A Conceptual Framework for Accounting for Public-Benefit Entities

There is a renewed impetus in the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) to develop a conceptual framework for financial reporting for both private sector and public-benefit entities. This article takes stock of some of the key issues related to this endeavour with particular emphasis on what the objectives should be and whether it is possible to have one conceptual framework for all entities.     

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.     

Harmonization and the Conceptual Framework: An International Perspective

The release of CLERP 9 (Commonwealth of Australia, 2002) requires the Financial Reporting Council and the Australian Accounting Standards Board to adopt International Accounting Standards (IAS) en bloc as domestic reporting standards by 1 January 2005. This article considers the current and future role and direction of the conceptual framework (CF) under the CLERP proposals and a potential IAS reporting environment after January 2005. It is argued that Australia, which has been a major innovator on CF issues, may suffer a major setback if the International Accounting Standards Board's CF is adopted in January 2005. Furthermore, while the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has been aggressively pursuing a set of global accounting standards, it remains unclear whether the IASB will, or can, develop an internationally relevant and generally accepted CF which can guide the development of a globally compatible set of accounting standards.     

Implications for the Conceptual Framework Arising From Accounting for Financial Instruments

This article describes some of the issues faced by standard setters in developing guidance on accounting for financial instruments and the implications these issues have for the conceptual framework (CF). The objective is to outline issues, not necessarily to resolve them, and to consider the implications they have for further developing the conceptual framework.
Given the current trend of harmonization and convergence of accounting practice towards international standards, it seems reasonable to assume that any policy implications will be most relevant to the CF inherited by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). ¹ Unless otherwise stated, references will be made to International Accounting Standards (IAS).     

Market Perception of Goodwill: Some Empirical Evidence

Accounting and reporting for goodwill has been on the agenda of the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the International Accounting Standards Committee, the UK's Accounting Standards Board, and the US Congress. Goodwill has also been the subject of Securities Exchange Commission rulings directed at specific companies. The attention directed towards goodwill would suggest that it is a material asset for a large number of firms. This article analyses the market perception of goodwill as an asset in the determination of the firm's valuation. Also explored is whether the market values goodwill to the same degree as it values other assets. The results of this study found that the market perceives goodwill as an asset and incorporates the information in the valuation of a firm. The findings of this study could be of importance to those involved in and affected by standard-setting deliberations involving goodwill.     

国际公共部门会计准则的回顾、基本框架及其启示

本文通过回顾国际公共部门会计准则 (IPSASs) 的发展史, 从公共部门财务报告的目标、会计核算基础、会计要素的分类、定义、确认和计量, 以及财务报表的列报等方面, 简要地介绍了国际公共部门会计准则的基本框架及其对我国开展公共部门会计改革和会计标准制定的启示。     

Business-model (intent)-based accounting

We discuss how basing financial reporting on an entity's business model is, in effect, basing financial reporting on management's intent with respect to the use, transfer or other disposition of an asset or liability. We provide several examples of existing International Financial Reporting Standards and US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles that permit or require intent-based accounting. We describe the meaning and consequences of basing the accounting for financial assets on management's intentions for realising value from those assets. We analyse the positive and negative features of intent-based accounting in the context of the Financial Accounting Standards Board's and International Accounting Standards Board's conceptual frameworks, specifically, the qualitative characteristics relevance and comparability and the objective of financial reporting, and apply that analysis to existing and proposed guidance for measuring financial assets. We also discuss evidence from academic research on the measurement of financial assets.     

Theory and practice of the proposed conceptual framework: Evidence from the field

We provide survey evidence of chartered accountants' perspectives on the proposed conceptual framework of the International Accounting Standards Board. Our survey obtains their views on the changes in the definitions of assets and liabilities, recognition criterion, and additional guidance in these areas, as well as issues relating to other comprehensive income, business model-based accounting, and choice of measurement basis. Our field evidence suggests broad consensus with respect to most of these changes. The areas that generate the most disagreement among our respondents relate to the removal of economic benefits in the proposed asset definition, the proposal to remove the minimum probability threshold from the asset recognition criterion, and the use of fair value as a measurement basis for certain difficult to measure assets. Overall, our results provide interesting insights regarding how chartered accountants view the proposed conceptual framework.     

Pirate Wireless: Revenue Recognition in the Telecommunications Industry

Pirate Wireless is a telecommunications company with stores and offices all over the globe. Jim Bayley is an extremely busy professional who enters into a contract with Pirate Wireless for the ultimate purchase of a smartphone with one‐year warranty, voice and data services, Cryptonite encryption software, and an extended warranty. The case requires students to act as Assistant Controller of Pirate Wireless Corporate and determine the appropriate revenue recognition for Pirate Wireless's contract with Jim Bayley. This mandates a thorough review of the five steps of revenue recognition set forth in Revenue from Contracts with Customers, the jointly converged standard issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) in May 2014. The FASB's Accounting Standards Codification 606 is effective for all U.S. public entities for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2017. The IASB's International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 15 applies to an entity's first annual IFRS financial statements for a period beginning on or after January 1, 2018. This case is appropriate for an undergraduate or graduate level Intermediate Accounting course.     

国际财务报告准则关于金融工具分类变化预期对我国企业的影响分析

2009年7月,国际会计准则理事会发布征求意见稿<金融工具:分类和计量>,旨在降低金融工具确认和计量原则的复杂性,避免会计准则内在的不一致.并在此基础上修订<国际会计准则第39号--金融工具:确认和计量>(IAS39)中关于分类和计量的有关要求.本文通过手工搜集13家上市银行(剔除中小板上市的宁波银行)2006年至2009年的年报和半年报数据,并按照新倡导的两分类方法进行数据调整,进而比较了不同分类下预期对企业财务信息的影响及两分类下所提供会计信息的质量问题,并根据前文的理论分析和实证结果对金融工具两分类及两分类后的相关问题提出了建议.     

Does the Control-based Approach to Consolidated Statements Better Reflect Market Value than the Ownership-based Approach?

Motivated by the recent Discussion Paper (DP) issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) on how to define reporting entities, this study investigates the value relevance of consolidated statements under the ownership-based approach of U.S. Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51 (ARB 51) and the control-based approach of International Accounting Standard No. 27 (IAS 27). The results show that consolidated financial statements based on a broader definition of control provide more useful accounting information than those based only on majority-ownership control. We also address one concern raised in the DP, namely, whether a reporting entity should use the common control model to include entities that are under common control of an individual investor or family. The results suggest that accounting standard boards should include the common control model in defining the group reporting entity for firms with complex ownership structures.     

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.     

The evolution of Indian accounting standards: Its history and current status with regard to International Financial Reporting Standards

This paper addresses the adoption and applicability of International Accounting Standards (IAS) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) to India. Specifically, the paper highlights some major areas where the country lacked harmonization with IAS in 1993 and the rapid congruence with IAS in the decade that followed. The attempt to achieve congruence with IAS appears to be more a by-product of the country's rapid economic growth rather than its catalyst. However, continued growth and the attraction of foreign capital to domestic ventures will depend on the transparency of the financial dealings. The Institute of the Chartered Accountants of India, (ICAI), India's standard setting body, is increasingly attempting to provide this transparency by revisions and additions to accounting standards, and by Exposure Drafts which aim to bring India more in line with International Financial Reporting Standards.     

Fifty-Seven Serious Defects in 'Australian' IFRS

Australian accounting standards commonly used in the preparation of company financial reports have a controversial origin. Under a protocol adopted by the Financial Reporting Council, Australian accounting standards since 2005 substantially replicate the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) made by the International Accounting Standards Board. These standards' continued development is largely outside the control of Australian authorities. The standards examined are found to have such a large catalogue of conceptual and technical deficiencies that the authors call to question the adoption of an Australian IFRS protocol.     

国际公共部门会计准则体系研究

国际公共部门会计准则（IPSAS）是全球政府会计准则的标杆。本文就国际公共部门会计准则（IP—SAS）的制定程序、制定团队、现有IPSAS的内容、国际公共部门会计准则理事会（IPsAsB）的未来战略和工作计划、IPSAS的未来布局及发展趋势等一系列问题进行概括与分析,以冀为我国的政府会计准则研究提供启发与借鉴。     

From compromise to concept? – a review of ‘other comprehensive income’

This paper reviews how ‘other comprehensive income’ (OCI) entered financial reporting by tracing major Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) and International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) projects that required direct entries to equity and describing recent efforts to make sense of the practice. It was the fixation on net income that brought about departures from all-inclusive income, which were repeatedly made over the years without decidedly devoting attention to developing a conceptual basis. OCI was used as a compromise to incorporate current values in the balance sheet, while retaining historical cost principles in the income statement. When the practice was labeled as OCI, it became institutionalized without a clear meaning. A sense-making of the practice then replaced the debates on the adequacy of using OCI and standard setters have realized that additional layers of theory became necessary to explain, for example, reclassification adjustments. Yet, the IASB has made clear in its recent Exposure Draft of a revised conceptual framework that it does not intend to pursue a fresh start in performance reporting that appears to be needed conceptually. Instead, practical considerations, primarily on International Financial Reporting Standards adoption in Japan, seem to lead to another ex-post rationalization of OCI, this time around a conceptually vacuous use of the relevance characteristic.     

An Investigation into the Potential Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards in the United States: Implications and Implementation

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) have been adopted by most of the G20 countries. Given the broad worldwide acceptance of IFRS and significance of attaining comparability to facilitate free flow of capital, the US standard setter, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) made a commitment to jointly work with the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) to explore the possibilities of convergence of US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) with IFRS. In 2007, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) eliminated the requirement that foreign companies listed on the US stock exchanges reconcile their IFRS‐based financial statements with the US GAAP. In the same year the US SEC issued a concept release to the public requesting comments on a proposal to allow US issuers to prepare financial statements in accordance with IFRS. Following these initiatives by the FASB and SEC, the aim of the present study is to investigate the implications of a potential full adoption of IFRS by the US. The present study details the challenges and benefits of adoption and outlines the steps required for a successful outcome of this process.     

Expected-loss-based Accounting for Impairment of Financial Instruments: The FASB and IASB Proposals 2009–2016

The financial and banking crisis of the late 2000s prompted claims that the incurred-loss method for the recognition of credit losses had caused undesirable delay in the recognition of credit-loss impairment. In the wake of the crisis, the US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) worked towards the development of expected-loss-based methods of accounting for credit-loss impairment. Their work included an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to develop a converged FASB/IASB standard on credit-loss impairment. The FASB and IASB eventually developed their own separate expected-loss models to be included, respectively, in a 2016 FASB standard and in the IASB’s 2014 final version of IFRS 9 Financial Instruments. The failure to achieve convergence on an issue of such high profile and materiality has generated some controversy, and it is claimed that it will impose significant costs on the preparers and users of the financial statements of banks. This paper examines the various sets of expected-loss-based proposals issued separately or jointly since 2009 by the FASB and the IASB. It describes and compares key features of the different approaches eventually developed by the two standard setters, referring to issues that arose in arriving at practically workable solutions and to issues that may have impeded FASB/IASB convergence. It also provides information indicative of the possible effect of differences between the two approaches.     

On the ‘Disclosure Initiative – Principles of Disclosure’: The EAA Financial Reporting Standards Committee’s View

Abstract

This paper summarises the contents of a comment letter produced by a working group of 12 academics in response to the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Discussion Paper on principles of disclosure. The comment letter was submitted by the Financial Reporting Standards Committee (FRSC) of the European Accounting Association (EAA). The work includes reviews of relevant academic literature of areas related to the various questions posed by the IASB in the Discussion Paper, including the ‘disclosure problem’ and the objective of the project, the suggested principles of effective communication, the roles of the primary financial statements and notes, the location of information and the use of performance measures. The paper also discusses the disclosure of accounting policies, the objectives of centralised disclosure, and the New Zealand Accounting Standards Board staff’s approach to disclosure.     

The Changing IASB and AASB Relationship

This article takes the reader inside the changing relationship between the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) and other standard setters, and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) in 2012. Critically, it looks at the prospect that relationships between the IASB and domestic standard setters might now change markedly as attempts are made to establish more formal links with domestic and regional groupings of standard setters, a move currently being mooted by the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Trustees and the IASB. Related to this development, the article looks at a rapidly emerging aspect of standard setting – the rise of regional groupings such as the Asian‐Oceanian Standard‐Setters Group (AOSSG). Such groups are having a direct impact on relationships between domestic standard setters and the IASB.