会计准则制定模式的思考

从会计准则制定权归属来看,会计准则制定模式主要有:政府主导型和民间主导型。从会计准则制定内容的详简程度来看,会计准则制定模式主要有:规则基础模式和原则基础模式。会计准则制定模式的选择目标应该是以高质量会计准则的制定为导向,制定出的会计准则具有可操作性和权威性。我国会计准则制定模式有待创新,执行环境亟待完善。     

会计准则制定模式:来自司法改革的启示

安然事件、世通事件等一连串会计丑闻的出现使美国重新检讨其财务会计准则的有效性。本文从当前会计准则制定模式与司法改革面临的共同困惑入手,分析了会计准则制定与法律制定在模式和思路上存在的联系,并提出会计准则制定的思路和方案。     

中小企业会计准则的制定:目标与模式选择

制定中小企业会计准则是实施差别报告制度的重要手段之一。中小企业会计的特性决定了其会计准则的制定目标应该是简化,一是要简化确认与计量,二是要简化披露与列报。在选择制定模式时,可以考虑一体法和分立法,即把中小企业会计准则作为一个独立的会计准则体系,还是作为现行准则体系中的一个独立的具体准则,甚至将有关内容直接融入到现有准则中,这些做法各有利弊。本文在分析中小企业会计准则目标的基础上,提出了制定独立具体准则的建议。     

会计准则制定模式的制度变迁

安然等财务舞弊案件的发生,引起了理论界和实务界关于会计准则制定模式原则导向与规则导向之争。美国公认会计原则的发展历程在一定程度上折射了会计准则原则导向与规则导向之间的相互更替。美国证券交易委员会提出了全新的以原则为基础或"目标导向"的会计准则制定模式,并认为此模式是最优的。由于受到会计支撑环境的限制,我国还不能完全采用上述模式,但对于我们有重要的借鉴意义。     

会计准则制定模式:原则导向抑或规则导向

目前国际上占主导地位的会计准则有以规则为基础的美国会计准则和以原则为基础的国际会计准则。两种会计准则的主要区别体现在应用价值、适用范围、规范基础等方面，会计准则的调整问题是一个政治化的博弈过程。     

对会计准则制定机构的思考

会计作为一个信息系统，其提供的信息是各利益相关者作出决策的主要依据之一。而会计准则作为规范会计信息生成的行为准则，是由特定的制定机构和专门的制定人员通过一定的制定程序制定，适用于一定范围的会计确认、计量和报告的标准。会计准则本身作为一种行为结果，必将因为行为主体和行为人员归属的不同，而体现不同集团的利益，产生不同的经济效果。本文主要是通过对中美两国会计准则制订机构区别的分析，对我国会计准则制订机构的选择提出一些思考。     

制定事业单位会计准则的若干思考

制定事业单位会计准则的若干思考朱小平，杨郊红随着我国社会主义市场经济体制的逐步确立，事业单位会计的发展变化，迫切要求改革现行的、以计划经济体制为背景的事业单位预算会计制度，尽快制定和实施事业单位会计准则。本文就制定事业单位会计准则的几个重点问题谈些看...     

企业养老金会计准则制定的思考

养老金会计理论与实务在西方国家已形成了一套较为完整的体系,而我国至今还没有正式颁布这方面的会计准则。本文就英国、美国等主要西方国家和国际会计准则委员会颁布的有关企业养老金会计准则作了一些比较,并对我国相关准则的制定进行了探讨。     

会计准则制定的制度博弈思考

会计准则的经济后果特征促使各利益主体在制定过程中形成了一个多方博弈的局面,而准则由政府机构主导制定及制定博弈中行动的不经济性,导致了上市公司管理当局的"袖手旁观"的态度,加快了我国会计准则由政府制定制度到经济主体利用其不足机会行事到完善制度的形成路径.而适当公开会计准则制定程序及增强会计准则制定机构的独立性将改进会计准则的制定.     

新会计准则:期待好"土壤"

如果说激励制度有可能导致公司管理层“创造性”地执行会计准则的话，那么，法律将对相关执行方的行为产生最终的约束作用。若以“种瓜得瓜”为喻，法律环境就是生成高质量会计信息的“土壤”[编者按]     

Monopoly versus Competition in Setting Accounting Standards

Financial accounting standards are set by organizations granted a significant degree of monopoly power by various governments. While there has been considerable debate on the merits of national (e.g., US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)) versus international (International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)) monopolies, little attention has been paid to the merits of using competing standard‐setting organizations (SSOs) for setting accounting standards. We compare the standard‐setting processes of the FASB/IASB to the processes of four technology‐oriented SSOs to assess the role of competition. We also provide a case study of monopoly and competitive standards in telephony. Both telephony and accounting yield some gains from coordination, and similar arguments are used (under the labels of comparability and consistency of accounting) in debates about granting a monopoly to their respective SSOs. Our results show that a group of volunteers competing with the government‐sanctioned monopoly of International Telecommunications Union transformed the telephone industry. Thanks to this standards competition, we enjoy free video internet calling and massive cost savings. Implications for accounting standard setting are discussed.     

The Setting Of Accounting Standards in Australia: An Evolving Structure

The evolution of the accounting standard-setting process in Australia will bring further significant changes as we move to introduce major features of the structures existing in the United States and the United Kingdom. Those features include an independent standard-setting body, full-time board members and broad-based funding of the process. Similar structural changes can be expected in other countries which have well developed standard-setting activities, and ultimately at the level of the International Accounting Standards Committee. These changes will result from the increasing demands on the standard-setting process and the increasing accountability required by those affected by the output of the process.     

IASB和FASB之间的准则协调及其对我国准则制定的启示——以权益基础薪酬准则为例

虽然IASB和FASB已经加强了在准则制定方面的协调和合作 ,但两个准则制定机构在最近颁布的有关权益基础薪酬会计处理规定上仍存在一定差异。本文分析了出台权益基础薪酬规定的背景 ,并简要总结了两者之间的差异 ;以此为基础 ,探讨IASB和FASB就准则差异所做的处理 ,及其展开的协调。最后就IASB和FASB的协调方式 ,对我国的准则国际协调提出了几点启示。     

Rethinking Accounting,Accountability, and Accounting Regulation: Concerns about the Proposed Canadian Sustainability Standards Board*

This paper expands on a letter recently submitted by a group of Canadian business academics to the Independent Review Committee on Standard Setting in Canada (IRCSSC) in response to the committee's proposed Canadian Sustainability Standards Board. We highlight sections of the IRCSSC's Consultation Paper that we find problematic and draw on accounting and other research to explain why it fails to live up to its potential. Chief among the problems we identify is that the IRCSSC appears to be wedded to the same narrow, investor-based focus promoted by the International Sustainability Standard Board. We also draw attention to the rushed nature of the process, its exclusion of lay experts, the IRCSSC's ambiguous use of the term public interest, and its inattention to alternative understandings of value and the environment (including the people within it). Finally, we problematize the IRCSSC's sidestepping of the issues of power, culture, and conflict; its neglect of monitoring and enforcement; and its surprising disregard of the Global Reporting Initiative. Along with a number of suggestions for improving the process and its outcome, this paper also contributes to ongoing debates on standard setting and the question of whether accounting is currently equipped to provide the necessary tools for sustainability reporting.     

Political Influences in Changes to Setting Australian Accounting Standards

The process of establishing regulatory arrangements for setting accounting standards in most Western countries has frequently exposed conflict between private-sector bodies, professional accounting organisations, and government bodies, each attempting to dominate the process in order to gain favoured outcomes. Recent changes by the Australian Federal Government in the structure of setting accounting standards show a substantial shift in power from the two professional accounting bodies (ICAA and ASCPA) to the government. The groups who believe they will gain more influence in the new structure have supported the changes and there has been little opposition from groups losing power for fear of ending up with even less. The initial proposal to adopt IASC accounting standards was effectively discarded in the reforming legislation, showing the government’s sensitivity to corporate reactions and reluctance to relinquish power to an international body. Although some activities in the period preceding the change can be categorised within the corporatism and inter-organisational domain conflict models of regulatory processes, the actions of the government in initiating change do not fit with the role of dispassionate arbiter in neo-corporatism and the muted reaction of the professional accounting bodies is inconsistent with predictions of domain defence.     

关于制定《增值税会计准则》的探讨

\世界各国对增值税会计处理的有关准则规定和我国增值税对会计的实际影响,产生了制定《增值税会计准则》的客观要求。该准则的目标是确认、计量、记录和报告当期应交增值税额以及增值税资产或负债,按照税法正确计算销项税额、进项税额、进项税额传出、出口退额和未交增值税额,为编制增值税明细表,以便向报表使用者提供有关纳税信息作出规范,该准则的内容应该包括：增值税会计的专门术语及其定义、业务性原则、确认与计量、报表     

我国会计标准与国际会计标准的差异分析及国际趋同的思考

本文从我国B股上市公司、金融类上市公司双重审计的制度背景出发 ,以B股和金融类上市公司的年度报告中的双重审计差异为基础 ,对我国会计标准和国际会计标准进行综合比较研究 ,对存在的差异做出了分析与评价 ,并提供了有关的政策建议。     

会计准则的信息含量:中国会计准则与IFRS之比较

在我国 ,对如何实现中国会计准则国际化问题一直存在不同的认识。一种观点认为 ,不应过多地考虑“国家特色” ,主张尽快全面国际化 ;另一种观点则认为在会计国际化的同时 ,应当考虑并体现会计的国家特色 ,不应片面追求国际化。那么 ,究竟应当如何解决这些争端 ,把握好借鉴国际惯例和考虑中国国情的辨证关系 ,掌握好两者之间的结合“度” ?我们认为 ,会计准则信息含量的比较研究 ,可以帮助我们进行这方面的分析。本文采用实证研究的方法 ,通过中国会计准则与国际财务报告准则 (IFRS)信息含量的比较研究 ,为哪一种会计准则对信息用户更具决策相关性提供量化证据。研究结果表明 ,按照中国会计准则提供的会计盈余数据比按照国际财务报告准则提供的盈余数据更有信息含量。因而 ,当前我国的会计准则建设仍应考虑国情 ,不应当全盘照搬国际财务报告准则