FASB/IASB联合概念框架相关性与可靠性质量特征的逻辑关系——基于经济学视角的分析

FASB和IASB联合概念框架于2010年9月对基本质量特征的逻辑关系做出了新的界定。从经济学视角,通过建立会计信息使用者的效用函数和预算约束方程,以既定支出下的效用最大化为目标,从理论上分析了相关性与可靠性的逻辑关系。研究结果表明,联合概念框架所界定的相关性与可靠性的逻辑关系可能导致财务报告边界无限扩张、会计信息质量下降。     

会计信息基本质量特征:基于信息经济学的解读——对IASB《财务报告概念框架(征求意见稿)》的一个回应

IASB在《财务报告概念框架(征求意见稿)》中提及的"将相关性和如实反映继续作为财务信息的基本质量特征是否恰当",要从概念框架中相关性和如实反映(可靠性)的源头——Trueblood report——进行深究,并立足"会计是一个经济信息系统"、"会计信息是一种经济信息",从信息经济学角度进行解读和评判。在Trueblood report中,相关性产生于会计的"信息观",而可靠性产生于会计的"计量观",二者是两种不同会计观念混合的结果,是互不相干的。信息经济学认为,经济信息的质量特征决定于经济信息结构的"粒度"和"准确度"。从"会计是一个经济信息系统"、"会计信息是一种经济信息"来看,会计信息的基本质量特征是会计信息结构的"粒度"和"准确度";以此判断,将相关性作为会计信息的质量特征是不恰当的,可靠性(如实反映)部分与准确度质量特征相符,部分涵盖粒度质量特征。提供高质量会计信息,要从会计信息结构的"粒度"和"准确度"着手。     

会计信息质量的相关性与可靠性权衡问题的探析

会计信息质量是连接会计目标和实现目标之间的关键因素,起到了纽带的作用,而相关性和可靠性又是会计信息质量特征的主要特征。会计信息质量特征在财务概念框架中起着至关重要的作用。文章主要从相关性和可靠性的权衡问题的角度来探讨怎样提高会计信息质量。     

财务报告概念框架:变革与挑战

本文主要梳理了国际会计准则理事会(IASB)近30年来制定财务报告概念框架的历程,分析了财务报告概念框架在财务报告目标和质量特征、财务报表要素定义和确认标准、计量基础,以及列报和披露方面所做的主要变革,以及在未来仍将面临的挑战。最后阐述了我们在财务报告概念框架上的一些基本观点,提出了我国基本准则修订完善的建议。     

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。     

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     

财务报告概念框架修订热点问题综述

国际会计准则理事会(IASB)最近发布多份修订财务报告概念框架的文件,在会计界引起极大关注。本文综述概念框架修订过程中五大热点问题的不同观点,试图通过对这些观点的梳理和探索,纵观利弊,为未来修订和完善我国的财务报告概念框架提供参考。     

会计信息相关性和可靠性质量特征的冲突与协调

在财务会计概念框架中,会计信息质量特征居于枢纽地位。相关性和可靠性作为两个最基本、最重要的会计质量特征,它们共同决定了会计信息的有用性。文章从会计信息相关性和可靠性的内涵入手,分析了两者冲突的引发原因,并提出了两者协调的路径。     

联合概念框架下会计信息质量特征之比较分析

本文依据最新颁布的SFACNo．8《财务会计概念框架：财务报告目标与决策有用的会计信息质量特征》,通过对比SFACNo．2和IASB框架（1989）关于会计信息质量特征的观点,对基于“决策有用信息”目标的会计信息质量特征进行了分析,并试图提供一些对构建我国财务会计概念框架有益的启示。     

联合概念框架下会计信息质量特征之比较分析

本文依据最新颁布的SFACNo.8《财务会计概念框架:财务报告目标与决策有用的会计信息质量特征》,通过对比SFAC No.2和IASB框架(1989)关于会计信息质量特征的观点,对基于"决策有用信息"目标的会计信息质量特征进行了分析,并试图提供一些对构建我国财务会计概念框架有益的启示。     

The CF and Accounting Standards: The Persistence of Discrepancies

The conceptual framework (CF) has introduced a set of ideals and broad criteria for financial reporting focusing on servicing users' information needs. In this article, each concepts statement is considered, in turn, and its consistency with selected accounting standards examined. Particular attention is paid to accounting standards issued for the first time, or in a revised form, subsequent to the release of the concepts statements. It is found that many standards have provisions that are at odds with the CF. These inconsistencies come as no surprise. The CF is incomplete; the issue of measurement remains unresolved, leaving ambiguity in the definitions of concepts such as revenue. The CF project has remained unfinished while standard setters have given priority to other tasks, such as international harmonization, in resolving contemporary financial reporting issues.     

Why is there inconsistency in accounting for liabilities in IFRS? An analysis of recognition,measurement, estimation and conservatism

We report that International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are inconsistent with respect to the recognition and measurement of liabilities, both in the conceptual framework for financial reporting and in accounting standards themselves. We demonstrate that this arises in part because the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) does not make a conceptual distinction between the process of measurement, which requires a currently observable measurement attribute, and the process of estimation, which is inherently subjective. The IASB employs only the logic and language of measurement, while actually requiring entities to report both measurements and estimates in financial statements. Our contribution is to identify and interpret this conceptual conflict, to demonstrate that this has particular relevance to accounting for liabilities, and to draw implications for accounting research and policy with respect to recognition, measurement and conservatism.     

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTING MODELS OF THE REPORTING ENTITY

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 the[16], [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.     

Adoption of IFRS in Spain: Effect on the comparability and relevance of financial reporting

EU Regulation 1606/2002 requires application of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by groups listed on European stock markets. In Spain, listed groups are now obliged to prepare consolidated financial information under IFRS, and legislative changes to bring local rules into line with international standards have been tabled.In this context, the potential impact of IFRS is fraught with uncertainty. Our study of IBEX-35 companies focuses on the effects of the new standards on comparability and the relevance of financial reporting in Spain. We address these objectives by seeking significant differences between accounting figures and financial ratios under the two sets of standards (i.e. Spanish accounting standards and IFRS).The results obtained show that local comparability has worsened. The study reveals that local comparability is adversely affected if both IFRS and local accounting standards are applied in the same country at the same time. Reforms to bring local rules into line with international standards are therefore urgent. We also find that there has been no improvement in the relevance of financial reporting to local stock market operators because the gap between book and market values is wider when IFRS are applied. While there has been no gain in terms of the usefulness of financial reporting in the short-term, improved usefulness may be achieved in the medium to long-term.     

Monitoring Compliance with IFRS: Some Insights from the French Regulatory System

European Union Regulation 1606/2002 is aimed at improving the quality of financial reporting and developing a single capital market in Europe. Nevertheless, these goals cannot necessarily be achieved solely by making a requirement for EU companies to use International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), and the EU has sought to create a mechanism to oversee the appropriate application of these standards. In this paper, we describe and comment on the methods used by the French stock exchange regulator, the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF), for monitoring compliance with the national reporting rules as this bears upon the issue of enforcement of IFRS in Europe as from 2005. The AMF has been chosen in our study because of its extensive experience with the review of financial statements of listed companies. Our paper draws on qualitative interviews with people involved directly in scrutinizing financial information at the AMF as well as on the experience gained from attachment to the AMF's Accounting Division. While there is recent research that addresses the issues on enforcement of accounting standards, there is still a lack of studies which discuss the relevance and effectiveness of the methods used to monitor compliance with accounting standards. Our paper may be of interest to different groups of participants including regulatory oversight bodies, auditors, producers and users of financial information in the capital markets.     

Harmonisation or discord? The critical role of the IASB conceptual framework review

The IASB has achieved great success in extending the adoption of international financial reporting standards, but it has also encountered opposition at national and regional levels. Some of this opposition arises from differences in national accounting cultures, which are embedded in the market structures and institutional and legal frameworks within which business entities operate. These issues are particularly apparent in the debate on the IASB’s revision of its conceptual framework, which expresses its own vision of an international accounting culture. An important example is the issue of whether stewardship should be a distinct fundamental objective of financial reporting.     

Financial statement users’ institutional logic

In this paper, we investigate what we call “financial statement users’ institutional logic,” defined as users’ expressed fundamental views and beliefs about accounting information. We analyze users’ comment letters to standard setters in response to the proposed standards on lease accounting to identify the dimensions of the institutional logic that underlie their views on accounting information. Our qualitative analysis identified and validated ten principal dimensions, namely economics and substance, due process issues, measurement, readiness and relevance for use, conceptual foundations, clarity, presentation and disclosure, cost-benefit issues, comparability and consistency, and financial statement manipulation. Quantitative analyses revealed that four of these dimensions, i.e. due process issues, readiness and relevance for use, comparability and consistency, and cost-benefit issues, occupy a medium or large amount of space in users’ comments and are referred to in strong terms, while economics and substance and measurement, although also widely discussed, are addressed in weaker terms. Overall, our study begins to fill a gap in the literature by providing insights into users’ views on accounting information. These insights challenge the “homo economicus user” currently constructed in standard-setting debates.     

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.     

关于建立国家统一会计核算制度的若干问题

建立国家统一会计核算制度非常必要。在建立过程中 ,有两个基本问题需要澄清 ,即会计标准的表现形式不是唯一的、会计标准也不存在绝对的优劣之分 ;有五个基本关系需要处理好 ,即会计核算制度与会计准则的关系、会计核算制度与税法的关系、会计核算制度与财务制度的关系、会计核算制度“新”和“旧”的关系、会计核算制度与国际会计惯例的关系。此外 ,为建立好国家统一会计核算制度 ,还需要设计好会计核算制度框架