中美财务会计概念框架比较

随着我国市场经济的发展,对会计的要求也发生着变化,2006年我国发布的《企业会计准则一基本准则》,既是与国际会计惯例的趋同,同时又具有中国特色,亦可看作我国的财务概念框架.本文主要通过对年美两国财务会计概念框架的比较,来分析两个框架的异同以及美国对我国概念框架的借鉴意义.     

西方财务会计概念框架与我国基本会计准则的对比研究

在西方,财务会计概念框架为会计准则的制订提供最直接、最有效的理论和技术性支持。而目前,我国没有发布财务会计概念框架,仅有一个《企业会计准则——基本准则》充当类似财务会计概念框架的作用。但此基本准则与FASB《财务报告概念框架》、IASB《财务报告概念框架》仍存在一定的差距。因此,拥有一个既有中国特色、又符合国际惯例的基本准则或财务会计概念框架,以满足和应对各种现实需求,已成为会计界关注的问题。本文通过对三者的对比研究,探讨了FASB和IASB概念框架对我国基本会计准则的借鉴指导意义,提出了如何完善我国基本会计准则的方法和构想。     

现行财务报告存在的问题及构想——复合财务报告系统

财务报告作为会计主体对外提供财务信息的载体,是财务会计的重要组成部分,因此,财务会计概念框架理应包括财务报告.但很遗憾,FASB制定的财务会计概念框架并没有专门就财务报告颁布相应的概念公告,它只是在其他概念公告中相关的地方进行阐述.其实,FASB曾经发布过两份征求意见稿,1980年5月发布的《财务报表和其他财务报告》及1981年11月发布的《报告企业的收益、现金流量和财务状况》,它们基本上是讨论财务报告的列报,后来不知什么原因,这两份征求意见稿都被搁置,财务报告的列报问题则销声匿迹了.为了研究我国现行财务报告存在的问题并进一步提出笔者的构想,我们有必要首先回顾现行财务报告模式的历史演进过程.     

韩国财务报告概念框架及其改进方向

韩国于2003年公布了现行财务报告概念框架。这一概念框架原则上以IASB的概念框架为基础,反映了韩国财务报告环境的特殊性和财务报告手段等,被誉为面向未来、反映韩国国情的概念框架。但是随着时间推移,韩国现行财务报告概念框架也显现出不足,存在着需要继续探讨的问题。它要真正成为一个为完善会计准则提供向导的概念框架,应持续改善其内容和形式。     

我国财务会计概念框架已具雏形——兼论财务会计概念框架的国际比较

新发布的《企业会计准则——基本准则》，尽管没有按照国际惯例称为“概念框架”，但它实质上起着概念框架的作用，因为它明确规定具体准则的制定应当遵循基本准则；同时，其中首次提出了国际会计惯例中公认的一些概念（如确认、计量、报告、交易、事项等），其从内容到实质全面向国际惯例趋同。应该说我国财务会计概念框架已具雏形。本文从财务会计概念框架的由来与比较入手。谈谈《基本准则》所确立的我国财务会计概念框架。     

财务报告概念框架与会计基本理论问题研究——中国会计学会会计基础理论专业委员会2016年学术研讨会综述

<正>2015年5月18日,国际会计准则理事会(IASB)发布了《财务报告概念框架(征求意见稿)》,向全球公开征求意见。与之相对应,我国2006年发布的基本准则仅在2014年修订了公允价值定义。在此背景下,为深入研究国际会计准则理事会发布的《财务报告概念框架(征求意见稿)》,推动我国会计基本准则的科学修订和理性趋同,加强我国会计准则体系建设和会计基础理论研究,中国会     

FASB与IASB联合趋同框架(初步意见)的评介

首先,本文对FASB与IASB于2006年7月6日发布的联合趋同框架(关于目标和信息质量特征的初步意见)的制定背景、主要内容(包括财务报告的目标和信息质量特征的相关内容)进行了简要的介绍和评价,着重强调了联合框架与FASB概念框架和IASB概念框架的区别。其次,本文对联合框架提出了两点整体性看法:一是是否应该由IASB和FASB联合制定联合框架;二是是否应该将受托责任观隶属于决策有用性。最后,本文分析了联合趋同框架对我国新会计准则《基本准则》的影响。     

权利观的资产定义述评——基于IASB概念框架征求意见稿

国际会计准则理事会(IASB)在2015年5月发布的《财务报告概念框架征求意见稿》(以下简称《征求意见稿》)中提出了基于经济资源的权利观的资产本质。本文主要对资产概念的发展演化进行了简要介绍,对新的资产定义进行了具体分析,并在此基础上得出了结论。     

浅析财务会计概念框架理论

目前，财务会计概念框架已经成为财务会计理论的核心内容。许多西方发达国家（如美国、英国、加拿大、澳大利亚等）和国际会计准则委员会都非常重视对财务会计概念框架的研究，并已纷纷建立起各自的概念框架体系。随着2006年2月新《企业会计准则一基本准则》的发布，我国现阶段既符合国际惯例又具有中国特色的财务会计概念框架已经初步建立。本文首先在对框架理论和对美国概念框架的概述的基础上，分别阐述目前概念框架理论体系中的各个部分，然后介绍我国现阶段的财务会计框架。     

对《企业会计准则——基本准则》（征求意见稿）相关问题的探讨

2005年6月2日，财政部发布了《企业会计准则——基本准则》（征求意见稿），要求各有关单位组织讨论并形成书面意见上报。财政部权威人士在接受媒体采访时表示“企业会计准则——基本准则是我国‘应用型的财务会计概念框架”，从征求意见稿的定位和有关人士的言论来看，这次对基本准则的修订实质上就是要以《企业会计准则——基本准则》作为我国的财务会计概念框架。本文拟结合西方的财务会计概念框架对基本准则征求意见稿的相关问题进行探讨。     

财务报告概念框架的新篇章——评美国FASB第8号概念公告(2010年9月)

本文试图介绍并评论FASB第8号概念公告,这份公告包括两章来自IASB/FASB联合项目的成果。本文肯定了该概念公告的优点和特点,并得出结论,这份概念公告是高质量概念框架的一部分,是财务报告概念框架的新篇章。     

Assessing Conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles Using Expert Accounting Witness Evidence and the Conceptual Framework

To enhance understanding of the status of the Financial Accounting Standards Board's Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting, we analyse important rules of evidence in United States (US) courts regarding the presentation of expert accounting witness testimony. We draw on this analysis to recommend the relocation of the Conceptual Framework in the US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) hierarchy. For empirical support, we explore how rules of evidence in the criminal trial in 2006 of Enron's two most senior executives affected assessment of whether Enron's financial reports conformed with the FASB's GAAP. We recommend that the FASB's Conceptual Framework should be included in authoritative literature as the uppermost authority, and that it be grounded closely in user needs and the ethical principles associated with meeting those needs. Further, we recommend that accounting expert witnesses adopt an overriding concern for objectivity and impartiality in assisting courts to understand complex accounting matters within the Conceptual Framework.     

A fundamentalist perspective on accounting and implications for accounting research

This paper presents a framework for addressing normative accounting issues for reporting to shareholders. The framework is an alternative to the emerging Conceptual Framework of the International Accounting Standards Board and the Financial Accounting Standards Board. The framework can be broadly characterized as a utilitarian approach to accounting standard setting. It has two main features. First, accounting is linked to valuation models under which shareholders use accounting information to values their stakes. Second, the desirable characteristics of accounting information are inferred from the demand of investors and analysts who use the information in practice. This stands in contrast to the “qualitative characteristics” in the Boards’ Framework which are embraced largely on the basis of their aesthetic appeal. These features lead to a set of broad accounting principles that resolve “recognition” and “measurement” issues at the core of the Boards’ Conceptual Framework and also the central issue of a balance sheet approach versus an income statement approach. The framework in the paper also frames the research questions for researchers interested in accounting policy.     

建立我国财务会计概念框架的路径选择

在基本准则转换为财务会计概念框架的进程中,需对我国会计准则规范体系进行重新的梳理,应遵循的正确路径是将现行的会计准则体系分立为确认与计量准则和披露准则,并由不同职能部门分别进行制定.完整的会计准则规范体系应包括财务会计概念框架、确认与计量会计准则、财务会计信息披露准则.     

Standard Setting and Economic Consequences: An Ethical Issue

This article examines difficulties associated with the Australian Conceptual Framework requirement that standard setters have to take into account the economic consequences of their decisions, particularly in relation to the possibility that qualitative criteria such as representational faithfulness might have to be sacrificed in the process. By identifying and assessing the ethical implications of the standard setting task, these difficulties are shown to be avoidable.     

Discussion of Barker and Teixeira ([2018]. Gaps in the IFRS Conceptual Framework. Accounting in Europe, 15) and Van Mourik and Katsuo ([2018]. Profit or loss in the IASB Conceptual Framework. Accounting in Europe, 15)

Abstract

I provide comments on two papers, Barker and Teixeira ([2018]. Gaps in the IFRS Conceptual Framework. Accounting in Europe, 15) and Van Mourik and Katsuo ([2018]. Profit or loss in the IASB Conceptual Framework. Accounting in Europe, 15), in this issue, which were presented at the EAA-IASB research forum in Brussels. The paper accepts the shortcomings of the updated IASB conceptual framework and argues that these are in large part due to the origins of the document. It points out that the original US project was an attempt to make standard-setting more consistent and involved creating principles which would explain existing standards. Constituents have subsequently resisted attempts to make the framework theoretically sound because they fear this will encourage too much innovation. Standard-setters prefer incremental change, so continue to work with a model created to resolve a problem of the 1970s. I suggest that since standard-setting has been professionalised, the more significant need to is to define what information investors find useful. This may involve providing more granular information about the entity’s business model.     

试评IASB/FASB联合概念框架的某些改进——截至2008年10月16日的进展

本文试图讨论IASB与FASB联合概念框架项目若干改进(截至2008年10月16日的进展)。现在,两个理事会已经颁发了三份讨论稿(初步观点),一是关于《财务报告的目标与财务报告对决策有用的信息质量特征》,二是关于《报告主体》,三是关于《财务报表列报》。还有《财务报告目标与决策有用信息质量特征》的一份征求意见稿(ED),此外还有一些两个理事会工作人员关于财务报表要素如资产及其定义、计量的基础等新闻公告。虽然上述文献是不完整且是初步的,但我们已能发现若干新的观点,例如在两个基本的质量特征中,"可靠性"已被"如实反映"所取代,理事会的工作人员还给出新的资产定义,而且在现有的概念框架中,第一次提出有关《报告主体》的讨论稿(初步观点)。本文主要介绍上述文稿的基本观点,同时也试图提出若干意见。     

Gaps in the IFRS Conceptual Framework

Abstract

The stated purpose of the IFRS Conceptual Framework is to assist the IASB to develop Standards that are based on consistent concepts, and also to assist preparers to develop consistent accounting policies when Standards either do not apply or allow a choice of accounting policy. Yet, the Framework actually does surprisingly little to help the IASB (or preparers) determine which assets, liabilities, income and expenses should be recognised, and how they should be measured. The Framework’s focus on assets and liabilities implies that the accounting can, and should, be determined from the balance sheet. Yet, many current financial reporting requirements focus initially on the income statement, and so they are not so much derived from the Framework as instead in need of being reconciled back to it. At its heart, the problem here is that, while the Framework states that accrual accounting provides a better basis for assessing past and future performance than cash-based information, it does not explain why. To do so would require a conceptualisation of how entities’ business models are employed to create value, and of the strengths and limitations of accounting data in enhancing investors’ understanding of that value-creation. The lack of explanation of the purpose and informational objectives of accruals, how they relate to business models and how they cause the income statement and the balance sheet to interact are gaps in the Framework. Filling those gaps would provide a more robust, and natural, way for the IASB to develop recognition and measurement requirements in its Standards.     

On the Attributes of an Asset

Definition of the elements of financial accounting has been a much discussed topic since the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) began work on their Conceptual Framework Project. Defining assets, liabilities, revenues, expenses and other elements has been attempted by many knowledgeable accountants but, to date, no single, generally accepted set of definitions exists. This paper will focus upon the definition of assets and will, through an examination of FASB Statements, attempt to derive an implicit definition of assets from the pronouncements of the FASB.