CAPITAL AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING: A COMMENTARY ON BRYER'S “A MARXIST CRITIQUE OF THE FASB'S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK”1

Bryer (1999) reiterates criticisms of the “balance-sheet” approach underlying the FASB's conceptual framework as failing either to explain or guide the development of financial accounting practice, and aims to demonstrate how operational and objective principles of financial accounting can be derived from Marx's labour theory of “surplus-value”. However, the potentially conflicting objectives of “Marxist” accountings remain unresolved, and Bryer's attempted derivation of accounting rules for individual business enterprises appears to misunderstand the rationale of Marx's detailed examination of the circuits of capital in Parts One and Two of Volume II of @9pCapital@2p and to offer no critical foundation for Praxis. It is argued here that the focus of a critical Marxist accounting would more appropriately shift to recognising the extraction of surplus-value from labour and its addition to the value of inventory during the process of production (rather than reporting profit as the result of sale). However, the practical application of such a principle would still require the use of convention-based allocations at least as arbitrary as those of conventional financial accounting and, more fundamentally, such a change of accounting principle could not in itself be sufficient to “force the secret of profit making” under the capitalist mode of production. The accounting would still be consistent with both Marxist and neoclassical economic theories of the nature of capitalism. Bryer's approach to deriving Marxist accounting rules cannot help us to understand the problematic nature of the power of modern financial accounting.     

A MARXIST CRITIQUE OF THE FASB'S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

In developing its conceptual framework the FASB challenged supporters of traditional accounting to provide objective and operational definitions of the elements of financial statements that do not depend on definitions of assets and liabilities as future economic benefits. The paper answers this challenge by deriving a general theory of accounting from Marx's analysis of the circuit of industrial capital. It concludes that whereas the FASB's framework, based on the marginalist idea of economic value, is subjective and vague, the Marxist theory of financial accounting derived here provides critical accounting with a scientific foundation.     

THE FASB'S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK SURVIVES A MARXIST CRITIQUE: A COMMENTARY ON BRYER

Rob Bryer has thrown down a fascinating challenge to practitioners of accounting standard setting and to accounting theorists by his bold conclusion that whereas the FASB's framework, founded in the marginalist concept of economic value, is subjective and vague, the Marxist theory provides accounting with a `scientific' foundation. The present author has intellectual capital both in the type of accounting theory which gave rise to the FASB's framework and in the work of the UK's Accounting Standards Board (ASB), which has adopted principles similar to those of the FASB. Not surprisingly, he was sceptical about Rob Bryer's paper, both before and after reading it. However, it is not necessary to accept the conclusions to find the argument illuminating and challenging to the accepted wisdom. What follows is a sceptic's attempt to interpret the Bryer argument and to explain the sources of doubt. The subsequent commentary follows the paper's argument chronologically and uses the same headings. A final summing up section attempts to identify the key issues identified in the commentary.     

Americanism and financial accounting theory – Part 2: The ‘modern business enterprise’, America's transition to capitalism,and the genesis of management accounting

The paper uses accounting evidence to explore when and how capitalism came to America. It continues the search for capitalists in American history begun in ‘Americanism and financial accounting theory. Part 1: Was America Born Capitalist?’ Part 1 concluded that America was not ‘born capitalist’ in Marx's sense, and that the capitalist mentality had not appeared in farming even by the late 19th century, on southern slave plantations by the Civil War, or in manufacturing enterprises by the 1830s. This paper (Part 2) challenges Alfred Chandler's thesis that the ‘modern business enterprise’ brought ‘a new type of capitalism’ from around the mid-19th century. It re-examines accounting evidence from the Boston textile mills, the railroads, and the iron and steel industry. It concludes that the Boston Associates who historians often see as ‘proto-capitalists’, the ‘managerial capitalists’ Chandler sees on the railroads, and the ‘entrepreneurial capitalists’ he sees in the iron and steel industry and elsewhere, remained semi-capitalists because their capitals and workers were not ‘free’. The paper re-examines the ‘costing renaissance’, the introduction and spread of product costing, standard costing, ROI and flexible budgets, and the evidence in Chandler's and Johnson and Kaplan's studies of the DuPont Powder Company and General Motors. This suggests that capitalism only appeared in America by around 1900, after more than two decades of intense conflict between ‘capital and labour’, and became established by the 1920s. This is the critical turning point in American business history, not the appearance of ‘managerial capitalism’, the paper argues. It concludes that America did not catch up with British capitalism until the late 1920s because its ruling elite faced an ideological problem created by its exceptional transition from a society of simple commodity producers and semi-capitalists, particularly the threat of popular socialism. The final paper, Part 3: ‘Adam Smith, the rise and fall of socialism, and Irving Fisher's theory of accounting’, argues that Fisher made a seminal contribution to solving this problem, but his legacy is a pathological theory of financial accounting.     

Americanism and financial accounting theory – Part 1: Was America born capitalist?

This paper (Part 1), and two related papers (Part 2: The ‘modern business enterprise’, America's transition to capitalism, and the genesis of management accounting; and Part 3: Adam Smith, the rise and fall of socialism, and Irving Fisher's theory of accounting), explore historical links between American ideology and Irving Fisher's theory of accounting. They explain Fisher's theory as the product of America's exceptional transition to capitalism and the ideological consequences. Part 1 uses Marx's theories of the transition in England, of colonisation, and of ideology, to construct an accounting history model of America's transition to capitalism that identifies the dominant social relations of production and calculative mentalities, and uses them to predict the accounting signatures and political ideologies we should observe if the theories are correct. Parts 1 and 2 test the model. Part 3 explores the ideological consequences of America's transition, for America and financial accounting. Scholars generally assume that America was ‘born capitalist’; historians argue it became capitalist sometime from the late 18th to early 19th centuries. The model, however, identifies early farmers as ‘simple commodity producers’ who, it predicts, kept only single entry accounts of debt, and had a ‘producer’ ideology of ‘equality’ and ‘freedom’. It identifies planters and manufacturers as ‘semi-capitalists’ – part merchant capitalist and part simple commodity producer – who it predicts calculated ‘profit’ as consumable surplus, pursued the ‘simple rate of profit’, controlled only prime costs, and had an ideology of ‘individualism’ that combined the producers’ ideology with the merchants’ ‘laissez-faire’. Part 1 re-examines evidence from accounts to around the mid-19th century, which confirms that farmers were not capitalists and that even the most advanced merchants, manufacturers and planters were semi-capitalists. Part 2 searches for capitalists in the second half of the 19th century. It re-examines evidence from the accounts of the Boston Associates who historians have seen as ‘proto-industrial capitalists’; from the railroads heralded by Chandler as the beginning of ‘managerial capitalism’; and from ‘entrepreneurial capitalists’ like Andrew Carnegie who created the large corporations that conquered America from the 1880s. Their financial accounts and cost management systems reveal the same semi-capitalist mentality found in the early 19th century. Re-examination of the ‘costing renaissance’ in the 1890s and evidence from the DuPont Powder Company and General Motors from 1900 to 1920, suggests that only from around 1900, after escalating conflict between ‘capital and labour’, did the capitalist mentality appear in new management accounting systems focused on ‘return on investment’. Part 3 shows that the accounting evidence closely correlates with the history of American political ideology. It argues that Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations dominated American politics until the late 19th century because it theorised a nation of simple commodity producers and semi-capitalists. It explains the delay in America's transition compared to Britain's, and the decline in the popularity of laissez-faire from the 1880s, as consequences of this exceptional starting point. ‘Big business’ capitalism created an ideological problem for America's ruling elite, particularly the threat of socialism from around 1900 to 1920. Part 3 argues that Fisher's neoclassical theory of ‘capital’ and ‘income’, designed as a critique of Marx, responded to this problem and played an important role in undermining middle class support for socialism. Fisher said he based his theory on accounting practice, particularly double entry bookkeeping, but Part 3 shows he did not use or understand it, which divorced his accounting from reality. American history's legacy to the world, the papers therefore conclude, is a pathological theory of financial accounting.     

Understanding the changes in accounting thought

Financial accounting and reporting are in the midst of one of the most significant revolutionary changes in modern history. The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework that will contribute to the dialogue surrounding these developments. We use Kuhn’s [Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press] framework on the theory of scientific revolution to describe how changes in the need for information, coupled with the lack of relevant accounting information, led to reporting anomalies that have spurred a revolutionary shift in accounting paradigms. We are moving from an accounting paradigm that existed in the age of an industrial economy to an accounting paradigm that fits the economy in an information age. This redirection has resulted in the following: a change in the conceptualization and application of relevance and reliability, an increased use of fair value versus historical cost measurements, a renewed emphasis on principles versus rules, and an evaluation of the composition of the basic financial statements.     

An institutional analysis of accounting growth and regulation in the United States

The accounting profession in the United States has experienced rapid growth in the past two decades, and growth is likely to continue in the foreseeable future. Although the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission possesses explicit statutory authority to regulate accounting and financial reporting, the profession is largely self-regulated, an arrangement widely supported by the corporate business community. Yet no single current accounting theory provides a full understanding of these two very basic phenomena. This paper examines organizational models based on contractualism (agency theory and transaction cost analysis), hierarchy (radical) and Fligstein's “organizational fields” conception, and evaluates their application to the accounting process. It is proposed that institutions are central to an understanding of accounting growth and regulation. The essay then offers a theoretical critique based on the internal and external aspects of economic organizations.     

Americanism and financial accounting theory – Part 3: Adam Smith,the rise and fall of socialism,and Irving Fisher's theory of accounting

A previous paper (Part 1) rejected the conventional wisdom that America was ‘born capitalist’ and the historians’ consensus that it had become capitalist by the early-19th century; another (Part 2) rejected Chandler's thesis that the ‘modern business enterprise’ brought a ‘new form of capitalism’ to America from the 1840s. The accounting evidence suggests that America began to make the transition to capitalism around 1900 in a period of intense conflict between ‘capital and labour’ generated by ‘big business’ from the 1880s, a process not completed until the 1920s. This paper (Part 3) examines the consequences for America's political ideology and financial accounting theory. America's exceptional transition, it argues, explains the history of its political ideology, and this history explains Irving Fisher's theory of accounting. Section A argues that America lagged behind Britain because it started from a society of simple commodity producers and semi-capitalists, which created an exceptional ideological problem for its ruling elite. Big business generated hostility from workers, farmers and small employers – expressed in labour movements, ‘populism’, socialism, and ‘progressivism’ – and created an ideological problem by contradicting the ‘independent producer’ ideology of workers and farmers, and the ‘individual liberalism’ of small manufacturers and merchants, both underwritten by Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. The paper argues that Smith's theory of price articulates as semi-capitalist accounting, which explains his popularity in America until the appearance of big business in the 1880s. Socialism and progressivism became political forces in America from 1900 to around 1920. Progressivism produced ‘corporate liberalism’, the ideological counter to socialism that corporations could be made ‘socially responsible’ by government regulation and ‘publicity’ to ensure they earned only ‘fair’ returns, but this left two problems. First, socialists argued that no profit was ‘fair’, and second, fear of the ‘labour danger’ made American financial reports secretive and conservative. Section B argues that Irving Fisher responded to these problems with a theory of accounting, which he developed as a refutation of Marx and the American brand of socialism advocated by Eugene Debs, the threateningly successful presidential candidate of the Socialist Party of America. An important but neglected reason for socialism's abrupt collapse around 1920, it argues, was that the socialists lost the intellectual argument with the middle classes, and that Fisher's theory played an important role in this defeat. Fisher was a vigorous self-publicist, strongly influenced the teaching of economics and accounting in the universities and, the paper argues, changed the language of American accounting. Fisher claimed that accounting practice supported his theory of ‘capital’ and ‘income’, but the paper shows he did not understand double-entry bookkeeping or the accountants’ ‘cost theory of value’, and therefore divorced accounting from the reality of business transactions. As his theory underlies the FASB's framework, the paper concludes that Fisher's legacy to the world is a pathological theory of financial accounting.     

Is mark-to-market accounting destabilizing? Analysis and implications for policy

Fundamental economic principles provide a rationale for requiring financial institutions to use mark-to-market, or fair value, accounting for financial reporting. The recent turmoil in financial markets, however, has raised questions about whether fair value accounting is exacerbating the problems. In this paper, we review the history and practice of fair value accounting, and summarize the literature on the channels through which it can adversely affect the real economy. We propose a new model to study the interaction of accounting rules with regulatory capital requirements, and show that even when market prices always reflect fundamental values, the interaction of fair value accounting rules and a simple capital requirement can create inefficiencies that are absent when capital is measured by adjusted book value. These distortions can be avoided, however, by redefining capital requirements to be procyclical rather than by abandoning fair value accounting and the other benefits that it provides.     

论新会计准则中的财务理念

会计与财务的关系是我国会计理论界长期争论的问题之一。本文以现代市场经济为背景,以新会计准则体系为依据,阐述了财务管理"现金化"的本质,论述了新会计准则体系在规范重心、确认标准、计量技术、报告内容等方面的管理性质,从环境变化和会计自身变革等角度分析了其必然性,论述了会计准则融入财务理念的理论价值和实践价值。     

决不能轻易否定"劳动生产力和商品价值变化成反比"的关系

马克思《资本论》中的劳动价值理论是一个完整的科学理论体系。其经典命题是:劳动生产力和商品的价值变化成反比,和商品的使用价值量变化成正比。实践证明马克思的这一理论是极其正确的,我们决不能随意地否定马克思这一科学的理论。     

Government Accounting: An Assessment of Theory, Purposes and Standards

Government accounting and financial reporting aims to protect and manage public money and discharge accountability. These purposes, and the nature of public goods and tax financing, give rise to differences with commercial accounting. This is not yet reflected either in government accounting standards in English–speaking developed nations or in international public sector accounting standards. All of these are heavily influenced by private sector practices, which favour the accrual basis and consolidated reporting. This article argues for a gradual symmetric approach to accruals and a combination of government–wide and fund reporting. The author also proposes some broad accounting principles to promote political and economic accountability.     

财务会计理论:演进、继承与可能的研究问题

本文划分为"早期学者的努力"、"会计准则导向的会计理论研究"、"会计基本假设时期和实证会计理论的崛起"、"财务会计概念框架的研究与实证会计理论的迅速发展"以及"改进企业财务报告与实证会计研究日益盛行"等五个阶段,扼要回顾了财务会计理论自从Sprague(1908)以来百余年的发展,坚持继承和发展的思路,在此基础上简要概括了财务会计理论领域内未来一些可能的研究问题。     

Efecto en la calidad de la información ante cambios en la normatividad contable: caso aplicado al sector real mexicano

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether changes in accounting standards improve value relevance of financial information on listed companies in Mexico. The research was conducted for the period 2000-2013 using a sample of 141 companies that report to the Mexican stock exchange using the methodology of panel data. Our findings show that changes in local regulations (generally accepted accounting principles) to internationally approved standards (financial reporting standards and international financial reporting standards) increase the value relevance and therefore the quality of information. The study shows that the accounting information with international financial reporting standards is more trustworthy for foreign and national investors.     

关于会计计量理论结构之认识

社会环境是构建会计计量理论结构的逻辑起点。会计计量理论包括会计计量基础理论和会计计量应用理论。探索会计理论结构,能够促进我国会计理论的发展,为会计工作者理解和掌握会计准则、会计制度提供帮助,从而使会计理论更好地为我国经济服务。     

MARX AND ACCOUNTING

Does Marx's political economy provide a theoretical foundation for understanding accounting in modern capitalism? The commentators dispute my Marxism, and contest whether my accounting is more objective than the FASB's. I show they have misunderstood Marx and the purpose of my accounting. Underlying their views is a failure to take seriously Marx's social relations of production and traditional accountability. I conclude the commentators have not challenged my claim that Marx's analysis of the circuits of industrial capital could provide a general theory of accounting.     

In pursuit of legitimacy: A history behind fair value accounting

An examination of the history of attempts by regulators, practitioners and scholars from the mid nineteenth century to 2005 to establish an appropriate accounting measurement basis for financial reporting here leads to an evaluation of the likelihood of fair value accounting (FVA) practices becoming fully institutionalised. Using concepts drawn from theories of legitimation, it is shown here that historic cost accounting (HCA) only enjoyed an episodic legitimacy in the 1940s–70s and that prior and after this period mixed measurement incorporating market values is routinised. Although principles of FVA have been legitimised to an extent, it is argued here that this has resulted in the practice of mixed measurement bases being taken for granted.     

企业价值报告:现代财务报告演进的必然趋势

本文从传统财务报告体系缺乏直接的企业价值信息披露这一制度安排的分析出发,探讨了企业价值报告的演进及其对财务会计、管理会计和投资会计三大会计领域信息报告的影响,根据现代财务理论的价值发掘,提出了相应的企业价值报告整体设计。     

Ambiguity intolerance and financial reporting alternatives

Authoritative accounting pronouncements almost always require more, rather than less, financial reporting disclosures and accountants rarely, if ever, act to overturn the required disclosures. Since the personality literature suggests that desire for more information is linked to an individual's intolerance for ambiguity, this study tested selected hypotheses about the relationship between accountants' intolerance for ambiguity and their desire for financial reporting alternatives. The findings of the study did not disclose a significant relationship between accountants' intolerance for ambiguity and their desire for financial reporting alternatives. However, the results did disclose a relationship between education level and two dependent variables: desire for disclosure and consistency of desired disclosures with generally accepted accounting principles. Therefore, additional research should pay more attention to the effects of demographic information, which may in fact be more informative than many previously tested variables such as personality characteristics.