关于会计计量的几个理论问题

随着当代财务会计试图把越来越多的所谓“资产负债表外业务”纳入表内核算和试图在会计报表中反映资产、负债价值的变化,会计准则中已经越来越多引入了公允价值等除历史成本以外的其它会计计量基础,从而对现行的历史成本会计模式产生了很大挑战。不仅如此,由于过去的财务会计概念框架没有考虑这一新的会计计量发展趋势,也使得会计准则与概念框架之间、会计准则与会计准则之间因为会计计量问题而产生了诸多的不一致,十分不利于会计信息质量的提高和国际会计的趋同。为此,本文以现行国际财务报告准则中存在的会计计量问题为出发点,系统研究了当前会计计量问题的实质、理论基础、未来发展趋向及其国际努力,并进而提出了我国的因应对策。     

印度央行资产负债与财务状况分析及启示

为了加强会计报表的可读性和信息披露,印度于2012年和2013年成立了两个技术委员会,审议了印度央行资产负债表和损益表的格式和披露内容以及印度央行各项内部准备金和盈余分配政策的标准及适当性,其资产负债表、损益表和部分会计政策经历了大幅变化。自2009年至2018年十年间,印度央行资产负债规模从15.53万亿增长至41.03万亿,增长2.82倍,收入总额亦波动上升。本文对印度央行近十年的资产负债和财务状况进行了分析,并提出了对我国中央银行资产负债表和损益表管理的借鉴。     

Accounting for the financialized UK and US national business model

In this paper we adopt a ‘business model’ conceptual framework grounded in accounting to describe the processes and mechanisms of national economic development and transformation. We locate national business models within a broad econo-sphere where they evolve and adapt to information arising out of stakeholder/institutional interactions. These interactions congeal into reported financial numbers that are presented as current income flows (income, expenditure), balance sheet accumulations and changes in net worth (assets and liabilities outstanding). We employ financial data from national accounts to specifically describe how the US and UK national business models have become financialized as ongoing capitalizations run ahead of earnings capacity. This process of interminable re-capitalization is conditioned by variable institutional and sub-institutional sector characteristics. However, in financialized national business models the system of accounting takes on added analytical significance because it ‘transmits rather than contains’ and ‘amplifies rather than dampens’ adverse financial disturbance as capitalizations are recalibrated up or down in secondary markets.     

Gestaltungsformen der Bilanzierung von Versicherungsverträgen: ein kritischer Vergleich von Deferral / Matching- und Asset / Liability-Ansätzen

On 31 of March 2004 the IASB issued the IFRS 4 (Insurance Contracts), which is a stepping stone to the second phase of its project on insurance contracts. The new standard deals with limited improvements to accounting practices for insurance contracts, without requiring major changes that may need to be revised in phase II. In the second phase of the project a recognition and measurement model is expected to be finalised which differs significantly from the traditional approach to accounting for insurance contracts. It will be an asset / liability-approach that requires an entity to identify and measure directly the rights and obligations arising from insurance contracts. The resulting assets and liabilities should be measured at their fair value. In contrast to the asset / liability-approach, the traditional approach to accounting for insurance contracts, referred to as deferral / mat-ching-approach, emphasises the measurement of income. Both approaches and their corresponding implications on the balance sheet and the profit and loss statement are analysed in detail.     

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.     

Aktuelle Entwicklungen in der Beaufsichtigung und Rechnungslegung von Versicherungsunternehmen: IFRS und Solvency II

Accounting and supervision are closely related, especially via the determination of regulatory capital. As a precondition for the harmonisation of solvency rules within Europe, as discussed in the context of Solvency II, there is a need for harmonised accounting rules regarding the recognition and measurement of assets and liabilities. The International Financial Reporting Standards resp. International Accounting Standards (IFRS resp. IAS) are used as a starting point. Insurance contracts are accounted for under IFRS 4, published in March 2004, which is only established as an interim standard allowing insurance companies to continue their existing accounting policy without major changes in their accounting systems. The IASB has just begun working on a final standard (Phase II). The IASB’s work on the final standard should be taken into account for the determination of regulatory capital as well. The third pillar of Solvency II is an additional connection between international accounting standards and the Solvency II project: extensive disclosure requirements companies shall provide disciplinary transparency with regard to their risk management systems and risk profiles.     

Articulation,Profit or Loss and OCI in the IASB Conceptual Framework: Different Shades of Clean (or Dirty) Surplus

Abstract

The 2015 International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Conceptual Framework Exposure Draft (2015 IASB CF ED) proposes a mixed valuation and transactions approach to income determination. Nevertheless, it does not clearly choose between single or dual concepts of profit, which renders the 2015 IASB CF ED’s financial accounting model somewhat incoherent. The 2015 IASB CF ED proposes a rebuttable presumption that profit or loss should be all-inclusive. Only the IASB can rebut this presumption, but the 2015 IASB CF ED provides no clear conceptual basis on which to rebut this presumption. In spite of considering dual measurement, the IASB believes that it is neither possible, nor necessary, to distinguish between profit or loss and other comprehensive income (OCI) on a conceptual basis. This paper suggests that the 2015 IASB CF ED’s approach to measurement can be improved by introducing a deprival value measurement rule in cases where fair value and historical cost are not appropriate. Furthermore, it argues that under dual measurement it is both necessary and possible to make a conceptual distinction between the realised items of income and expense in profit or loss and those recognised by accretion in OCI.     

A fundamentalist perspective on accounting and implications for accounting research

This paper presents a framework for addressing normative accounting issues for reporting to shareholders. The framework is an alternative to the emerging Conceptual Framework of the International Accounting Standards Board and the Financial Accounting Standards Board. The framework can be broadly characterized as a utilitarian approach to accounting standard setting. It has two main features. First, accounting is linked to valuation models under which shareholders use accounting information to values their stakes. Second, the desirable characteristics of accounting information are inferred from the demand of investors and analysts who use the information in practice. This stands in contrast to the “qualitative characteristics” in the Boards’ Framework which are embraced largely on the basis of their aesthetic appeal. These features lead to a set of broad accounting principles that resolve “recognition” and “measurement” issues at the core of the Boards’ Conceptual Framework and also the central issue of a balance sheet approach versus an income statement approach. The framework in the paper also frames the research questions for researchers interested in accounting policy.     

IAS 39: Where Different Accounting Models Collide

The implementation of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), particularly in the European Union, has led to frequent comments that IFRS are “fair value based standards” and that the IASB is moving inexorably towards full fair value accounting. This article examines the extent to which IFRS do, in fact, require the use of fair values for the measurement of assets and liabilities. It explains the definition of fair value in IFRS, the evolution of that definition and the need for further clarifications and guidance with respect to the application of the definition. It then identifies the four main uses of fair value in IFRS. Three of these uses reflect what should have happened under many national standards. The fourth use is, in practice, restricted to very few assets and liabilities. The article concluded with suggestions about the possible areas in which the IASB might extend the use of fair values.     

Market Value Margin für die Fair Value-Bilanzierung versicherungstechnischer Verpflichtungen : Ableitung auf Basis des CAPM

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) started a project on Insurance Accounting to apply the principles of fair value to insurance businesses. The so called ?asset and liability approach“ would focus on the balance sheet, with both assets and liabilities being reported at fair values, while income and expenses are defined in terms of changes in the values of those assets and liabilities. Indeed, there are no deep and liquid markets for insurance liabilities. Thus, the fair value has to be calculated as a theoretical value, using assumptions concerning future events, risk provisions and discount rates. Both in theory and in practice a generally accepted modelling of fair value is missing. Particularly with regard to the deviation of a Market Value Margin (MVM), which reflects the premium that a marketplace participant would demand for bearing the uncertainty inherent in the cash flows, there is a need for adequate modelling. Transforming the CAPM for determining risk loads in insurance will mean measuring the correlation between insurance companies’ returns from underwriting and market returns on its shareholders’ equity. The criticism on an underwriting beta focuses on (a) the basic assumptions of the CAPM, (b) the absence of active markets for insurance liabilities and (c) the unreliability of estimating underwriting betas.     

Accounting for Intangible Assets: Thinking It Through

With the modern corporation investing more in intangible assets, the issue of appropriate accounting for these assets is very much at the fore and formally on the agendas of accounting standards boards. Some commentators advocate that internally generated intangible assets should be booked to the balance sheet, just like tangible assets. This paper explains that this apparently straightforward solution is not so simple. There are subtleties that, when recognised, indicate that such accounting would often make both balance sheets and income statements less informative. In response, the paper outlines an accounting for intangible assets that preserves, indeed enhances, the information conveyed by both the balance sheet and the income statement and satisfies the financial reporting objective of providing information to investors about ‘the amount, timing, and uncertainty of future cash flows’.     

A Trusteeship Theory of Accounting for Natural Capital Assets

One of the problems encountered in implementing accrual accounting in the government sector is that of accounting for natural capital assets provided freely to government and which are used as public goods. Professional accounting standards require that these assets be valued and included in the government's statement of assets and liabilities. The problem is not encountered in business accrual accounting because business neither acquires assets freely nor provides services to the public on a non-commercial basis.
Various issues surrounding accrual accounting for natural capital assets used as public goods are examined in this article. The nature and characteristics of such assets, and the distinctions between private goods and public goods markets, are first explained to set the context for examination of the issues. Then the issues as to whether natural capital assets should be treated as assets for accounting purposes and included in the government's statement of financial position are analysed according to FASB standards; it is concluded that they are not assets. Rather, it is proposed that these assets used for the provision of non-commercial services to the public should be treated in a separate category as public goods assets which are held in trust by the government on behalf of the nation, for the benefit of current and future generations and for the preservation of the natural ecology of the nation. Commercial valuations are not relevant for these assets and they need not be valued in financial terms for their good management.     

Research Note: Revisiting Fair Value Accounting––Measuring Commercial Banks' Liabilities

IAS 39, Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement (IASB, 2000), requires assets to be marked to fair value if held-for-trading, available-for-sale purposes, or if they are derivatives; held-to-maturity securities, originated loans and originated securities are measured at amortized cost, providing they are not held-for-trading. Financial liabilities are measured at amortized cost except those that are held-for-trading or derivatives. A proposed amendment would accommodate improved fair value measurement of financial instruments. Commercial banks are greatly affected by any accounting standard concerning the recognition and measurement of financial instruments, whether related to assets or liabilities. This article demonstrates that the existing and proposed standards perpetuate the mismeasurement of interest rate risk for commercial banks. Under IAS 39 banks that have a balanced position, that is, no interest rate risk, counterfactually could show large changes in income through interest rate changes. An alternative accounting treatment, full fair value reporting of financial assets and liabilities, including all loans and deposits, is offered. Presently fair value data are mandated as footnote disclosure.     

Agenda Entrance Complexity in International Accounting Standard Setting: The Case of IFRS for SMEs

Features of rational decision making (such as agenda entrance criteria and statement of jurisdiction) barely conceal the complexity of international accounting standard setting. In 2003, when the International Financial Reporting Standard for Small and Medium‐sized Entities (IFRS for SMEs) project achieved agenda entrance, the International Accounting Standards Board's (IASB) jurisdiction was to develop, ‘a single set of … accounting standards … to help participants in the world's capital markets’. Drawing on interviewees' recollections and other material, this study of how the project achieved agenda entrance finds within‐IASB opposition to the project, arguing it was outside the IASB's jurisdiction that dissolved with the realisation that the IASB's jurisdiction would be changed to encompass the project.     

Corporate Lobbying in Private Accounting Standard Setting: Does the IASB have to Reckon with National Differences?

This paper explores whether the attitude of preparers towards lobbying to a private accounting standard setter is different depending on the regulatory background of the preparers' home country. Prior literature examined the preparers' incentives and characteristics as drivers to participate in the due process of international accounting standard setting, but it did not investigate the impact of the preparers' national regulatory background on participation. As a result of the acceptance of the International Financial Reporting Standards promulgated by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) in different countries, preparers who are traditionally accustomed with an accounting standard setting process initiated by governments with few opportunities for formal participation, are now able to participate in a private accounting standard setting process characterised by several possibilities for participation. Comparing survey evidence of Belgian preparers with existing survey evidence of UK preparers, we notice that the participation methods used, the perception on the effectiveness of the participation methods and the reasons for non-participation differ across both groups of preparers. This finding suggests that the national regulatory background of the preparers may affect the behaviour of preparers in their decision to participate in private accounting standard setting.     

从净收益视角看公允价值和历史成本计量属性的作用

论文在决策有用性的会计目标框架下,以权益投资者的企业价值评估为视角,探讨了会计计量属性的选择和应用问题。在资产负债会计体系下,即便采用公允价值计量也无法反映企业的整体经济价值。企业价值需要借助金融模型估计,传统收入费用会计体系下的净收益指标是模型中的关键变量,但资产负债表中公允价值的引入使净收益的计量失去了逻辑一致性。这对权益估价模型的应用造成了干扰,从而损害了财务报告对投资者的有用性。论文认为对投资者提供公允价值信息的最佳方式是单独披露,而不是表内确认。最近FASB为应对金融危机对有关会计准则的修订反映了计量方法多样化的趋势,但计量方法的优势并不取决于该计量方法是否符合计量对象的具体特点,而是是否符合会计系统的整体目标。     

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.     

Does greater user representation lead to more user focused standards? An empirical investigation of IASB’s approach to standard setting

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has faced calls to act in the interest of users of financial statements given the perception of the greater influence exerted by preparers and professional accounting firm stakeholders. In response, the IASB has, over more than a decade, sought to increase user centricity, adapting its people and processes to more fully engage the views of users. We report on our empirical analysis from the standard setter’s perspective of user engagement which is a research objective not documented in the prior literature. Our results draw on interviews conducted with 31 IASB representatives, comprised of 26 staff and 5 Board members representing approximately 60% of IASB’s non-support staff as well as publically available archival data. We deploy the Griffiths (1960) citizenship participation framework in reporting on the procedural rigor directed at user utility, to assess IASB’s attempt to enhance its perceived relevance (existential enhancement) as a standard setting body. We explain how a “clash” between new user centric practices and the extant practices led to challenges for the IASB in factoring the views of, and acting in the interest of users, as demanded by regulatory authorities. We discuss some of the tensions this has made evident in IASB’s objective to function as an effective standard setter. Conceptually, our paper clarifies how more embedded representation modes per Griffith (1960) elicited greater user feedback, but that tensions arose in relation to the IASB’s broader objectives to more directly serve users’ interests. Functionally, we offer a more nuanced appreciation for why the IASB might not unilaterally seek to be “user-focused” in the interests of both users and other stakeholders, and in doing so, serve the longer term objectives of accounting standard setting.     

Accounting for Intangible Assets: There is Also an Income Statement

Accounting is often criticized for omitting intangible assets from the balance sheet. This paper points out that the omission is not necessarily a deficiency. There is also an income statement, and the value of intangible (and other) assets can be ascertained from the income statement. Thus, calls for the recognition of 'intangible assets' on the balance sheet may be misconceived. The paper lays out the property whereby the income statement corrects for deficiencies in the balance sheet. It then explores the case where the income statement perfectly corrects for a deficient balance sheet and the case where it does so imperfectly. In the latter case, the paper then asks whether accounting in the balance sheet—by capitalization and amortization of intangible assets or carrying them at fair value—could remedy the deficiency in the income statement (or makes it worse). The investigation involves an analysis and valuation of Microsoft Corporation and Dell Inc., two companies presumed to posses a good deal of 'intangibles assets'. The paper is instructive, not only to those concerned with accounting issues but also to analysts attempting to value firms, like Microsoft and Dell, with assets missing from the balance sheet.     

‘Deprival value’ vs. ‘fair value’ measurement for contract liabilities: how to resolve the ‘revenue recognition’ conundrum?

Revenue recognition and measurement principles can conflict with liability recognition and measurement principles. We explore here under different market conditions when the two measurement approaches coincide and when they conflict. We show that where entities expect to earn ‘super profits’ (residual income) the conceptual conflict is exacerbated by the adoption of ‘fair value’ (FV) as the measurement basis for assets and liabilities rather than the more theoretically grounded approach of ‘deprival value/relief value’ (DV/RV) which better reflects the impact of, and rational management response to, varying market conditions. However, while the problems of balance sheet liability and revenue recognition, and the related problems of income statement presentation, can be resolved by the application of DV/RV reasoning, this is not sufficient fully to resolve issues of the appropriate timing of profit recognition. Performance measurement issues still need to be addressed directly. The standard setters' current projects on ‘revenue recognition’, ‘insurance contracts’ and ‘measurement’ therefore need broadening to consider the pervasive issue of accounting for internally generated intangibles.