国际会计准则变迁:动因、特征及解释

国际会计准则委员会(国际会计准则委员会)是一个独立的非官方会计准则制定机构,成立于1973年6月,其宗旨和目的是本着公众的利益,制定和发布财务报表所应遵循的会计准则,并维护其在世界范围内被接受和遵循.国际会计准则委员会自成立以来,在其漫长的发展变迁中曾先后经历了制定国际会计准则(IAS)、提高IAS可比性、制定核心会计准则以及制定国际财务报告准则等主要阶段,组织的名称也变为国际会计准则理事会(IASB).本文视国际会计准则委员会制定的国际会计准则为一种产权制度,将国际会计准则的制定(包括修订和废除)与推行纳入制度变迁的理论框架中,对国际会计准则变迁的动因、路径及特征给出一种制度经济学的解释.     

国际审计准则趋同进展评析

前言国际会计准则步伐加快,国际审计准则趋同同样紧锣密鼓。近几年,许多国家和地区的准则制定机构、监管机构等纷纷对国际审计准则明晰项目作出了积极反应,给予了极大的肯定和支持。关注国际会计、审计准则的利益因素,有利于我们加深对会计、审计准则国际发展的本质认识,关注国家未来利益,实现国际会计、审计的实质性趋同。     

国际会计准则的实施对收入确认的影响

国际会计准则委员会和美国会计准则委员会正商讨于2011年底将关键准则定稿.去年,两委员会决定优先处理4个项目,以实现于2011年中期会计准则国际趋同的目标.国际会计准则委员会计划就租赁、收入确认、保险合同和衍生金融工具制定新的会计准则.本文将针对国际会计准则和美国会计准则对收入确认的不同规定进行深入探讨,以阐明国际会计准则就收入确认的准则更改对欧洲企业的影响.     

国际会计准则的实施对收入确认的影响(英文)

国际会计准则委员会和美国会计准则委员会正商讨于2011年底将关键准则定稿。去年,两委员会决定优先处理4个项目,以实现于2011年中期会计准则国际趋同的目标。国际会计准则委员会计划就租赁、收入确认、保险合同和衍生金融工具制定新的会计准则。本文将针对国际会计准则和美国会计准则对收入确认的不同规定进行深入探讨,以阐明国际会计准则就收入确认的准则更改对欧洲企业的影响。     

关于财务报表列报准则的修订

2010年7月,国际会计准则委员会（IASB）和美国财务会计准则委员会（FASB）联合发布了一份征求意见稿草案,提议修订国际财务报告准则中有关财务报表列报内容。委员会认为,通过修订,将财务状况、综合收益和现金流细分为核心经营活动与其他活动有助于报表使用者更好地理解公司的业绩。     

国际会计准则委员会重组前后目标及结构之比较

国际会计准则委员会（IASC）承诺制定的核心准则（core standard）于2000年5月经证券委员会国际组织（IOSCO）认可并向各国资本市场推荐在跨境融资使用后，IASC的声誉空前提高，不仅伦敦证券交易所公开采用国际会计准则（IAS），欧盟还公告至2005年全体企业实施IAS。但是，美国SEC发表声明认为IAS不是质量最好的准则，言下之意，美国是经济最发达的国家，因而美国FASB的准则是质量最高的。在此情况下，IASC理事会（IASC Board）于1999年12月决议采纳战略工作组（Strategy Working Party）的未来规划建议，同意重组并投票选…     

新国际会计准则:将股票期权列入成本

国际会计准则委员会将在近日完成对金融衍生工具会计准则的修改 ,从而形成一套国际性的会计准则。“新版”国际会计准则将使不同国家和地区的公司会计报表具有可比性 ,以降低国际资本流动的成本。但欧美大公司出于自身利益考虑 ,希望在执行新准则时能剔除某些对其不利的条款。据《商业周刊》报道 ,目前已有 91个国家或地区同意采用新国际会计准则 ,而这将至少带来三方面好处 :第一 ,如果美国证券交易委员会同意以新国际会计准则代替美国会计准则 ,外国公司在美国上市将更为便利。第二 ,简化跨国公司的会计工作 ,无须按子公司所在国家和地区…     

前进中的国际会计准则委员会与国际会计准则

前进中的国际会计准则委员会与国际会计准则编者按：１９９７年５月８日，在多米尼加召开的国际会计师联合会理事会会议上，中国注册会计师协会被全票通过接受为国际会计师联合会的正式会员。根据１９９２年１０月１１日国际会计准则委员会全体会员会议通过的《国际会计准...     

浅议美国会计准则与国际会计准则的协调

美国会计准则与国际会计准则的协调是目前各国会计准则国际化关注的焦点。本文概述了美国会计准则与国际会计准则的协调过程，分析TFASB积极推进与国际会计准则协调所采取的措施，为我国会计准则的国际协调提供了一些启示[编者按]     

国际会计准则改革新动向

由2007年次贷危机引发的国际金融危机,暴露了国际会计准则的一系列问题,引发了国际社会和各国会计准则制定机构对国际会计准则的重新审视。公允价值计量的顺周期效应和金融工具会计准则的亲经济周期特点,导致众多投资者同时采取同方向的经济决策,使金融资产的流动性几乎陷于瘫痪。同时,国际会计准则的主要制定者——国际会计准则理事会(IASB)、美国会计准则委员会(FASB)——也因在金融危机中存在效率低下、理事代表性偏颇、公众     

How wide is the gap between IASC and U.S. GAAP? impact of the IASC comparability project and recent international developments

The objectives of this paper involve determining the significant areas of difference between International Accounting Standards (IASs) and U.S. GAAP following the IASC’s Comparability Project and the most recent IASC and FASB projects on these issues. In addition, the paper assesses the consistency of U.S. practice with the IASs revised via the Comparability Project. For this purpose, the 1996 annual reports of 38 large multinational U.S. companies are examined and an empirical analysis of reporting practices is carried out. Finally, the remaining gap between IASs and U.S. GAAP is evaluated and policy implications are considered for the IASC and FASB. It is concluded that while there are still some significant issues to be resolved, notably relating to the determination of net profit/loss for the period, research and development, changes in foreign exchange rates, and business combinations, these differences are not insurmountable.     

(No) Limits to Anglo-American accounting? Reconstructing the history of the International Accounting Standards Committee: A review article

The development of the current International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) from the earlier International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) provides insight into many issues of international financial reporting, among them the characteristics of international accounting standards themselves. This article reviews Camfferman and Zeff’s [Camfferman, K., & Zeff, S. A. (2007). Financial reporting and global capital markets. A history of the international accounting standards committee 1973–2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press] volume on the organizational development of the IASC and contextualizes it in the broader literature of cross-border standardization in accounting. While having produced a seminal piece, the authors take a clear Anglo-American perspective. The downsides are insufficiencies regarding a simplistic understanding of experts and expertise, a neglect of the role of auditing firms, and only an imbalanced integration of different stakeholders.     

The Conceptual Framework as a Coherent System for the Development of Accounting Standards

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) visualized a conceptual accounting framework as a 'coherent system of interrelated objectives and fundamentals that can lead to consistent standards that prescribes the nature, function, and limits of financial accounting and financial statements' (FASB, 1976). To Australian standard setters, the primary purpose of the conceptual framework (CF) was only to be used as a 'guide' in developing and reviewing accounting standards (AASB, 1995, para. 5). The International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) diminished the role of a conceptual framework even further by openly acknowledging that some standards are inconsistent with the guidelines offered by the framework (IASC, 1989 para. 12). Even though the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) supposedly pursues a policy of harmonization of conceptual frameworks and accounting standards, there are also acknowledged inconsistencies in the conceptual frameworks of the IASC.
The aim of this article is to assess the coherence of the Australian (and IASC) conceptual framework. This analysis identifies confusion in drafting or construction of the conceptual framework, internal inconsistencies, and inconsistency with the legal framework within which business entities operate. Accordingly it is suggested that the adoption of a conceptual framework will not lead to consistent accounting standards, and inevitably the conceptual framework will lack credibility so long as it is inconsistent with legislation.     

The IASC And Japan

The support of Japan, as a powerful nation and world leader, will be critical to the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) in its aim of promoting the harmonisation of international accounting standards. Japan represents a substantial challenge to the IASC objective; cultural and institutional factors have been regarded as impediments to its preparedness to adopt IASC standards. As deputy chairman of the IASC, the co-author of this paper, Michael Sharpe, has been involved in a number of seminars and discussions in Japan relating to the IASC activities and aims. This paper draws on those discussions, and on recent events and developments in Japan, to suggest that relations between the IASC and Japan are heading in the right direction and to make some prognoses about the acceptance of IASC standards by Japanese regulatory bodies.     

Measurement of formal harmonization progress:: The IASC experience

As a result of globalization, the accounting profession has become increasingly aware of the need to establish a single set of accounting standards that would be valid in the international arena. Recent events highlight the timeliness of this study, which provides an empirical measurement of International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) progress throughout its harmonization history. The purpose of this article is twofold: first, a new measure of the advances achieved through formal harmonization and second, to use this methodology to evaluate the IASC achievements all through its standard-setting activity. Our results prove that the IASC has made great progress in regard to the level of harmony achieved through the accounting standards it has issued or revised. Nevertheless, we conclude that the IASC needs to continue working towards greater formal harmonization. Our study also indicates research directions that could advance the study of formal harmonization. This specific area of research has generally been disregarded in the existing literature, a trend we would like to see reversed, considering that its application can provide valuable insight for standard-setting processes, especially now that the accounting community is so conscious of the need to advance the harmonization process.     

Regulatory flexibility and management opportunism in the choice of alternative accounting standards: an illustration based on large French groups

Due to the flexibility of domestic accounting regulations, French groups are entitled to refer to international or American standards for their consolidation. The objective of this research paper is to focus on the choices made by the 100 largest French companies during the last 16 years (1985-2000). In practice, apart from the French rules, three “alternative” sets of standards are used: the International Accounting Standards (IAS), “international principles,” and the U.S. GAAP. The percentage of companies referring to alternative (i.e., non-French) standards rose in the first part of the period, then fell. Additionally, while the number of companies choosing U.S. GAAP increased over the period as a whole, the number preferring IAS or “international principles” has been in sharp decline since 1994-1995. Our results show that in this voluntary move towards international accounting harmonization, the choices made by French companies have clearly varied according to developments in French accounting regulations and the changing power balance between the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) and the SEC-FASB. This indicates a certain degree of opportunism by the management, who clearly keeps one eye constantly on the cost-benefit trade-off.     

Lobbying of the International Accounting Standards Committee: The Case of Construction Contracts

Many cultural, political, economic and other environmental factors have been suggested as impediments to the efforts of the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) to harmonize international accounting standards. We investigate the relationship between lobbyists’ position, and: (1) their home countries’ financial accounting standards; and (2) their home countries’ tax rules. The factors are tested both separately and jointly to increase our understanding of lobbying and obstacles to harmonization. Long-term construction contracts are used as our case study. Construction contracts were traditionally accounted for by either the completed contract method (CCM) or the percentage of completion method (PCM). Originally, the IASC’s Standards (IASs) allowed both CCM and PCM. Thus, most countries’ accounting standards complied with IASs. However, the IASC’s Comparability Project, beginning with Exposure Draft (ED) 32, proposed to eliminate CCM. Thirty-nine comment letters submitted on ED 32 contained specific references to long-term construction contracts. Although almost 60% opposed the complete elimination of CCM, the IASC eliminated it. However, in many ways, the IASC co-opted lobbyists by allowing the Zero Profit Method, which may effectively result in the same timing of profit recognition as CCM. Support is found for a strong link between respondents’ lobbying position and both their home country’s accounting standards and tax laws. Each factor may hinder the harmonization process. A high positive correlation also exists between the accounting standards and tax laws of lobbyists’ countries. Beyond the possible importance of the tax and financial reporting linkage affecting harmonization, the issue of multicollinearity should signal caution when interpreting the results of lobbying studies that simultaneously include highly correlated variables in the same model.     

Do earnings reported under IFRS tell us more about future earnings and cash flows?

We contribute to the debate about the relative benefits and costs of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption by examining whether earnings persistence and the association between current accounting earnings and future cash flows differ for firms reporting under IFRS versus firms reporting under United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) and firms reporting under non-U.S. domestic accounting standards (DAS). Using samples comprised of 58,832 firm-year observations drawn from 33 countries from 2002 through 2008, we find that positive earnings reported under IFRS are no more or less persistent than earnings reported under U.S. GAAP but losses reported under IFRS are less persistent than losses reported under U.S. GAAP. Moreover, we find that earnings reported under IFRS are no more or less persistent and are no more or less associated with future cash flows than earnings reported under non-U.S. DAS. However, we find that earnings reported under U.S. GAAP are more closely associated with future cash flows than earnings reported under IFRS. This is important if a key role of reported earnings is to help investors form expectations about future cash flows. These results should be of interest to academics and standard-setters as they debate the merits of transitioning to IFRS, and to parties who use reported earnings to form expectations about future earnings and cash flows.     

The use of International Accounting Standards terminology, a survey of IAS compliance disclosure

This study examined where and how companies that purport to be using International Accounting Standards (IAS) are referring to IAS in their financial statements. Virtually all firms surveyed referred to IAS in the footnotes but referred to IAS in the audit report just under 50 percent of the time. The largest group of companies uses a combination of home-country and IAS standards. A significant number of firms report the use of IAS standards with exceptions. The majority of these firms do not discuss the dollar impact of those exceptions. Referencing IAS with home country standards or exceptions reduces comparability and transparency of financial statements. The International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) is referenced as the source of IAS in about half of the cases. Failure to reference the IASC as the source of IAS may result in ambiguity concerning what IAS means     

美国金融安全审查的新趋向、影响及应对——以《外国公司问责法》为切入

美国作为金融发达国家,也是金融安全审查十分严厉的国家,其建立了从准入前、准入时到准入后直到市场化退出的全过程安全审查机制。其金融安全审查因《外国公司问责法》经过参众两院通过而进一步强化。通过实证分析美国安全审查实践和制度演变,能够清晰发现其金融安全审查范围不断扩张、审查标准模糊性愈发明显、歧视性针对性愈加增强,且美国将法律作为其金融霸权和政治打压的制度性工具之特质。这一核心观点突出表现在该法的政治化倾向和长臂管辖实质、商业问题及其监管政治化内核等层面。我国金融开放新阶段下,美国金融安全审查的新趋向需要我们依法积极应对。