Malaysian Management Journal 5 (1&2), 65 - 87 (2001) Disclosure Practices Among Unit Trust Funds in Malaysia KU NOR IZAH KU ISMAIL SHAMSUL NAHAR ABDULLAH MAHAMAD TAYIB NOR ASMA LODE School of Accountancy Universiti Utara Malaysia ABSTRACT This study examined the level of transparency among unit trustfunds in Malaysia. Unit trustfunds were the focus of this study due to its nature: unique, heavily regulated and rapidly growing. The study investigated the extent of disclosure in relation to the various mandatoy and voluntay requirements and the roles of the specific characteristics of trustfunds in explaining their level of disclosure in the annual reports. Thefindings showed that the level of disclosure increased rapidly within the period of study suggesting that trust funds were becoming more transparent. With regard to the funds’ specific characteristics, the study showed that the influence was not consistent. The model best explained the disclosure level during thepre-mandato y period, i.e. 1996. During this year, the variables ’sponsor of the fund’ and ‘auditors’ significantly influenced the disclosure level in the predicted direction. In the other years (1997 and 1998), the explanatoy power of the model was very low as suggested by the significant reduction in the adjusted R2.One argument was that during this period, the revised Guidelines had been issued and thus the model could not explain much the variation in the disclosure level as a large amount of the items in the study were already mandated. ABSTJXAK \ Kajian ini melihat tahap ketelusan di kalangan unit-unit dam amanah di Malaysia. Unit-unit dana amanah menjadi fokus kajian ini kerana sifatnya yang unik, industri ini dikawal ketat dan berkembang dengan pesat. Kajian ini rnelihat tahap pendedahan dengan mengkaji kesan-kesan keperluan sukarela dan kzperluan mndatori serta peranan beberapa ciri-ciri spesifik dana amanah dalam memberi penjelasan terhudap tahap pendedahan di dalam laporan tahunan. Dapatan kajian menunjukkan tahap pendedahan di dalam tempoh kajian meningkat ketara dan secara umumnya memperlihatkan tahap ketelusan yang semakin tinggi sepanjang tempoh kajian. Namun, dapatan kajian peranan ciri-ciri spesifik menunjukkan kesan ke atas tahap pendedahan adalah tidak konsisten di antara kajian. Model regresi yang terbaik diperoleh bagi tempoh pra-mndatori, iaitu 1996. Bagi tempoh ini, dua angkubah memberi kesan yang signifikan ke atas tahap pendedahan, iaitu penaja unit dana amanah dan juruaudit dan arah kesan seperti 66 yang dijangkakan. Bagi tmpohketika dan pasca-mandatori, iaitu tahun 1997dan 1998, keupayaan model ’ dalam menjelaskan tahap pendedahan amat rendah seperti yang ditunjukkun oleh R2terlaras yang rendah. Ini berlaku kerana &lam tmpohini,garis panduan yang telah dismkakan diterbitkandan dikuatkuasakan oleh Suruhanjaya Sekuriti Malaysia. INTRODUCTION nor a finance institution which accepts money from depositorswhich in turn lent to borrowers The issue of corporate transparency has for profits. A unit trust fund accepts money recently been a topic of interest particularly from investors and issues units to the investors with the Asian financial crisis in 1997. in return for the money. Unlike a finance Corporate transparency is about an entity institution, a trust fund does not lend money disclosing all relevant and material information for profits but rather it uses the money to not already known to the public. In accounting, invest in various securities. Thus, being the major issue involving transparency is the investment driven, the level of disclosure of a level of disclosure in annual reports unit trust fund is expected to be high as all of particularly relating to items that are not its unit holders are investors. Furthermore, as required to be disclosed either by regulatory a unit trust fund is an investor in nature, it bodies or by law. The amount of disclosure would expect the entities in which it holds and the degree of compliance with the securities to be transparent. Therefore, a unit approved accounting standards serves as an trust fund is also predicted to be transparent to indicator of high quality financial reporting. promote high transparency level among Malaysia’s seriousness in increasing the level companies. Thus, it is the purpose of this of transparency is evident in the number of paper to investigate the level of transparency disclosure regulations and accounting among unit trust funds in Malaysia. standards that have been introduced by the Additionally, unit trust funds have become a , relevant bodies in recent years. As suggested very popular type of investment among by Watts and Zimmerman (1986), these Malaysians, particularly in the 1980’s and governmentally enforced regulations will 1990’s. The government strongly encourages improve the capital market’s ability to allocate the public to invest in unit trusts because these capital more appropriately. funds are managed by professionals. This is Extant studies investigating transparency evidenced by the large number of unit trust mainly focused on public companies. This funds that are sponsored by either the Federal study, on the other hand, attempts to examine government or the State governments. The the level of transparency among unit trust level of transparency among unit trust funds funds in Malaysia. Unit trust funds are the is expected to improve as a result of the various focus of this study due to its unique nature; a changes since the early 1990’s involving unit trust fund is neither a company which disclosure requirements to ensure that the utilizes its assets to produce servicesor product, interests of unit holders are protected. Malaysian Management Journal 5 (1&2),65 - 87 (2001) 67 This study focused on the financial 1997 known as Guidelines on Unit Trust Funds disclosure provided by unit trust funds in (here after referred to as the revised their annual reports. Although various Guidelines). These revised Guidelines were defimtions were given to the word ‘disclosure’ mandatory and superseded the earlier (see Azhar, 1998), we, nonetheless, restrict our Guidelines. The revised Guidelines imposed definition of disclosure to all information various additional disclosures which were disclosed by unit trust funds in their annual considered as important in evaluating the reports as per required by the Securities performance of a trust fund. Contents of the Commission (SC) as contained in the annual report of the trust funds were outlined Guidelines and the proposed accounting in Schedule VI of the Revised Guidelines. standard issued by the Malaysian Accounting Variations in the items disclosed in annual Standard Board (MASB). reports of unit trusts still prevail despite the reporting requirements imposed by the SC (MASB, 1998). The issuance of the Draft BACKGROUND Statement of Principles 2 (DSOP 2), Financial Reporting by Unit Trusts, in 1998by MASB was As at December 1998, there were a total of an attempt to address this issue of variation in ninety-two approved funds or schemes reporting. DSOP 2 specifies items to be managed by thirty-two management disclosed in the financial statements and the companies (http:/ /www.sc.com.my). The methods of measuring certain items for 1990’s alone saw a very rapid growth in the disclosure, which were not previously covered unit trust industry in Malaysia where sixty- in the revised Guidelines. Thus, DSOP 2 three funds were set up during the period 1990 addresses the issue of disclosure and to 1998. The growth pattern continued in the measurement not dealt with by the revised year 2000 where another seventeen new trust Guidelines. However, unlike the revised funds were launched (The New Straits Times, Guidelines, DSOP 2 is not mandatory. 14 February 2001). The scope of this study was limited to the Prior to the establishment of the SC in disclosure practice due to data unavailability 1993, the unit trust fund industry was under at the time of the study. This study did not deal the purview of the Guidelines on Unit Trust with the measurement and recognition aspects Funds, which was issued in 1991by the Capital of financial reporting. The reason was that Issue Committee (CIC). Compliance to the these issues of recognition and measurement Guidelines was not compulsory. In 1994, were only addressed in 1998, following the following its establishment, the SC adopted issuance of DSOP 2. the Guidelines, known as Guidelines on Unit No research evidence on disclosure Trust Funds 2994 (hereafter referred to as the practices by unit trust funds in Malaysia is Guidelines). Compliance to these Guidelines currently available. Nevertheless, several was mandatory. Following a revision, the studies on disclosure practices by companies revised Guidelines were issued by the SC in in other industries are available. For example, Malaysian Management Journal 5 (1&2), 65 - 87 (2001) 68 Ku Nor Izah and Shamsul Nahar (1998) tant sources of information used by financial conducted a study on mandatory disclosure analysts (Ku Nor Izah and Zuaini, 1995; and practice among general insurersand Hashanah Azhar, 1998). This evidence was further sup- (1999) examined disclosure practices of banks ported by a comment from a financial analyst in Malaysia. On more general industries, whoindicatedthattheannualreportwasamong Hossain, Lin and Adams (1994), Normah and the major formal sources of information that Abu Bakar (1995) and Azhar (1998) studied analysts usually relied upon (Razani, 2000). the disclosure practices by companies listed Research on the extent of