| Abstract: | The IASC’s Framework (1989) allows a choice of accounting models when measuring financial performance. However, subsequent reports by the G4+1 focus exclusively on the version of the Assets−Liabilities=Equity model pioneered by the16], 17]. Sub-components of income, such as operating income, are acknowledged as important but these are treated as matters for display and are not conceptually defined. The issue of model choice has assumed increased importance following the decision of the EU to require the group accounts of listed companies to comply with International Accounting Standards by 2005. In this paper the emerging literature that links styles of corporate governance to financial and legal systems and then to economic performance is extended to consider the role of accounting model choice. The issue of accounting for non-reciprocal transfers, in particular, government grants, is used to illustrate the reduction in the relevance, reliability and comparability of financial statements that result from the failure to provide a conceptual definition of performance at the level of operating profit. Compliance with UK disclosure requirements for government grants following the 1981 Companies Act is investigated and differences in the corporate governance, financial, legal and accounting systems of Germany, a code law country, and the UK, a common law country, are reviewed. To serve the interests of investors in all jurisdictions and the information requirements of different styles of corporate governance it is recommended that different accounting models be applied to measure operating income and shareholder income in a single income statement. |
