The Altman (1968) bankruptcy prediction model (BPM), based on financial statement data from manufacturing firms in the USA, has been widely applied. It does not, however, consider the differences in accounting practices for intangible assets (IAs) between countries. This paper investigates the effect of changes in how intangible assets are reported in Australia, pre- and post- AIFRS, on the accounting ratios in Altman’s (1968) BPM and the model’s prediction accuracy. Specifically, the paper compares the ratios and Altman’s Z scores, calculated under three different strategies based on the (i) original unadjusted data; (ii) data adjusted excluding all identifiable and unidentifiable IAs; and (iii) data adjusted by excluding all identifiable IAs only. The research uses data from 46 bankrupt firms matched to 46 non bankrupt firms based on size, GICS Industry and principal activity over fourteen years prior to the adoption of AIFRS in 2005. The results show marked differences across the three strategies, thus supporting consideration of these reporting changes in future modelling of bankruptcy.