研究开发支出会计处理的改进建议

如何对研究开发支出(简称“研发支出”)进行正确的会计处理,使之能够真实地反映企业无形资产价值是一个值得探讨的问题《。企业会计准则第6号——无形资产》(简称“新准则”)对企业自行开发无形资产的成本计量等问题有了新的规定。本文通过对新准则的分析,提出改进研发支出会计处理的建议。     

研究开发支出会计处理的改进建议

如何对研究开发支出（简称“研发支出”）进行正确的会计处理，使之能够真实地反映企业无形资产价值是一个值得探讨的问题。《企业会计准则第6号——无形资产》（简称“新准则”）对企业自行开发无形资产的成本计量等问题有了新的规定。本文通过对新准则的分析，提出改进研发支出会计处理的建议。     

浅议无形资产开发前景及账务处理

在知识经济领导经济潮流的今天,无形资产的研究与开发支出在经济主体中的地位和作用日渐突出。本文在介绍目前我国对研究与开发支出的会计处理方法的基础上,分析现行方法存在的问题,并在文中指出改进建议,希望能够为完善对无形资产研究开发支出的会计处理做引玉之砖。     

浅议无形资产开发前景及账务处理

在知识经济领导经济潮流的今天,无形资产的研究与开发支出在经济主体中的地位和作用日渐突出.本文在介绍目前我国对研究与开发支出的会计处理方法的基础上,分析现行方法存在的问题,并在文中指出改进建议,希望能够为完善对无形资产研究开发支出的会计处理做引玉之砖.     

新准则中关于研究开发费的核算内容

新的《企业会计准则第6号——无形资产》在很大程度上对原准则进行了修订,笔者认为,对研究开发费会计处理的修订特别切合实际,有利于真实反映企业财务状况和财务成果。一、新企业会计准则中研究与开发费用的会计处理新准则规定：企业内部研究开发项目的支出,应当区分研究阶段支出与开发阶段支出。企业内部研究开发项目研究阶段的支出,应当于发生时计入当期损益。企业内部研究开发项目开发阶段的支出,同时满足下列条件的才能确认为无形资产：（1）完成该无形资产以使其能够使用或出售在技术上具有可行性。（2）具有完成该无形资产并使用或出售的意图。（3）无形资产产生经济利益的方式,包括能够证明运用该无形资产生产的产品存在市场或无形资产自身存在市场,无形资产将在内部使用的,应当证明其有用性。（4）有足够的技术、财务资源和其他资源支持,以完成该无形资产的开发,并有能力使用或出售该无形资产。（5）归属于该无形资产开发阶段的支出能够可靠地计量。     

浅议无形资产开发前景及账务处理

在知识经济领导经济潮流的今天，无形资产的研究与开发支出在经济主体中的地位和作用日渐突出。本文在介绍目前我国对研究与开发支出的会计处理方法的基础上，分析现行方法存在的问题，并在文中指出改进建议，希望能够为完善对无形资产研究开发支出的会计处理做引玉之砖。     

新会计准则下的无形资产会计解析

财政部发布的企业会计准则第6号,在借鉴和吸收我国已有的无形资产准则与相关国际会计准则的基础上,对无形资产核算的会计规范作了许多方面的新规定。文章主要从研究开发支出的处理、无形资产的价值摊销,以及无形资产的减值处理等方面,讨论新准则作出的新的会计规范。     

新准则下无形资产会计核算的新规范

财政部发布的《企业会计准则第6号——无形资产》,在借鉴和吸收我国已有的无形资产准则与相关国际会计准则的基础上,对无形资产核算的会计规范作了许多方面的新规定。本文主要从研究开发支出的处理、无形资产的价值摊销,以及无形资产的减值处理等方面,谈谈新准则作出的新的会计规范。     

自创无形资产价值的确认及计量模式探微

知识经济最大的特点是无形资产占企业总资产的比重显著增加.而我国传统会计对资产的确认与计量则侧重于有形资产,对无形资产尤其是自创无形资产在确认原则、确认范围和计量模式上都存在着诸多不足.对此,笔者提出以下一些建议以供探讨.     

新准则下无形资产会计核算的新规范

财政部发布的《企业会计准则第6号——无形资产》,在借鉴和吸收我国已有的无形资产准则与相关国际会计;隹则的基础上,对无形资产核算的会计规范作了许多方面的新规定。本文主要从研究开发支出的处理、无形资产的价值摊销,以及无形资产的减值处理等方面,谈谈新准则作出的新的会计规范。     

自创无形资产计价方法的中外比较分析——兼评《具体会计准则第6号——无形资产》

自创无形资产的计价一直是会计界关注的焦点,争论的核心在于研究与开发费用是资本化还是费用化的问题。本文从自创无形资产的支出项目及计价方法入手,对比了不同国家对自创无形资产计价方法的差异,指出了自创无形资产研发支出费用法的不足,评价了我国新无形资产准则对自创无形资产计价方法的合理性。     

Relative Value Relevance of R&D Reporting: An International Comparison

This study examines the relative value relevance of R&D reporting in France, Germany, the UK and the USA. France and the UK allow conditional capitalization of R&D costs, whereas Germany and the USA (except for the software industry) require the full and immediate expensing of all R&D costs. The relative value relevance of R&D reporting under different R&D accounting standards are compared while controlling for the reporting environment. Test results suggest that the level of R&D reporting has a significant effect on the association of equity price with accounting earnings and book value. The reporting of total R&D costs provides additional information to accounting earnings and book value in Germany and the USA (expensing countries), and the allocation of R&D costs between capitalization and expense further increases the value relevance of R&D reporting in France and the UK (capitalizing countries), including firms in the US software industry.     

研发投资、舞弊风险与审计费用

以2007—2018年中国A股市场研发投资额大于零的非金融类上市公司为研究对象,实证研究研发投资强度对财务舞弊风险和审计费用的影响以及CPA审计治理效果。研究结果表明：研发投资强度与财务舞弊风险和审计费用均正相关,并且财务舞弊风险在研发投资强度对审计费用的影响中存在部分中介效应。使用工具变量法进行内生性分析发现,研发投资强度在前三种度量方式（研发投入额÷总资产、研发投入额÷净资产、研发投入额÷公司员工数）下具有很强的外生性,而在第四种度量方式（研发投入额÷营业收入）下是内生的。对审计治理效果进行分析发现,虽然高审计收费保证了CPA较高的执业努力程度,但与审计合谋正相关的异常审计费用的存在使得CPA审计治理效果并不佳,并且对研发投资强度大的客户、财务舞弊风险高的客户和高新技术企业收取更高的异常审计费用通常与更高的审计合谋倾向有关。     

The negative impact of R&D capitalization: A value relevance approach

Abstract

Accounting for R&D costs is an open issue. SFAS N°2 mandates that all R&D costs must be immediately expensed. IAS 38 requires capitalization of R&D costs if they meet certain criteria. Recent research papers show the value relevance of capitalized R&D. We test the value relevance of R&D reporting in a sample of 197 French firms between 1993 and 2002. The French context provides an interesting field for R&D value relevance studies because both accounting treatments of R&D costs (expensing and capitalization) are allowed. Unlike previous studies, we find that capitalized R&D is negatively associated with stock prices and returns. This negative coefficient on capitalized R&D implies that investors are concerned with and react negatively to capitalization of R&D. We also find that the firms choosing to capitalize (successful) R&D are smaller, more highly leveraged, less profitable and have less growth opportunities. Taking into account these characteristics, our robustness checks confirm that capitalized R&D is not associated with higher prices and is related to lower returns.     

The contribution of research and innovation to productivity

This paper examines the impact of investment in research and innovation on Australian market sector productivity. While previous studies have largely focused on a narrow class of private sector intangible assets as a source of productivity gains, this paper shows that there is a broad range of other business sector intangible assets that can significantly affect productivity. Moreover, the paper pays special attention to the role played by public funding for research and innovation. The empirical results suggest that there are significant spillovers to productivity from public sector R&D spending on research agencies and higher education. No evidence is found for productivity spillovers from indirect public funding for the business enterprise sector, civil sector or defence R&D. These findings have implications for government innovation policy as they provide insights into possible productivity gains from government funding reallocations.     

R&D INTENSITY AND THE EFFECTIVE TAX RATE: A META-REGRESSION ANALYSIS

We apply meta-regression techniques to provide a quantitative review of the empirical literature on how research and development (R&D) expenses affect the effective tax rate (ETR). R&D expenses relate to a well-accepted profit shifting channel, strategic placement of intellectual property within a multinational entity. Using a unique hand-collected data set, we add a new perspective to the current base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) state of research and debate, in three ways: First, observing that primary studies report mixed evidence on how R&D expenses affect ETR, we provide a consensus estimate for this effect. Second, we consider this effect in more detail by separating a tax accounting effect and a profit shifting effect, which to our knowledge has not yet been investigated. We detect that one-third of the R&D effect on the ETR is due to the tax accounting effect and could be mitigated via book-tax conformity. We further find that 10% of the profit shifting effect can be traced back to R&D tax credits. Third, our meta-regression reveals factors that are possible sources of variation and bias in previous empirical studies.     

PUBLIC R&D POLICIES AND PRIVATE R&D INVESTMENT: A SURVEY OF THE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE

The importance of R&D investment in explaining economic growth is well documented in the literature. Policies by modern governments increasingly recognise the benefits of supporting R&D investment. Government funding has, however, become an increasingly scarce resource in times of financial crisis and economic austerity. Hence, it is important that available funds are used and targeted effectively. This paper offers the first systematic review and critical discussion of what the R&D literature has to say currently about the effectiveness of major public R&D policies in increasing private R&D investment. Public policies are considered within three categories, R&D tax credits and direct subsidies, support of the university research system and the formation of high‐skilled human capital, and support of formal R&D cooperations across a variety of institutions. Crucially, the large body of more recent literature observes a shift away from the earlier findings that public subsidies often crowd‐out private R&D to finding that subsidies typically stimulate private R&D. Tax credits are also much more unanimously than previously found to have positive effects. University research, high‐skilled human capital, and R&D cooperation also typically increase private R&D. Recent work indicates that accounting for non‐linearities is one area of research that may refine existing results.     

Research and Development,Uncertainty, and Analysts’ Forecasts: The Case of IAS 38

This study analyzes the consequences of the capitalization of development expenditures under IAS 38 on analysts’ earnings forecasts. We use unique hand‐collected data in a sample of highly research and development (R&D)‐intensive German‐listed firms over the period 2000–2007. We find that the capitalization of development costs is significantly associated with both higher individual analysts’ forecast errors and forecast dispersion. This suggests that the increasing complexity surrounding the capitalization of development costs negatively impacts forecast accuracy. However, for firms with high underlying environmental uncertainty, forecast errors are negatively associated with capitalized development expenditures. This indicates that the negative impact of increased complexity on forecast accuracy can be outweighed by the information contained in the signals from capitalized development costs when the underlying environmental uncertainty is high. The findings contribute to the ongoing controversial debate on the accounting for self‐generated intangible assets. Our results provide useful insights on the link between capitalization of development costs, environmental uncertainty, and analysts’ forecasts for accounting academics and practitioners alike.     

内部控制、研发强度与管理短视——基于中国上市公司的经验证据

研发投入具有长期性和不确定性等特征,企业的研发行为会降低当期会计盈余。在研究内部控制质量对企业研发强度影响的基础上,深入分析内部控制作用于企业研发活动的两个路径——抑制管理机会主义风险和抑制研发项目运营风险,结果表明：企业内部控制质量与研发投入强度正相关,内部控制能够显著降低企业的管理机会主义风险和研发项目运营风险,最终有利于提高企业的研发强度,这不仅揭示了内部控制在研发投入方面发挥作用的内在机制,也为我国上市公司的内部控制及研发活动提供了新的经验证据。     

Impact of R&D and Technology Diffusion on Productivity Growth: Empirical Evidence for 10 OECD Countries

This paper examines the empirical evidence on the impact of performed R&D and of R&D embodied in intermediate and capital goods on productivity performance in 10 major OECD countries over the last two decades. To quantify intersectoral and international technology flows, industry-level embodied R&D variables were constructed from an input–output (IO) R&D embodiment model. The productivity variables used are discrete Divisia growth indexes of total factor productivity (TFP), which were estimated from an IO growth accounting model. The results from pooled regressions indicate that the rates of return of the R&D variables were positively significant and increasing in the 1980s. In particular, embodied R&D is an important source for TFP growth in services, indicating very high social returns of the flows of capital-embodied technology into this sector. Moreover, the information and communi-cation technology (ICT) cluster of industries played a major role in the generation and cquisition of new technologies at the international level.