我国会计国际化进程刍议

本文分析了会计国际协调的成因和进展 ,论证会计国际化是必然趋势 ;探讨了主要发达国家和部分西方学者对会计国际化的态度 ,论证会计国际化是一个政治程序而非技术范畴 ;分析了国际会计准则的基本特点及其在我国的实践及研究发现 ,推论了国际会计准则的角色 ;讨论了国际财务报告准则的发展战略及其应用环境问题 ,并对我国会计国际化进程提出政策建议     

Using Form 20-F reconciliations to internationalize an accounting course

Accounting courses and textbooks in the United States focus on US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). As a result, US accounting students have little exposure to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and to differences between these standards and US GAAP. To familiarize students with the differences between IFRS and US GAAP, accounting instructors can develop assignments based upon the reconciliation of IFRS to US GAAP net income included in Form 20-F, the annual document submitted to the SEC by non-US firms. The course assignment described in this paper provides students with a “road map” of the differences underlying specific company financial reporting, and helps instructors identify where these differences occur. The assignment represents an innovative way of integrating international financial reporting standards and SEC reporting requirements into a higher level undergraduate or graduate accounting course.     

中国对于国际会计协调的基本态度与所面临的问题

本文从分析当前国际经济全球化的背景和国际财务报告准则制定及其应用的急剧变化出发,认为我们应当积极关注国际财务报告准则发展和国际会计协调与趋同的进展情况。尽管我国目前尚没有完全采用国际财务报告准则,但是中国实际上也是国际财务报告准则的使用者和受益者,为此,中国一方面支持国际会计准则理事会制定全球公认会计准则的努力,另一方面也将积极参与国际会计协调与趋同进程。与此同时,考虑到中国当前所面临的特殊会计环境及其对我国会计国际协调与趋同的影响,中国会计国际化将适应经济发展的需要,走一条渐进式改革之路。为此,本文提出了一个务实、可行的会计国际化策略。     

The influence of process accountability and accounting standard type on auditor usage of a status quo heuristic

There has been considerable discussion about the U.S. reporting standards becoming less rules based, similar to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). One proposed advantage of a change to IFRS is increased comparability across multinational and non-U.S. companies. Additionally, some believe that IFRS afford greater flexibility in its principles, thereby enabling firms’ accounting choices to better reflect the true economic nature of any given transaction (FASB, 2002; SEC, 2003). With fewer rules, both financial statement preparers and auditors would be expected to adjust to having more options with regards to financial reporting. However, some proposed changes leave the option open to implement IFRS (or other principles-based standards) in ways that still follow rules in U.S. GAAP. This paper investigates whether prior year accounting treatments influence the judgment for current year treatments when one way to implement the standard is to follow the prior year treatment. We find that some auditors fixate on prior year scenarios and judgments, even if the current year scenario and applicable accounting standards are different. We find that holding auditors accountable for their decision making process reduces the likelihood of sticking with the prior year treatment most notably when the prior year standards were U.S. GAAP.     

新会计准则研究:分析框架与综述

本文构建了一个新会计准则研究的分析框架,在此基础上,对已有的新准则研究文献进行了系统的回顾与评论。结合分析框架和对已有文献的评述,我们进一步提出了未来尚需探索和拓展的方向。     

IFRS framework-based case study: DaimlerChrysler – Adopting IFRS accounting policies

This instructional case applies a framework-based approach to explore the concept of comparability in financial reporting and retrospective application of new accounting policies. The DaimlerChrysler (DC) case provides an opportunity for you to research key financial reporting concepts, analyze accounting policy differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS, determine adjustments necessary to convert financial statements from U.S. GAAP to IFRS, and compute and discuss key ratio impacts following financial statement conversion. This case demonstrates that transitioning to IFRS is more than an accounting issue; it provides opportunities for financial restructuring (e.g., Daimler’s amendments to pension plans and its 2007 sale of Chrysler). It also illustrates the importance of professional judgment when initially adopting IFRS accounting policies. Also, despite FASB and IASB convergence efforts, you learn that most of the key differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS identified in DC’s reconciliations continue today. This case helps you to: (1) develop skills to interpret and apply the requirements on first-time adoption of IFRS to a real-world setting; (2) research key differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS and their effects on the financial statements and ratios; and (3) understand significant impacts of the transition to IFRS on businesses and financial statements. Completing the case develops your critical thinking and research/technological skills.     

Does Convergence of Accounting Standards Lead to the Convergence of Accounting Practices?: A Study from China

In this empirical study we examine whether China's efforts to converge domestic accounting standards with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) over the past 15 years have resulted in the successful convergence of Chinese listed firms. This study is unique in that we evaluate convergence of firms' accounting practices from three perspectives: (1) the level of compliance with Chinese GAAP and IFRS, (2) the consistency of accounting choices under Chinese GAAP and IFRS, and (3) identification of significant differences in the net incomes produced under Chinese GAAP and IFRS (earnings gap).Using the 1999 and 2002 annual reports of 79 Chinese listed firms we find improvement in both compliance with IFRS and in the consistency of the accounting methods used in annual reports prepared under Chinese GAAP and IFRS. We also find a reduction in the earnings gap from 1999 to 2002. However, interestingly we observed that Chinese listed firms' compliance with IFRS is significantly lower than their compliance with Chinese GAAP. Overall we believe that our findings suggest that in China the convergence of accounting standards has been a conduit to the convergence of accounting practices.     

The IASB and FASB convergence process and the need for ‘concept-based’ accounting teaching

The increasing globalization of the U.S. economy drives interest in international accounting standards. In this respect, the convergence process between the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) targets the completion of several major projects by 2011. The importance of the projects under consideration as well as the lack of conclusive theoretical solutions around them suggests that the target of a “common set” of accounting standards will be replaced in the short-medium term by a de facto situation of a “slightly different set” of accounting standards. In this paper, we draw on best available practices to make a specific proposal for the introduction of IFRS into the curriculum of institutions of higher learning in the U.S. Our proposal is driven by the idea that accounting education should move from teaching ever temporary rules to emphasize the economic and strategic underpinnings of accounting transactions.     

The valuation properties of earnings and book values reported under IAS,domestic GAAP and U.S. GAAP: Evidence from China,Hong Kong,Japan, Korea and Singapore

This paper examines whether earnings or book value is the dominant valuation accounting measure for companies reporting under alternative accounting standards — International Accounting Standards (IAS)/International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) or domestic accounting standards of China, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea and Singapore. Our sample consists of domestic firms in the five Asian countries and firms from these countries cross-listed in the United States as American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) from 2002 to 2011. For domestic firms, book value is more informative than earnings for firms from Hong Kong, Singapore, China, Japan and Korea during 2002–2011 although their accounting standards are influenced by different systems. For the ADR sample, book value is more informative than earnings for U.S. GAAP reporters and reconcilers during 2002–2007. However, earnings are more informative than book value for U.S. GAAP reconcilers from China. After 2007, ADRs in our sample from Hong Kong, Japan and Korea continued to file under U.S. GAAP. Some ADRs from China filed under U.S. GAAP and some filed under IFRS. Earnings are more informative than book value for IFRS users; however, book value has higher incremental value relevance than earnings for U.S. GAAP users. We contribute to prior research by providing evidence on the valuation properties based on accounting measures reported under different GAAPs for the Asian countries.     

The academic community’s participation in global accounting standard-setting

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are now used in more than 100 countries. In the US, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is considering a “Work Plan” to allow or require US corporations to use IFRS. Considering the rising importance of IFRS, the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), the SEC, the European Union (EU), and others have called for broader stakeholder participation in the global accounting standard-setting process. Academicians are seen as one group that has the potential to have a strong positive influence in the shaping of accounting standards.This study investigates the academic community’s participation in the IASB’s standard-setting process through the submission of comment letters for 79 issues. For 55 IASB issues, 90 academics and academic organizations (5.8% of all respondents) provided 153 responses (2.7% of total responses). For 24 Draft Interpretations issued by the IASB’s International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee (IFRIC), just 17 academics and academic organizations (4.9% of respondents) provided 20 responses (1.9%).Overall, Anglo country writers dominated, with Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States together providing a majority of writers and responses. Non-Anglo EU countries provided about a quarter of the writers and responses. While academic interest increased for a few issues, usually discussion papers and substantive issues, the overall response rate remained low. Possible reasons for low participation rates are discussed, as well as some changes that may increase academic engagement with the IASB’s standard-setting process.