Application of the Reporting Entity Concept in Australia

For decades, the reporting entity concept has been the foundation of differential reporting in Australia. Those entities classified as ‘reporting entities’ are, prima facie, required to produce full GAAP‐based financial reports while other (non‐reporting) entities are generally able to produce less complex and shorter ‘special purpose’ financial reports. In recent years, the application of the concept, as originally set out in the Statement of Accounting Concepts (SAC) 1 Definition of the Reporting Entity, has been criticized on several grounds—particularly, that it does not yield the reporting outcomes originally intended by regulators. Our analysis of 1,546 companies lodging financial statements with the corporate regulator in Australia (ASIC) shows the principles‐based criteria in SAC 1, designed to indicate the existence of a reporting entity, do not systematically explain its application by entities. Our findings are relevant for policy makers, researchers, and regulators concerned with how these choices might be more effectively regulated in future and whether this is best done through principles‐based or rules‐based approaches.     

国有资产管理体系的完善

加强我国国有资产管理,减少国有资产的流失,是我国经济发展中的一个重要问题。同时,国有资产管理体制改革与市场经济体制改革能否相适应,能否满足我国经济建设发展的需要,是我国经济体制改革的核心问题之一。本文旨在通过对我国国有资产管理体制的现状以及存在的问题的阐述和分析的基础上,提出一些可行的对策,以期有利于我国国有资产管理体制改革的进一步推进与完善。     

加强国有资本经营预算

加强国有资本经营预算,既是预算体制改革重要组成部分,也是财政体制改革必然要求。国有资本既涉及到中央,也涉及到地方。本文就国有资本经营预算过程中需要注意的几个关系进行了阐述。     

Financial Reporting by Charities: Why Do Some Choose to Report Under a More Extensive Reporting Framework?

While voluntary disclosure theory posits that profit-oriented companies voluntarily disclose information to increase their market value, this does not explain why a charity would report in accordance with a more comprehensive financial reporting framework than required. Using a unique financial reporting framework choice available in Australia, our study examines factors associated with large charities’ choice of a General Purpose Financial Statements (GPFS) reporting framework, which encompasses expansive financial reporting requirements, versus a Special Purpose Financial Statements (SPFS) reporting framework, where management, within limits, effectively chooses that subset of accounting standards applicable to that charity. For those preparing GPFS, we then examine the factors that determine those charities that report in accordance with the complete set of Australian Accounting Standards (Tier 1) versus Reduced Disclosure Requirements (Tier 2). Using manually collected data from 11,471 large-registered charities for 2014–2016, we find that the economic importance of the charity, its funding sources, and level of indebtedness are significant in explaining charities choosing a more comprehensive financial reporting framework. Further, we find a substantial increase in the proportion of large charities electing to disclose GPFS-Tier 2 over this three-year window. The choice of a large audit firm (Big 4 and mid-tier audit firms) is significantly associated with charities both lodging more comprehensive GPFS, and also reporting GPFS in accordance with the less onerous GPFS-Tier 2 framework. Our results provide insights into voluntary reporting choices made by charities and inform charities, accounting firms, and regulators of factors influencing charities’ choice of financial reporting frameworks.