我國實施財務會計準則第34 號公報後，多數金融商品以公平價值衡量入帳，唯不同種類公平價值變動數報導方式具差異，令人質疑是否提供企業盈餘操縱的機會？本研究觀察財務危機與正常公司，金融商品分類決策是否有所差異，管理者是否會藉由操弄金融商品分類方式來達成其盈餘管理之目的。本研究之樣本共有37 家財務危機公司，每家危機公司配對2 家正常公司，共配得74 家正常公司，進行Tobit 迴歸分析。結果顯示，財務危機公司在會計波動性、流動性需求等因素考量下，管理者會分類較高比例金融商品至「備供出售金融資產」項下。此外，本研究亦發現第二次修訂條文實施後，正常公司重分類「交易目的金融資產」比例高於財務危機公司。綜上所述，本研究找出新公報下企業從事形式上與實質上盈餘管理之證據，使得主管機關與投資人對未來企業之盈餘管理行為能有所防範。

In order to connect with the International Financial Accounting Standards (IFRS), the Financial Accounting Standards Board of Taiwan issued the Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No.34 in 2006. The statement requires financial instruments to be recognized at fair value. However, the changes of market value derived from “Financial Asset at fair value through profit or loss” are required to record in the income statement, whereas the changing value of “Available-for-Sale Financial Asset” is reflected in the stockholders’ equity account. The difference in reporting method of changing value leads us to question that it provides an opportunity for business to manage earnings. Thus, this study examines whether the decisions of financial instruments classification made by distress firms are different from those made by non-distress firms, and investigates whether managers fulfill their goals of earnings management through manipulating asset classification. The sample of this study includes 37 distress firms and 74 non-distress firms and was analyzed by Tobit regression. The empirical results indicate when distress firms consider the tolerance of accounting volatility and liquidity requirement, the managers will classify high proportion of financial instruments as “Available-for-Sale Financial Asset”. But it is still inapparent that the managers of distress firms manage earnings by disposing of this kind of asset. And after the adoption of the second revision of SFAS No.34, we find non-distress firms classify higher proportion of “Trading Financial Asset” than distress firms. Accordingly, it is evidential that managers engage in earnings management in appearance and in effect. Our results can make regulators and investors have a deeper cognition of SFAS No.34, and let them have quick responses to managers’ earnings management through financial instruments classification.