论企业合并的会计方法选择

企业并购带来了一系列的财务会计问题，其中一个重要的议题就是合并会计方法的选择问题。权益集合法虽然能带来合并收益，但这并不是企业的经营业绩真正提高了，因此，我国不应允许企业采用权益集合法，而应要求所有企业合并都采用单一会计处理方法-购买法。     

浅议权益结合法

目前,企业合并的会计处理方法主要有两种:购买法和权益结合法,国际上流行采用购买法.企业合并时采用的会计处理方法会对合并后公司经营情况会产生或轻或重的影响.     

彼此之间(上)

在企业合并的会计处理方法上,公司可能为了达到自身期望的景致而游走于购买法与权益结合法之间。在企业合并的会计处理方法上,公司可能为了达到自身期望而游走于购买法与权益结合法之间。而公司与监管层在购买法与权益结合法之间的博弈,使得企业合并方法的选择平添沧桑。两种企业合并方法对企业现金流并无影响,但对资产负债表和利润表以及有关财务比率的影响却是显而易见的,如表1所     

浅谈企业合并的会计处理

随着我国市场经济的建立,公司兼并和收购成为市场资源配置中的普遍手段,成为增强实力、实现发展战略的手段.公司兼并和收购时在会计上有两种处理方法.即:购买法和股权联合法,而采用不同的会计处理方法会对公司产生一定的、甚至重大的影响.本文首先分析我当前我国关于企业合并会计处理的法律规定,接着对购买法和权益结合法会计处理的比较进行了分析,在此基础上重点分析了购买法和权益结合法会计处理对财务的影响.     

浅谈企业合并的会计处理

随着我国市场经济的建立，公司兼并和收购成为市场资源配置中的普遍手段，成为增强实力、实现、发展战略的手段。公司兼并和收购时在会计上有两种处理方法，即：购买法和股权联合法，而采用不同的会计处理方法会对公司产生一定的、甚至重大的影响。本文首先分析我当前我国关于企业合并会计处理的法律规定，接着对购买法和权益结合法会计处理的比较进行了分析，在此基础上重点分析了购买法和权益结合法会计处理对财务的影响。     

购买法和权益结合法下合并报表编制研究

在现代社会,企业合并是一种重要的社会资源再分配的方式,在财务上对企业合并的处理方法主要有两种:购买法和权益结合法。本文讲述了购买法和权益结合法的区别,针对购买法和权益结合法在企业在编制财务报表时产生的差异和影响作了分析,对我国企业合并在财务方面的处理方法进行了深入研究。     

企业合并会计处理方法的探讨

2006年我国新会计准则第20号《企业合并》的颁布,确立了我国关于合并会计处理方法上权益结合法和购买法并存的二元格局.本文通过对合并会计处理方法的研究,综述了权益结合法和购买法的优缺点,我国保留权益结合法的原因,并对我国合并会计的发展进行思考,分析合并会计处理方法仍存在的弊端,提出完善发展的建议.     

合并购买法和权益结合法之会计比较

财政部于2006年初颁布了《企业会计准则第20号——企业合并》。在企业合并的会计处理中,新会计准则采用的是购买法与权益结合法并存的二元格局。购买法和权益结合法在不同的企业合并下分别使用。准则中规定非同一控制下的企业合并使用购买法：同一控制下的企业合并使用权益结合法。购买法和权益结合法的使用各有其优点和不足,怎样在实际使...     

企业合并会计处理方法的比较分析

<正>一、购买法和权益结合法的概述(一)购买法的定义及基本理论1.购买法的定义购买法以一家公司(收购方)取得另一家公司(被收购方)的形式对企业合并进行会计处理。收购方按公允价值记录所取得的资产和承担的债务。取得成本超过所取得净资产公允价值的差额,记为商誉。收购方的报告收益包括被收购方自收     

企业并购重组过程中会计工作的开展

伴随着企业并购的进一步发展,企业对于并购会计工作开展一直是实务和会计理论的重点问题之一。从西方的并购会计历史我们可以看出,在第二次世界大战爆发之前,企业的并购重组一般都采用了购买法这一单一的会计处理方法,而在第二次世界大战以后,权益集合法已经产生了,并且在二十世纪的六十年代这一法律盛行,企业对于权益集合法进行了滥用,并且造成了很大的危害,这也就在一定程度上使企业的会计准则机制制定的机构逐渐对权益集合法的应用进行限制。本文中,笔者就对企业并购重组过程中会计工作的开展进行浅谈。     

企业合并会计的经济后果分析——兼论我国会计准则体系中计量属性的整合

本文在回顾相关文献的基础上 ,指出购买法和权益法的选择不仅具有明显的会计后果 ,而且在企业特定因素和我国特殊融资和监管环境的作用下可能转化为严重的经济后果。本文最后勾勒出我国企业合并会计的逻辑框架并对我国会计准则体系中计量属性的整合提出初步见解     

论企业合并理论框架对会计实务的影响

随着全球经济一体化和资本国际化的不断发展，我国也随之发生大量企业合并案例。企业合并带来了一系列的会计问题。本文就目前会计界处理企业合并业务普遍采用的购买法和权益法，从会计实务处理、对财务报表分析的影响、对投资者的影响等几个方面进行了对比分析，最终得出选择合并会计方法对经济后果影响极大的结论。     

对权益结合法与购买法的关系疏理及其思考

企业合并会计处理方法的规范与选择曾被认定为国际四大会计难题之一,在会计学术界引起了广泛的关注和讨论。研究成果主要集中在对购买法与权益结合法的经济后果的对比分析以及对权益结合法的存废之争上,而对二者相互关系的历史变迁的研究尚不多见。从美国企业合并会计准则的历史沿革来看,权益结合法与购买法之间的关系经历了从互补到交叉再到互斥最后到统一的变化历程。我国目前正处于购买法与权益结合法互斥共存的二元格局。从中国经济的发展趋势来看,预计我国最终也会取消权益结合法而统一使用购买法来处理企业并购实务。     

Disharmony in international accounting standards setting: The Chinese approach to accounting for business combinations

The paper addresses two distinct aspects of disharmony in international accounting standards setting. The first aspect relates to the political economic context of financial accounting standards. This is illustrated by the Chinese standards setters’ decision to allow the pooling of interests method of accounting for business combinations despite the prohibition of this method by both the FASB and the IASB. This decision by the Chinese standards setters appears to have been based on political economic factors related to the need for industrial reorganization in China rather than a desire to serve the needs of global capital markets. The second aspect of disharmony relates to the role played by differential understandings of the fundamental objectives of financial reporting in an international context. The IASB's goal of producing one set of global accounting standards to serve the needs of global capital markets has led to a reduction in the number of permissible accounting methods and a move towards the fair value accounting model. In particular, the IASB concluded that the acquisition method of accounting for business combinations should be the only method allowed for business combinations. In contrast, the Chinese standards setters have recognized the existence of both mergers and acquisitions, and in response they created two different methods of accounting for business combinations. Effectively, the Chinese standards setters developed an alternative approach to accounting for business combinations which challenges the IASB's goal of achieving international accounting convergence through the fair value model.     

TO PURCHASE OR TO POOL: DOES IT MATTER?

The recent decision by the Financial Accounting Standards Board to eliminate pooling accounting for acquisitions raises several important questions: Does the choice of “purchase” or “pooling” affect firm valuations? How do differences in goodwill and its amortization affect cash flow and price/earnings multiples? How has the market reacted to purchase and pooling acquisition announcements? The authors' new research suggests that the market already judges mergers and acquisitions based on fundamental economics, not on GAAP earnings. In a study of 1,442 large acquisitions in the 1990s, the authors find that, in the first month after the announcement of pooled transactions, the acquirer's stock fell by an average of almost 4%. By contrast, the market reaction to purchase acquisitions was extremely favorable, with a 3% positive abnormal return in the first month. But what about the ongoing effect of goodwill amortization on values? In the second part of their two-part study, the authors report that the P/E multiples of acquirers reporting increases in goodwill amortization increase significantly following the acquisitions, and that the increases in P/E are large enough to offset the negative impact of goodwill amortization on earnings. Moreover, the authors also tested for and were unable to find any evidence of a market bias against balance sheet goodwill as an indicator of future amortization charges. The authors thus conclude that changes in accounting for acquisitions should not be a concern for acquirers, and that the elimination of pooling should have no lasting impact on corporate strategic decisions or M&A activity. Nevertheless, they do suggest that companies with significant goodwill would benefit from making their amortization transparent in their financial statements by, for example, breaking out amortization from depreciation on their income statements.     

History repeats itself: The acquisition method and nonrecurring charges

The Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement No. 141 (R) that replaces Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 141, Business Combinations. The new standard mandates use of the acquisition method, which requires expense treatment for acquisition-related transaction costs. Expense treatment is a departure from purchase accounting procedures, but is consistent with past guidance of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 16 for the pooling-of-interests method. Restoration of historical and controversial accounting procedures resurrects past outcomes. This study utilizes econometric techniques to predict outcomes of the acquisition method. Evidence indicates that expensing acquisition-related costs may improve transparent reporting. The results, based on 638 business combinations from 1994 through 1998, support the expectation that expense treatment for acquisition-related costs increases the likelihood that these costs appear more frequently and are greater in magnitude.     

Goodwill or “No-will”: Hubris in the tone at the top

In this study, we examine the effect of hubris in the “tone at the top” on goodwill accounting, specifically the proportion of the purchase price allocated to goodwill following a business combination, and subsequent decisions to write down goodwill. Using a sample of CEO letters to shareholders from firms listed on the Stockholm Stock Exchange, we carry out textual analysis of CEO letters to identify hubristic language markers. Regression analyses show that hubristic tone is positively and significantly associated with the purchase price allocation to goodwill. Furthermore, we predict that hubristic managers are more likely to overestimate future cash inflows related to goodwill and are less likely to perceive the need for a potential write-down. Consistent with this prediction, we find that hubristic tone in the CEO letters is associated with less timely goodwill write-downs. This study contributes to the literature on goodwill accounting, the role of CEO attributes on corporate decision making, and to research on CEO-speak, by providing evidence that a hubristic tone at the top can explain strategic choices by management and accounting outcomes.     

资产负债表债务法在企业合并所得税会计中的应用

新会计准则中,明确规定企业所得税核算采用资产负债表债务法,并规范了商誉的计量。但是对企业合并时,合并商誉对所得税的影响如何确认和计量未作规范。本文结合企业合并时对商誉的会计处理,初步探讨了其对所得税影响的确认和计量在资产负债表债务法下确认和计量的方法。     

Converging to International Accounting Standards: Views from Japan

Many countries, including the European Union member states and Australia, adopted international accounting standards in 2005. This year was also critical in Japan for convergence activities. Based on a review of 2005 financial statements and a survey of securities analysts, this study identifies key issues for convergence of Japanese and international accounting standards. We find that accounting requirements relating to fair value measurement, comprehensive income items, leases and business combinations are relevant to Japanese firms. A survey of 974 members of the Security Analysts Association of Japan about these issues indicated support for convergence and the use of fair value measurement, disclosure of comprehensive income, recognition of leases and use of the purchase method for consolidation. We report support for several positions favoured by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), a positive signal for achieving convergence goals in Japan, which will be of interest to capital market participants in Japan and other countries .     

THE VALUE ADDED BY BANK ACQUISITIONS: LESSONS FROM WELLS FARGO'S ACQUISITION OF FIRST INTERSTATE

Wells Fargo's recent acquisition of First Interstate Bancorp represents one of the relatively uncommon cases in which the economic values of both the acquiring and acquired banks increased sharply upon announcement of the deal. The transaction is also one of the few cases where the bidder in a major bank acquisition chose purchase instead of pooling accounting–despite the fact that the deal was openly hostile and that Wells Fargo had to fight off a competing bid from First Bank Systems.
Based on the stock market's reaction to this merger battle, as well as the results of their study of 153 bank mergers over the period 1985–1991, the authors argue that the most promising mergers are those presenting large opportunities to reduce costs by eliminating redundant operations. The stock market is much less responsive to other merger rationales such as diversification or entry into new markets in pursuit of growth.
The Wells case also suggests that a preoccupation with the accounting treatment of a merger is a mistake if it becomes the primary reason for turning down a deal that creates economic value, or if it prevents the bidder from choosing the lowest-cost method of financing the deal. Throughout the bidding contest for First Interstate, the stock market responded positively to the success of Wells Fargo's efforts, even though purchase accounting would have a large adverse impact on reported earnings.
But if the stock market does not appear to care about the accounting treatment of a merger, the method of financing does appear to matter to investors. In general, acquisitions financed with cash are viewed more favorably by the market than stockfunded transactions. The evidence also suggests, however, that acquiring firms can reduce the negative impact of stock deals by making conditional offers (those in which the number of shares depends on the stock price performance of the acquirer) and by combining such offers with stock repurchase programs.