PFRs and bond

“RATING.” Table 1 shows theratings; the former have been collected

definition of RATING.

from state government websites, andtheTable 1 Definition of RATING
bond rating by S&P
RATING

AAA
8
A+
4

AA+
7
A
3

AA
6
A2

latter

from

the

S&P

website“History of U.S. State Ratings.” Thebond ratings at the end of each year

AA5
BBB
1

(after PFRs of each year are publishedand publicly released) are used to33

calculate COR_NAR. All these PFRs are
based

on

GASB34andhavecomparability.
Table 2 List of PFRs used in this study
StatesAlabama
AlaskaArizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
FloridaGeorgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
KansasKentuckyLouisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
MichiganMinnesota
Mississippi
MissouriMontana
Nebraska
NevadaNew Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
OregonPennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
n

BBR
G1
G2
G1
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G1
G2
G1
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G1
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G1
G2
G2
G1
G2
G2
G2
G2
G2
G1
G2

2002

2003

2004
●
●
●
●

2005
●
●
●
●
●

2006
●
●
●
●
●

2007
●
●
●
●
●
●

2008
●
●
●
●
●
●

●

●
●
●
●

●
●

●
●

●
●

●
●

●
●

●
●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●

●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●

●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●

●

●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●

●

●

●
●

●
●

●
●

●
●

●
●

●
●
●

●
●
28

●
●
33

●
●
34

●
●
39

●

●
●
●
●
●

●
●

2009
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

2010
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

2011
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
42

●
●
45

●
●
46

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
48

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
49

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
49

34

2012
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
50

2013
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
50

2014
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
50

2015
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
50

n
11
13
14
13
14
9
7
14
14
4
14
8
14
14
14
14
10
6
14
14
14
14
14
13
14
14
10
14
14
14
13
13
14
12
14
14
11
11
14
9
11
14
9
10
14
14
11
7
14
14
613

(4) Results and Hypothesis
DevelopmentForfurtherincreaseissignificant

becauseCOR_NAR

in

2015

is

we

significantly larger than all COR_NAR

statistically examine the time-series

values prior to 2008, with the exception

behavior of the NA–BR relationshipof 2003 (i.e., the minimum value of the

using

of

confidence interval of COR_NAR in

The2015 is larger than the maximum value

calculatedof the confidence interval of COR_NAR

theanalysis,long-term

confidence

COR_NARandconfidence

intervals

intervals

COR_OR.
areusing Fisher ’s Z transformation. The

in 2007 and earlier).

results are shown in Figure 1. The error

From these results, we develop thebars show the 95% confidence intervals

hypothesis that the relationship (i.e.,of COR_NAR (Figure 1). The broken

the correlation coefficient between thehorizontal lines show the minimum

stock measurement (NAR) and the bondvalue of the 95% confidence interval of

rating

COR_NAR in 2015.

appears gradually, not immediately. We
callmeasurement
this(RATING))hypothesis

the“gradual-

appearance hypothesis.”
The gradual-appearance hypothesis
insists that the appearance of the NA–
BR relationship has been caused by
gradually

increasing

appearance

factors. This implication (i.e., “gradualincreasing of the appearance factors”)
is an important key to clarifying theappearance

factors.

As

previously

noted, as Japan has only recently
completed the implementation of fullaccrualPFRs,

clarifying

theappearance factors is very importantbecause they can indicate the future

Figure 1 Time-Series Analysis of COR_NAR

Japanese NA-BR relationship.

In Figure 1, COR_NAR in 2002 is not
significant because the minimum value(5) Discussionof COR_NAR is less than zero. In

1. Variance of NAR

addition, all of variation widths of
COR_NARinone

significant

because

year
all

are

not

error

bars

We focus on the NAR variances toclarify appearance factors because of
their importance to the relationship-

overlap with the following year.
Ontheincreases

other

hand,

COR_NARgradually

over

time;

appearance. When the differences in thefinancial conditions (i.e., NARs) among

thislocal governments are small, they will
35

have

littleeffectonbondratings

The variance “var_NAR” in eachbecause the ratings are not continuous;

year is shown as ▲, and the error bars

they are discrete values. In addition,

show the 95 % confidence intervals.

rating agencies would not reflect NARs

Figure 3 shows the plots of NARs andin bond ratings if the NAR variances are

RATINGs in each year. The confidence

not material enough. That is to say, aintervals of var_NARs are calculated

sufficient variance of PFR indicators

using the chi-square distribution.

among local governments is necessary
for

the

appearance

of

the

NA–BR

relationship. We also note that the NAR
variances indicate the differences in thefinancial conditions of the individualstates, and these are very interestingvalues to discuss policies related toautonomy. Other appearance factors
will be discussed in Section 6 as areas
for future research.
If the NAR variances have increased
gradually
appearance

over

time,

hypothesis

thegradualandtheassertion that NAR variances cause the

Figure 2: Time-series analysis of var_NAR
NA–BR
relationshipcanbeexplained self-consistently. Figure 2

Figure 3 Plots of NAR and RATING

shows the time-series analysis of the
Figures

NAR variances.

2

and

3

illustratethefollowing observations. First, var_NARs
36

in the U.S. tend to increase over timesuggests that the significant difference(i.e., the divergence of NARs). Thisbetween 2014 and 2015 is caused by the

result indicates that the stability of therestatements of GASB68 (hereafter, thestock-based financial condition tends torestatement-caused divergence).

gradually decrease, and states with

The restatements pertained to theboth higher and lower NARs haveaccounting treatment of the related

existed simultaneously in recent years.

debts derived from all activities since

As shown in Figure 3, there are several

the establishments of local governments

states in which NARs have decreased

accordingsignificantly over time, and these statesaccounting rules. This resulted in the(with much lower NARs) have driven

identification

the divergence of NARs in the U.S.

restatement-caused

Second, the differences in var_NARs

result

to

of

the
of

changehidden
the

The
is

a

financialfor each consecutive two-year period are

conditions

not significant between 2002 and 2014;

appropriately

however, the difference in var_NARs

restatements (i.e., the identification of

between 2002 and 2014 is significant.

hidden debt according to the adoption ofThis result shows that NARs in U.S.

GASB68). S&P incorporated GASB68

states have diverged over the long term

for analyzing pension liabilities and(over ten years) (hereafter, the long-

deciding credit bond ratings for states

term divergence of NARS). On the otheraccording to S&P (2013).

hand,

the

differenceinvar_NARs

Both

of

each

the

debt.

divergencereflecting
of

of

state

more

the

PFR

following

these

two

types

of

between 2014 and 2015 is significant,divergences are caused by long-term

unlikeNAR variations (greater than one year).

in

other

time

periods.

The

divergence of NARs between 2014 andThis2015 is assumed to be caused by theincrease of var_NAR in the U.S. wasrestatement

caused by the long-term accumulation

of

the

net

asset

means

that

information for the beginning value ofof NAR variations

2015 PFRs according to the adoption of

2015.

the

significant

between 2002 andGASB68, which changed the accounting

The fact that the differences inrule for defined-benefit pension plans.

var_NARs over the long term (short

We recalculate NARs and var_NARsterm) are significant (not significant)by adding (subtracting) the decreasedmeans that the short-term variations of(increased) value of net assets derived

NARs are significantly lower than long-

from

term

these

restatements

to

the

variations.

smaller

short-term

var_NARs

numerator of the NARs in 2015 anddifferences

verify the effect of these restatements.

(the larger differences in long-term

The

recalculated

var_NARs) arose from the fact that

var_NARs between 2014 and 2015 is notthere are few (several) states in which

difference

significant.

This

in

resultstrongly

inThe

their NARs varied drastically.
37

States receive cash inflows from tax

Therefore,cash-basis

financialnottorevenues each year. This is consistentstatementswith our results suggesting that short-material

term variations in stock-based financial

conditions. On the other hand, accrual-

conditions (NARs) are small. On thebasisother hand, it is interesting that themight be able to detect them. Our

accumulation of these small short-time

findings suggest the necessity of PFRs

variations (i.e. long-term variations)toseriously

conditions of local governments and theworsenedstates’financialconditions.

aredeterioration

financialmeasureinstatements

stock-based

detectfinancial(PFRs)

financialdifficulty of measuring them without

As stated above, the correlation

PFRs. The measurability of PFRs is

coefficients of NARs and RATINGs haveimportantbeen significantly positive in recent

deciding bond ratings.

years.

able

Thechangeinforratingagenciesinfinancial

It should be noted that there areconditions significantly affects states’

some restrictions for PFRs and theirfinancialusefulness for rating agencies. PFRs

management,asratingagencies tend to decrease the bondmust

ratings

comparability between each state sinceofstateswithworsenedfinancial conditions.

creditFollowing the previous discussion,
we

would

like

have

to

emphasize

sufficientbondratings

accuracyareandrelativevaluations. Without these, PFRs cannot

thebe used for deciding bond ratings,

importance of PFRs in contrast to theparticularly in cases where PFRs are

cash-based

based on different (not uniform) models.

financialstatements

historically used in Japan. Financial

PFRs

based

on

the

uniform

statements of local governments areaccounting standards with sufficient

dividedaccuracy

intocash-basis

financial

andcomparability

providestatements and accrual-basis financial

information on stock-based financial

statements (i.e., PFRs in this study).

conditions and variances (i.e., detection

Cash-basis

areof states where NAR has deteriorated).

able to measure single-year variations

This information contributes to thein financial conditions. However, theybond rating decision of rating agencies

are not able to measure the cumulativeand should result in downgrades forvalue of these variations. As statedstatesabove, the single-year variations ofconditions and the appearance of thestates’

NA-BR relationship.

financialfinancialstatements

conditions

aregenerally small, and the measurement

This

with

resultworsenedsheds

financial

light

on

the

of the accumulated variations over aimportance of measuring the stock-

longer period is necessary to detect any

based financial condition of states andseriousthe decision-usefulness of PFRs. In

deteriorationoffinancialconditions.

addition,38

thegradualincreaseofvar_NAR self-consistently explains our

implementation). These results suggest

findings;

NAR

appearance

variancefactors

relationship,andrelationshipappears

of

is

one

of

that the variances of NARs in Japan are

the

NA-BR

generally smaller than in the U.S.

NA-BR

However,thegradually

over

the

possibilityoffuturedivergence of NARs in Japan cannot be

time.

denied.
We

2. Implications for Japan
With

specificshould

also

focus

on

the

significant effect of the restatements byreference

tothe

GASB68

in

the

U.S.

There

is

no

relevance to Japan, Haraguchi (2018b)

possibility for similar restatements inrevealed that the NAR variance ofJapan

Japanesewasgovernments do not owe debts related tosignificantly smaller than that of U.S.

defined benefit pension plans; however,states in 2012. Haraguchi (2018b) also

there are several possibilities for otherpointed out that strict balanced budget

hidden debts unique to Japan. For

requirements

local

example, Japanese uniform accounting

governments, as defined by Japanesestandards allow local governments tolaws, can decrease the NAR variance.

account for obligations of lump-sum

The Japanese Local Autonomy Law

payments as the total value of lump-states that the expenses in each fiscal

sum

year

the

employees retire at the end of the year.

revenues of the current fiscal year. In

The amount of these obligations may

addition, the Japanese Local Financevary significantly when the accounting

Law asserts that the purpose of issuingstandards

debt is limited, in principle, to thediscounted cash flow method.

local

shall

purchasegovernments

among

be

or

infrastructure.

Japanesefinancedwithmaintenancesince

payments

Japanese

assuming

require

the

use

local

that

of

all

the

of

Another example is an obligatory

These

piecesofassurance (OA) for a multi-year project

effectively

restrict

allof Japanese local governments. The

fromJapanese Local Autonomy Law states

carrying over deficits into the nextthat a local government must obtain afiscal year and signify that the balanced

local assembly’s approval for OAs whenbudget requirements of Japanese local

there is a possibility of future payments

governments are very strict. Haraguchi

from the local government. Japaneseand Oishi (2019) investigated NAR

uniform accounting standards require

variances in Japan and the U.S. They

local governments to count only defined

found

OA

legislation
Japanese

local

that

the

governments

NAR

varianceinamounts

as

and

of

not

Japanese local governments is much

undefined

smaller than in U.S. states in both 2012

included. This means that amounts of(beforefuture payments that can vary slightly,

implementationof

uniform

accounting standards) and 2017 (after

such
39

as

amounts

obligations,payments

for

OA

are

construction

projects continuing for several years,

decision, they form a core part of the

may not be accounted for as obligations.

information infrastructure of the bond

These unaccounted future payments

market in Japan.

may cause obligation amounts to vary
when accounted for using adequate(6) Summary and Future Research

estimations.
Our

This study investigated the time-

resultssuggestthat

futureseriesbehavior

of

the

NA-BR

amendments of Japanese accounting

relationship in U.S. states in order tostandards

PFR

construct a hypothesis that explains therestatements may cause variations inappearance process of the relationship.

stock-based financial indicators of local

We

governments. As stated above, we note

hypothesis” stating that the NA-BR

that single-year variations in financial

relationshipconditions of U.S. states are generally

immediately, after the implementation

small, and those of Japanese localof the uniform accounting standards. In

governments may be similar because ofaddition, we revealed the possibility

the stabilizing mechanisms used inthat the gradual appearance of the NA-

local government finance, such as tax

BRallocations

national

gradual increase of the NAR variance bygovernment. Thus, the possibility of theconfirming that the variance of NARs in

future divergence of Japanese NARs

themay be decreased but cannot be denied,results suggest that PFRs based on thesuggesting the possible appearance of

uniform standard bring information to

the NA-BR relationship in Japan.

ratingThe

that

result

from

in

the

implementation

built

the

appears

relationshipU.S.

“gradual-appearanceisincreasedagencies

gradually,

caused

over

that

by

time.

is

not

the

Our

usefulinofJapanese

deciding bond ratings. It is also noted

uniform

PFR

accounting

standards

that these results imply the possibility

revealsthestock-based

financialof future appearance of the NA-BR

local

relationship in Japan and contribute to

sufficientestablishing the significance of theconditionofgovernments

Japanesewithcomparability and can provide usefulimplementation

information to rating agencies for bondstandards. This study offers a new

rating decisions. As stated above, ourperspective on time-series behavior for

results suggest that the variances inthis topic, and the evidence we provide

stock-based

will contribute to clarifying the utility

financialconditions,observed through the implementation oftheuniform

gradualstandards,

appearanceofcaused
the

of

the

uniformof PFR information in bond markets.

the

However,

additional

studies

are

NA-BR

needed for further verification of therelationship in U.S. Not only can PFRs

gradual-appearance hypothesis. First, abased on uniform accounting standards

time-series analysis of the Japanesebring useful information for the ratings

NA-BR
40

relationshipisneeded,especially after the implementation ofcancellation.

the uniform PFR standard, to verify theclearly identify the reason for theapplicability of the hypothesis. Thiscancellation,

study only investigatedthe NA-BR

statistical

relationshipstates.

further investigation.

in

U.S.

The

However,andwecannottheoretical

and

are

for

analysesneededclassification analysis in the U.S. can

Finally, the effect of other PFR-

be also useful to verify our conclusion

based financial ratios should be alsothat the NAR variance causes the NA-

investigated

BR relationship. By classifying thegradual-appearance

states into two groups, states withapplicable to ratios other than NARs.

toverifywhethertheory

can

the
be

lower NAR variance and states withhigherNAR

variance,wecanAcknowledgements

investigate the appearance process of

The original version of this paper

the NA-BR relationship for each of the(Haraguchi, 2019) was published in

respective groups over time.
Second, further clarification of the

Accounting Progress and won the Best
Paper Award at the Japan Accounting

appearance factors is important. There

Association (JAA). The article in thiscan be several appearance factors otherjournal is an English translation ofthan NAR variance. The cancellation ofHaraguchi (2019) and published withdivergence

financial

the recommendation of the president of

indicator evaluation and a bond rating

JAA. The author would like to thank theevaluation is an example. The NA-BR

president. This research was partiallyrelationship will not appear without the

supported

cancellation of divergence. A state with

Endowment of Kyoto University anda lower financial indicator evaluation

JSPS(i.e., NAR of the state is lower than that

JP19K23214.

betweenaby

MizuhoKAKENHI

Securities

Grant

Numberof other states) and higher bond rating
evaluation (i.e., RATING of the state isReferences

higherstates)Callahan, C. M., and T. R. Waymire

contributes to decreasing COR_NAR for(2015). The GASB No. 34 Impact ofthat

Budget-to-Accrual

than
year,

that

of

according

other
to

Pearson’s

Variancesoncorrelation coefficient. The cancellation

Bond Ratings: Evidence from U.S.

of divergence can be caused by rating

Cities. Journal of Governmental &agencies’ recognition of the importance

Nonprofit Accounting . 4(1): 32–52.

of NARs. In addition, the increase in

Clark, B. Y. (2015). Evaluating the

PFRs’ reliability and the accumulation

Validityofacademic

Financial Condition Index for Local

studies and rating agencies’ practical

Governments. Public Budgeting &knowledge,knowledgeofconditions,also

includingevaluating
contribute

Reliability

Finance . 35(2): 66–88.
GASB(1999).
Basic

financial
to

and

the
41

of

the

FinancialStatements—andManagement’s

Governments and U.S. States: A

Discussion and Analysis—for State

Statistical Study using Financial

and Local Governments. Statement

Statements). Kaikei-kensa Kenkyu .

No.

57:13–35.

34

of

the

Governmental

Accounting Standards Board.
GASB (2012). Accounting and Financial
Reportingfor

Pensions—

Haraguchi,

K.

(2019).

ChihouKoukyoudantai ni okeru Koukaikei

An

Zaimusyohyo

toChihousaishijo

Amendment of GASB Statement

tono Kanrensei no Hatsugen Katei

No.27. Statement No. 68 of the– Beikoku Kakusyu no data wo

Governmental

mochiita

AccountingStandards Board.
Haraguchi,
K.
(2017).
Zaimusyohyo

Jikeiretsu

Bunseki －(The Appearance Process of theKoukaikei

Relationshipni

Financial

Bunsekiyoru

between

Reports

PublicandChihou Koukyou Dantai no Zaimu-

Government

kenzensei no Sokutei (Measuring

Statistical Study Using Data of U.S.

Financial

States). Accounting Progress . 20:

Health

of

Local

Bond

Local

Ratings:

A

Governments

withFinancial

Statements

Analysis).

Kaikei-Haraguchi, K. and K. Oishi (2019). The

kensa Kenkyu . 55: 117–132.
Haraguchi, K. (2018a). Koukaikei

International Differences in the

Zaimusyohyo

to

6–31.

Relationship

Chihousai

Financial

between
Reports

Publicand

Bond

Kakuduke tono Kanrensei – Zaimu

Markets: A Comparison between

Kenzensei ga Kakuduke ni Ataeru

Japanese Local Governments andEikyouU.S.

noToukeibunseki

oyobiStates.

Discussion

Paper

of

Series of Kyushu University. 20195: 1–19.

Financial

Johnson, C. L., S. N. Kioko and W. B.

Reports and Credit Bond Ratings -Hildreth (2012). Government-wide

An International Comparison -).

Financial Statements and Credit

Bulletin of Japanese Association

Risk. Public Budgeting & Finance .

forInternational
Accounting
Studie s. 41–42: 131–146.

32(1): 80–104.

Kokusai Hikaku (The RelationshipbetweenFinancial

Local

Governments’Haraguchi,

K.

Indicators

Kravchuk, R. S. and S. B. Stone (2010).

(2018b).

ChihouHow

Koukyoudantai

ni

Zaimu

Deficits Reveal Themselves? The

Kenzensei

Kokusaihikaku

okeru

and

When

Do

Structural–

Case of Indiana. Journal of Public

Nihon to Beikoku no Koukaikei

Budgeting, Accounting & FinancialnoZaimusyohyo
Bunsekini(ThekakaruManagement . 22(4): 487–510.
Nakazato, T. (2008). Zaisei Shushi to

ToukeiInternational

Comparison of Financial Condition
betweenJapanese

Saiken

Local

Shijo

Chihousai
42

wo

–

Shijo

taisyou

to

Koubo
shita

Budgeting & Finance . 27(2): 1–21.
URL

Bunseki – (Fiscal Conditions andCredit Spreads in the JapaneseThe
Economic

MIC of Japan. 2015. The

Research. 58: 1–16.
Plummer, E., P. D. Hutchison, and T. K.

Standard PFR model.

Municipal

JournalPattonBondofMarket).

Japan(2007).

GASB

No.

Implementation of the Uniform
https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_con

34’stent/000334402.pdf

Governmental Financial Reporting

S&P History Of U.S. State Ratings

Model: Evidence on Its Information

https://www.spglobal.com/ratings/e

Relevance. The Accounting Review .

n/research/articles/190319-history-

82(1): 205–240.

of-u-s-state-ratings-2185306

Pridgen, A. K. and W. M. Wilder (2013).
Relevance

of

GASB

No.

34

to

Financial Reporting by Municipal
Governments. Accounting Horizons .

(Received: January 31, 2020)27(2): 175–204.

(Accepted: April 20, 2020)

Rivenbark, W. C., D. J. Roenigk, and G.
S. Allison (2010). Conceptualizing
Financial

Condition

in

Local

Journalof

PublicGovernment.

Budgeting, Accounting & Financial
Management . 22(2): 149–177.
S&P(2013).

Standard&

Poor’sApproach To Pension Liabilities In
Light

Of

GASB

67

And

68,

RatingsDirect , July 6, pp.1-6
Stone, S. B., A. Singla, J. Comeaux andC. Kirschner (2015). A Comparisonof Financial Indicators: The Case of

Public

Detroit.

Budgeting

Finance . 35(4): 90–111.
Tantardini, M., H. Guo,

and

&
N.

Ganapati (2017). Social Capital andPublicFinancial

Performance:

Lessonsfrom

PublicManagement

Performance

Florida.

&

Review . 40(3): 480–503.
Wang, X., L. Dennis, and Y. S. Tu (2007).
Measuring Financial Condition: A
Study

of

U.S.

States,Public43