原则导向会计准则研究外文文献翻译

原则导向会计准则研究外文文献翻译(含：英文原文及中文译文)文献出处：GaryKablake.Theresearchofprinciple-orientedaccountingstandards[J]ComplianceWeek,2016.6(4):10-21.英文原文Theresearchofprinciple-orientedaccountingstandardsGaryKablakeThedebateonprinciple-orientedaccountingrulesandrules-orientedaccountingprincipleshasbeengoingonfordecades.Intheforeseeablefuture,thiskindofargumentcannotbeended.Ofcourse,thisisausefulargument.Iftheprinciplesaresettoohigh,therewillbemanyissuessuchascomparabilityandotherchallenges;andoverlydetailedruleswillleadtounnecessarycomplexityandinducethesubjecttoconductbusiness.Structureddesign.Inthisarea,IhavespentfortyyearsasanauditorandfinancialreporteditorintheUnitedStates.AsamemberoftheInternationalAccountingStandardsBoard,Ihavebeeninvolvedforseveralyears,soIcaneasilylearnfromit.Adifferentperspectivetoobservethisissue.Incontrast,Ithinkthereisnodoubtthatusingtheprinciple-orientedapproachtobuildingaccountingstandardsisabetterandfeasibleway.However,theprinciple-orientedapproachcanonlysucceedifithascertainprerequisitesforcertaintechnologiesandconcepts.Thisisthecentraltopicofthisarticle.Thestartingpointofprinciple-orientedaccountingstandardsisthepowerfulconceptualframeworkBoththeInternationalAccountingStandardsBoard(IASB)andtheUnitedStatesFinancialAccountingStandardsBoard(FASB)haveawell-designed,closely-intuitivesimilarconceptualframeworkthatprovidesaglobalumbrellaformanyaspectsoffinancialreportingatahighlevel.Amongothergoals,theconceptualframeworkalsoprovidesguidancetofinancialreportpreparersandauditorsintheabsenceofguidelinesattheguidelinelevel.Forexample,theconceptframeworkoftheInternationalAccountingStandardsBoardisclearandtheaccountingpoliciesformulatedbytheentitymustproduceclearandhonestoutcomes.Thesubstantiveemphasisisonformprioritization,neutrality,andimpartiality.Allavailableinformationisconsideredinitsentiretyandtheresultscanbereviewed.Wait.Theconceptualframeworkalsoprovidesaconcisedefinitionoftheassetsandliabilities.Icancontinuetogiveexamples,butIwouldliketopointoutthatinordertoavoidrule-orientedaccountingrules,theremustfirstbeatheoreticallyreasonable,sensibleandunderstandableconceptualbasissothatallparticipantscanfindguidanceinthem.Thispoint,theInternationalAccountingStandardsBoardhasalreadyachieved.Rulescan'tcovereverythingIftherulesareall-encompassing,thenalotofaccountantsarenotneeded,andacomputerwithadecisiontreecansolveeveryproblem.Fortunately,nooneisenthusiasticaboutit.However,suchahypotheticalquestiontouchesonakeypoint:Howmanydetailedrulesmustbeconsideredexcessive?Ifthegoalofformulatingrulesistocompletelyeliminatenon-comparability,thisisadaydreamandcannotbeachievedatall.Verydetailedrules,theresultsofwhichcanonlyleadtoflexibilityintheprocessingandstructureddesignofthebusiness,andtheentitycanalwaysachieveitsownpurpose,Imagine89.9%ofthecurrentleaseaccountingfor90%ofthissituationisenough.Ifyouformulateadetailedruletodealwithit,thisnewrulewillbecomeanotherflexibleoperationopportunity.Whereistheend?Irememberthatthe“DerivativeFinancialToolsApplicationGroup”onceformulatedrulesforscrutinyandnitpickingasmanyasseveralhundredpages.Thekeypointoftheproblemisthatthesedetailedrulescannotanswerallquestions.Whendetailedrulesdonotsolvetheproblem,professionaljudgmentswilldebutandplayarole.Anddon'tforgetthatrulesdonotpreventwell-plannedbadbehavior.Someofthelargestfinancialaccountingfraudsthathaveoccurredinthepast15yearsincludesomemarginalandambiguoustransactions.Asaresult,theyhavealsobecomeatypicalcaseoftechnicalcomplianceandtechnicalcompliance.Inaddition,ifthementalityofengaginginbadbehavioris“Ifyoucanstopmeifyouhavetheability”,thenitdoesn’treallymatterwhattherulessay.Iamnotsayingthatthedetailedrulesareabsolutelyunnecessary.Imean,undernormalcircumstances,theycannotrelyondetailedrulestoconsistentlyachievetheirgoals.Rulesareoftenmaskedbytheirownredtape.Therefore,astrongconceptualframeworkistheappropriatestartingpoint,anddetailedrulesoftenlosetheoverallgoal.Then,wherearetheforwardpathsforformulatingandimplementingprinciple-orientedaccountingstandardstoproducecomparableresults?Ithinkthattheanswerwillbefoundinthefollowingthreeinterrelatedsteps:theexpressionofaccountingstandards,respectforprofessionaljudgments,andunderstandingofthemostimportantneedsofthemainusersoffinancialstatementsarediscussedseparatelybelow.Whenformulatingguidelines,youshouldclearlyexpressthegoalsofaccountingtreatmentThisproblemseemsobvious,butit'seasiersaidthandone.Iwilldemonstratethisasanexampleoftheexpenseofemployeestockoptions,becausesuchcomplexityandcurrentrequirementsarestillnew.Wecansimplyputforwardsucharequirement:"employeestockoptionsshouldbeincludedinthecostduringtheacquisitionperiod."Althoughthisisaprinciple,itneedsalotofdevelopmentworkaroundit.Inordertoproperlyaccountfortransactionswithinthescopeofthenormativenorm,thefinancialstatementpreparersshouldatleasthaveclearguidelinesformeasurement,confirmation,presentation,anddisclosurethatreflecttheintentofthestandardsetter.Thesefouraspectsarepreciselythefourpillarsoftheconceptualframeworkfortheaccountingtreatmentofequity-settledemployeestockoptionawardsonthegrantdate,whichareassumedtobeexpressedasfollows:Employeestockoptionawardsshouldbevaluedatfairvalueatthegrantdate.Thefairvalueshallberecognizedasafeeandaliabilityonastraight-linebasisfromthegrantdatetotheexercisedate.Attheearliestdateofcancellation,exerciseorexpiration,allrecognizedliabilitiesshouldbereclassifiedasequity.Ifthesubsequentmodificationofconditionsaffectstheexerciseofexpectationsoraffectsthevalueofemployees,thefairvalueoftheoutstandingawardsshallbere-measured.Theresultingfairvaluedifferenceshallbeappliedfromthedateofmodificationtotheperiodofexercise,usingfutureapplicablelaws.Straightlinebasisforconfirmation.Regardlessofwhetherornotpeopleagreewiththeaboveaccountingtreatment,the100easilyunderstandableEnglishwordsintheaboveparagraphhaveprovidedclear,principle-orientedaccountingguidelinescoveringtheentirelifecycleofemployeestockoptionawards,including:measurement(fairvalue).),Confirmation(straight-linemethod),vestingperiod(grantingdatetoexercisedate)andpresentation(firstlistedasliability,thereafterreclassifiedasequity).Moreover,theaboveparagraphalsoprovidesguidelinesforchanginginitialconditions.Ofcourse,optionawardsarecomplicated.Althoughtheaboveparagraphsprovidethenecessarykeyguidelines,itisoftennecessarytomakesomelower-leveldecisions.ThisisalsotheissuethatIwilldiscuss.RespectrationaljudgmentOncetheguideline-orientedguidelineisestablished,low-levelquestionswillarise.Insomecases,theanswerwillbeobviousaslongastheyrefertotheconceptualframework.Insomecases,generallyacceptedpracticeswillemergeinthesesituations,andcomparabilityshouldnotbeaffected.Thecomparabilityofatleastproperdisclosureshouldnotbecompromised.Thentherearealltheotherissuesbesidestheabovetwotypesofsituations.Iftheguidelinesmakersrecognizetheneedtoprovideguidanceonthis,detailedtheorizingrulesforothertransactionstructuresandunconventionalsituationswillbedeveloped(butlikelynottimelyenough).Justastoday’smoderntechnologywillbecomeobsoletetomorrow,detailedaccountingrulesarealsotrue,asnewtypesoftransactions,creativetermsandclauses,andcomplexstructuresemergealmostdaily.Theuseofprofessionaljudgmentistheonlyreasonableresponsemethodundertheguidelinesandconstraintsofthestandardlevelorconceptualboundary.Theexistenceofprofessionaljudgmentsrunsthroughthecurrentaccountingmethods.Forexample,inthetwoimportantguidelinesrecentlyissuedbytheInternationalAccountingStandardsBoardforincomerecognitionandleasing,theterm“judgment”hasappearedalmost50times.Therefore,thejudgmentispartoftheaccountingprocess,butwhatkindofjudgmentisit?Themostconservativechoicesmayoftenbetheonesthataretheeasiesttoprotectanddocumentproof.However,alwayspickingthemostconservativeanswerisobviouslynottheintentionoftheconceptualframework.Assessingtheso-called“reasonableness”oftheUSauditingstandardsjudgedbymanagementjudges,inmyopinion,isaboutchoosingtherightconceptsandmindsetstobereasonable,wemusttakeresponsibility:Managementmustbeimpartialandobjectivelyconsiderallavailableforuse.Information;Intheperformanceofattestationresponsibility,theauditorshouldrespecttheclient'sreasonableconclusions,andmustnotrequestexcessivedocumentationorevidence;thesupervisormustrespectreasonableaccountingconclusions,evenifthisconclusionisnottheoutcomeofthesupervisor'spreferences.Finally,asthestandardsetter,theIASBmustprovideenoughguidancebasedonprinciplestolimittheunavoidablediversityinpracticewhenitisnecessarytomakejudgments.ThisisthelastpointIwillelaborateon.ComparabilityoffinancialstatementsandmajorusersOneofthemainargumentsforclaimingrules-basedaccountingstandardsisthatwithoutrules,financialstatementslosetheircomparability.However,asmentionedabove,itisnotpossibletowritedowntherulesforeachcase,sosomejudgmentsanddifferencesinpracticeareinevitable.Butwhatdoes"comparability"mean?Comparabilityisnotunity.Incolloquialterms,comparabilityreferstotheabilitytodrawcloseenoughconclusionswithouthavingtoworryaboutpotentialdifferences.Accountingprinciplesprimarilyservemajorusers(ie,investors,creditors,lenders,andothercapitalproviders)andhelpthemmakedecisionsaboutbuying,selling,holding,orlending.Thesebasicdecisionsareusuallymadebasedonthecompany'soverallsituation,seldomrelyonacertainaspectofinformationoranisolatedaccountingjudgment.Ifonelooksatcomparabilityinthisway,itisdifficulttoimaginethelackofcomparabilityresultingfromthetypeofjudgementandthedegreeofjudgement,sothatmajoruserswillmakeasignificantdifferenceinmakingassetallocationdecisions.Iftheaccountingresultsdonotleadtosignificantdifferencesintheuser'sanalysis,itisnotimportantbydefinition.Therefore,thedifferencesarisingfromrationaljudgmentsarenotimportantfromtheoverallperspective.ConclusionWell-designed,principle-orientedaccountingstandards,underpinnedbyastrongconceptualframework,togetherprovidenecessaryguidanceforthedevelopmentofalmostallmajoraccountingdecisions.Sinceitispracticallyimpossibletomakearuleforeachsituation,judgmentisakeycomponentoftheaccountingprocessandshouldnotbeworriedaboutmaking,protectingandacceptingrigorousjudgments.中文译文原则导向会计准则研究加里·卡布莱克关于原则导向会计准则与规则导向会计准则的争论，已经持续了数十年。在可见的将来，这种争论也不可能终结。当然，这是有益的争论。如果把原则规定得层次过高，会产生可比性和其他挑战等诸多问题；而过分详细的规则，则会导致不必要的复杂性，还会诱使主体进行业务的结构化设计。在此领域，我作为一位在美国从业的审计师和财务报表编报者已经浸淫了四十载的光阴，作为国际会计准则理事会的理事也已涉猎若干年，因而我也便于从几个不同的角度来观察这个问题。相比之下，我觉得毫无疑问，使用原则导向法来构建会计准则是较好的可行之路。但是，只有具备某些技术和理念上的先决条件，原则导向法才能取得成功，这也正是本文的中心议题所在。原则导向会计准则的起点是强有力的概念框架国际会计准则理事会（IASB）和美国财务会计准则委员会（FASB）均有一套设计良好、推理严密的类似概念框架，在较高层次上为财务报表的诸多方面提供了全局性总括原则。除其他目标外，概念框架还在财务报表编报者和审计师遇到准则层面不存在指南的情况下，为他们提供了指引。例如，国际会计准则理事会的概念框架明确，主体制定的会计政策，必须产生明确无误的诚实后果、实质重于形式优先、中立、不偏不倚、完整地考虑所有可利用的信息、结果可复核等。概念框架还提供了资产和负债要素简明扼要的定义。我可以继续举例，但我要指出的是，为了避免规则导向的会计条规，首先就必须有一个在理论上合理、明智和可理解的概念基础，以便所有参与者都能在其中找到指南。这一点，国际会计准则理事会业已实现。规则不可能囊括一切如果规则能够无所不包，那就不需要很多会计师了，带有决策树的计算机就可解决一切问题。幸运的是，无人热衷于此。但是，这样一个假设性问题触及了一个关键点：要有多少详细的规则才算过多呢？如果制定规则的目标是要彻底消除非可比性，这就是一个白日梦，根本无法实现。非常详细的规则，其结果只能导致灵活变通的处理和业务的结构化设计，而且实体总能实现自己的目的，试想一下现行租赁会计中的89.9%对90%这种情况就够了。如果你再制定一个详细规则应对它，这个新规则又会变成另外一个灵活操作的机会。何处才是终点呢？记得“衍生金融工具应用小组”曾经制定了条分缕析、吹毛求疵般多达几百页的规则。问题的关键点是，这些详细的规则并不能回答所有的问题。当详细规则不能解决问题的时候，职业判断就必然登场亮相、发挥作用。而且不要忘记，规则并不能阻止精心策划的不良行为。过去15年发生的一些规模最大的财务会计舞弊，就包括了某些边缘性的、模棱两可的交易，因而它们也成为照本宣科地处理但又技术合规的典型案例。另外，如果从事不良行为的心态是“如果你有能力就阻止我啊”，那规则怎么说也真的无关紧要了。我并不是说详细规则绝无必要，我的意思是：在通常情况下，不能依靠详细的规则一贯地实现其目标，规则经常被自身的繁文缛节掩没。因此，强有力的概念框架是恰当的起点，详细的规则通常会迷失总体目标。那么，制定和实施原则导向会计准则从而产生可比结果的前行路径在哪里呢？我认为，在以下三个相互关联的步骤中会找到答案：会计准则的表达方式、尊重职业判断以及理解财务报表主要使用者最重要的需求。以下分别论述之。制定准则时应清晰地表达会计处理的目标这个问题似乎显而易见，但说起来容易做起来难。我将以雇员股票期权费用化为例证明这一点，因为这种复杂性和现行要求尚属新鲜事物。我们可以简单地提出这样的要求：“雇员股票期权应在获得期间内计入费用”，尽管这是一条原则，但围绕它需要开展大量的制定工作。为了对准则规范范围内的交易进行恰当的会计处理，财务报表编报者至少应该获得计量、确认、列报和披露方面清晰的、反映准则制定者意图的指南。这四个方面恰恰是概念框架的四根支柱。以权益结算的雇员股票期权奖励在授予日的会计处理方法，假定按如下方式表述：雇员股票期权奖励应以授予日的公允价值计价。该公允价值应在授予日至行权日期间，以直线基础确认为一项费用和一项负债。在取消、行权或期满三者中的最早日期