基于营利性行为的民间非营利组织会计制度变革

我国民间非营利组织的营利性行为不仅客观存在,而且呈增长趋势,但现行《民间非营利组织会计制度》并没有对营利性行为的资金（或基金）运动过程进行会计规范,必须从会计假设、会计原则、会计要素等方面进行理论创新,并增设利润表和利润分配表,以满足政府管理、公众监督和非营利组织治理对会计信息的需求。     

营利性行为与非营利组织财务规制研究

文章根据非营利组织营利性行为趋势,结合中国社会组织网公布的非营利组织工作报告,指出我国非营利组织的营利性活动仍存在一些不规范行为,应当在财务管理上加以规范,以保证非营利组织营利性行为有章可依,有章必依。     

我国非营利组织营利活动的税收优惠问题

我国现行针对非营利组织的税收优惠法律制度规定较为笼统,对非营利组织营利性和非营利性的标准没有明确。因此,主张不论非营利组织从事营利性还是非营利性活动都给与税收优惠可能违背税收优惠政策制定的初衷。本文提出应从静态的资格优惠转向动态的行为优惠,以营利活动是否体现组织的非营利目的为标准来确定税收优惠政策在非营利组织营利性活动方面的适用。     

营利性行为分类与民间非营利组织税收优惠制度设计北大核心CSSCI

促进民间非营利组织遵守非营利宗旨是税收优惠的根本目的,而存在营利性行为并不等于民间非营利组织以营利为主要目的,只有当营利性行为"过度"或营利方式"不当",民间非营利组织的本质才会走向非营利宗旨的反面。因此,政府应按照"实质重于形式"原则,在民间非营利组织营利所得遵守"一个原则和两个标准"的前提下,根据营利性行为的营利方式和营利"度"的分类分别确定不同的免税、减税标准,形成科学的税收优惠制度,更好地促进民间非营利组织履行社会公益使命。     

浅议高校教育基金会财务核算体系

高校教育基金会在高校教育事业的发展中发挥着越来越重要的作用,随着业务的不断增加,高校教育基金会的财务核算体系就显得越来越重要。目前,在财务工作中可以参考依据的财务政策法规有《基金会管理条例》、《民间非营利组织会计制度》、《民间非营利组织会计制度——会计科目和会计报表》等。高校教育基金会的财务核算中经常会遇到一些需要解决的现实问题,     

非营利性医院技术管理风险要素及其纳入分配问题分析

中国是人口大国,面对着如此庞大的人口数量,我国的医药卫生水平显得十分落后,在我国的非营利性医院中出现的技术管理风险和其纳入分配的问题就显得十分重要。一般认为私立医院为营利性医院,而政府的公立医院为非营利性质医院。国家对营利性医院实行服务和医疗价格放开。目前我国的非营利医院已经开始积极地应对自身出现的问题,也采取了一些比较有效的方法。本文主要对现阶段我国非营利医院所存在的技术管理风险的要素和其纳入分配的问题加以探讨,为更好地寻找一条使非营利医院更好、更快发展的道路进行分析、探讨。     

对《民间非营利组织会计制度》的理解和完善建议

《民间非营利组织会计制度》颁布的意义2004年8月18日,财政部发布了《民间非营利组织会计制度》(以下简称为《制度》),自2005年1月1日起实施。这是自1998年我国预算会计改革以来在我国非企业会计改革方面的一大成果。长期以来,民间非营利组织没有专门的会计制度可依,一直执行事业单位会计制度。事实上,民间非营利组织与事业单位在资金来源、运营目的、业务活动等方面存在很大的差别,执行同一会计制度不利于准确反映民间非营利组织的     

规范民间非营利组织会计行为促进非营利事业蓬勃发展——学习《民间非营利组织会计制度》的几点体会

本文拟就颁布《民间非营利组织会计制度》的必要性、主要内容和特点谈几点个人的学习体会 ,并就宣传贯彻《民间非营利组织会计制度》、规范民间非营利组织财务会计行为的配套法规制度建设等方面提出一些建议。     

非营利组织财务制度问题及构建对策研究

当前,我国非营利组织已暴露出许多财务问题,致使社会公益事业在某种程度上陷入了信任危机.在此现实背景下,本文依据新制度经济学,对我国非营利组织财务制度进行探讨,并提出相应的构建对策.非营利组织财务制度是用于规范组织财务活动、处理组织财务关系的一套行为规则.尽管我国非营利组织财务制度历经变迁,但依然难以有效指导和规范非营利...     

我国民间非营利组织会计规范问题

文章分析了我国民间非营利组织在市场经济发展中的重要作用以及对其进行会计规范的必要性和紧迫性 ,并就我国民间非营利组织会计制度体系的设计和民间非营利组织的界定问题进行了探讨。最后 ,文章就我国民间非营利组织所涉及的基本会计问题及其规范作了重点研讨 ,并提出了规范建议     

新会计准则下对企业利润操纵空间的思考

新会计准则的出台制约了企业操纵利润的空间,压缩了会计估计和会计政策的选择项目,适度引入公允价值,提高了我国会计信息质量,但由于我国市场不够成熟、公允价值的认定方式、手段尚不完备,引发了新的企业利润操纵空间,为了保障新准则顺利贯彻与实施,必须完善会计法规体系,提高从业人员素质,加强外部会计监管。     

公允价值计量与企业利润操纵的关系及防范研究

我国2007年会计准则恢复了公允价值计量模式,在新会计准则中涉及会计要素计量的有30项,其中有21项不同程度的应用了公允价值计量属性。2014年出台了财政部发布《企业会计准则第39号--公允价值计量》准则（财会[2014]6号）,这不仅体现了我国会计准则与世界接轨的趋势,也反映了公允价值这一计量模式在现代社会经济中的的重要性。但随着公允价值得以恢复,企业利用公允价值进行利润操纵的现象时有发生,并且也给某些公司特别是上市公司带来严重损失。     

Genesis of Accounting Profit: A Dialectical Approach

This paper intends to explain the genesis of accounting profit from the viewpoint of dialectical materialism. Here accounting profit means the expression-form of value-change or surplus which is produced by human beings’ activities. In other words, it is a form of alienation.One of the characteristics of this paper is to try to criticize accounting from the viewpoint of accounting, not economics nor sociology. The meaning of criticize here is to explain the rationality of the existence of accounting profit, i.e. make clear the reason for the birth and development of accounting profit, because the affirmation by the explanation of rationality means the negative explanation at the same time.Accounting profit is a balance concept and, therefore, it must be computed according to a computation structure, i.e. bookkeeping, single or double. Some writers assert that accounting is so subjective as to change profit as accounting likes. However, what is asserted in this paper is that one cannot help using the computation-structure of bookkeeping, in book or in brain and single or double form, to measure income and it is difficult to change accounting arbitrarily.The reason why transaction cost cannot help becoming the basis of valuation in double bookkeeping is explained. Needless to say, holding gain or money-value change should not be ignored. However, these problems should be discussed more as a development of accounting profit, based upon the part which is dealt with in this paper.     

The Impact of Financial Accounting Practices on the Measurement of Profit and Equity: Australia Versus the United States

The purpose of this paper is to make a quantitative comparative analysis of differences between Australian financial reporting practices and U.S. GAAP. The empirical data consist of Form 20-F filings for thirteen Australian incorporated companies for the period 1985–93. Based on prior research, there is a test of the hypothesis that U.S. GAAP is more conservative than Australian financial reporting practice. The results of the empirical analysis offer little support for this hypothesis in the context of the reporting of profit. However, the hypothesis is supported for the reporting of shareholders’ equity. The most frequent and material differences in profits relate to asset measurement, equity consolidation and accounting for intangible assets. Generalizations relating to differences in shareholders’ equity are more difficult to make.     

The Relationship Between Accounting Profit and Economic Income

The reliance on economic concepts, most notably economic income, for the measurement of profit in financial accounting is misplaced. This paper explores the concept of economic income, contrasting it with the concept of profit in the conventional accounting model. The concept of individual economic income cannot be used for measurement of profit for a past period as the concept is based on the capitalisation of expectations and excludes "separate but correlated" concepts of profit and capital needed for capital maintenance.     

The impact of the new Accounting Standards for Business Enterprises (ASBE) on financial results of mainland Chinese listed companies

Effective 1st January 2007, 38 new Accounting Standards for Business Enterprises (ASBE) had become applicable to listed companies in mainland China. Research based on these latest standards will help us understand the current accounting harmonisation process in China. Previous studies, though rather scarce, had compared financial statements of companies simultaneously being listed on the mainland and Hong Kong. However, the very recent impact of the new ASBE has not been taken into account. Therefore, the present study focuses on domestic Chinese companies after implementation of the new ASBE. The financial figures of each item reported under the old Chinese Accounting Rules and Regulations and the new ASBE were collected in pairs and were analysed. Except for the test results on total assets and shareholders' equity, the other results revealed no significant differences between the paired figures of net assets per share, operating revenue, profit before tax, net profit, net profit after extraordinary gains and losses, basic earnings per share, net cash flow from operating activities and the per share value.     

What Explains the Valuation Difference between Intangible‐intensive Profit and Loss Firms?

Prior research suggests that loss firms are valued based on their abandonment/adaptation option values, while profit firms are valued as going concerns. However, conservative accounting treatment of expensing of R&D leads many R&D‐intensive firms to report losses even though they are not in financial distress. In this paper we investigate the difference in valuation of profit and loss firms that invest in intangibles, either through internal development (R&D) or purchases. The accounting treatment for internally developed intangibles is conservative in that US GAAP requires immediate expensing. Yet, it allows recognition of purchased intangibles. We find that in valuation of firms with high recognized‐intangible assets, book value has more prominence in loss firms than profit firms, while that is not the case for firms with high R&D expenditures. This suggests that their abandonment/adaptation option explains the difference in valuation between profit and loss firms with high recognized‐intangibles, while conservative accounting explains the valuation difference between profit and loss firms with high R&D intensity. This result suggests that recognition of intangibles in financial statements might mitigate the conservative bias in accounting numbers.     

国有及国有控股企业“利挤税”的财务分析

国有及国有控股企业经营盈利时总想少上缴给国家财政,而出现亏损时总能得到国家财政补贴。本文分析了我国国有及国有控股企业“利挤税”式的税收不遵从的内生机制,并通过利润分配、利润弥补亏损、存货计价和固定资产核算的会计处理来实现。只有通过体制改革使我国经济社会发展中不需要存在的国有及国有控股企业民营化、需要存在的国有及国有控股企业财政化,才能消除“利挤税”分配机制。