Noting this practice, the Australian Accounting Research Foundation (AARF) issued Accounting Guidance Release No. 5, stipulating that all non current assets, tangible or intangible ought be written off against earnings on a systematic basis over the period during which benefits attributable to the items in question were expected to arise. Lacking legal force, the compliance response was underwhelming (Goodwin & Harris, 1991).
Further, while the rules governing goodwill restricted the capacity of reporting entities to employ large one-off write downs (or big bath accounting), no such restrictions formally existed in the context of accounting for identifiable intangible assets. This gave rise to a process which came to be known as the “intangible mirage”, whereby having aggressively valued identifiable intangibles obtained in acquisition transactions, reporting entities thereafter wrote off large amounts of the resulting value as extraordinary items8, protecting future earnings streams from any revisionist, amortisation oriented regulatory change.
Appraised critically, the regulation of goodwill reporting arrangements essentially ossified in Australia from the late 1980s onwards. The Accounting Standards Review Board (ASRB) was replaced by the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB). ASRB 1013 thus morphed into AASB 1013 - Accounting for Goodwill, with no initial modifications of any substance.
中国行政管理支出现状及改革建议 Subsequently, after widespread controversy generated by the decision of a small number of highly acquisitive Australian listed companies to apply the inverted sum of the years digits method (ISOYD) as the basis for amortising goodwill, AASB 1013 was refined to expressly require an amortisation period of no more than 20 years coupled with mandatory application of the straight line method. (Day & Hartnett, 2000) 本文来自辣^文,论-文·网原文请找腾讯752018766
Goodwill accounting practice in Australia can therefore be understood as having settled, between the mid 1980s when regulatory intervention was first systematically brought to bear and the advent of A-IFRS into a state of relatively sedate equilibrium. At one pole stood the influence of Applicable Accounting Standard AASB 1015 - Accounting for the Acquisition of Assets, which mandated the use of the purchase method for acquisition accounting. At the other stood AASB 1013, which exhibited a strong bias against write off of goodwill in the immediate wake of an acquisition13 and otherwise required the application of straight line amortisation of goodwill against periodic earnings over a period not exceeding twenty years.
This relatively sedate state of affairs was disrupted, to an extent, by revelations that the United States FASB had approved the issuance of SFAS 141 - Business Combinations and SFAS 142 - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. In combination, these standards proscribed the use of pooling approaches to acquisition accounting, instead requiring purchase accounting, but on the other hand, removed the requirement for amortisation of goodwill against periodic earnings, instead allowing purchased goodwill to be held indefinitely at cost until impaired, at which time an appropriate write down against earnings would be required.
A number of technical articles published in Australia at this time questioned whether the failure of the Australian regulatory regime to immediately move to an impairment based regime similar to that in existence in the U.S after the promulgation of SFAS 141 and SFAS 142 might damage the capacity of Australian domiciled businesses to effectively compete on price on internationally contested acquisition transactions (see – for example, Ernst & Young, 2001).
Irrespective of domestic lobbying efforts, it was perhaps inevitable given the emphasis placed on international harmonisation, that the U.S. move to an impairment regime coupled with the existence of a similar approach to goodwill accounting under the IFRS regime which was contemporaneously being promoted by the IASB, would jolt countries such as Australia which had maintained their own indigenous reporting standards into contemplation of their own course of action.
Ultimately, this crystallised with formal Australian adoption of IFRS for reporting periods commencing on or after January 1 2005. The essence of the new regime (in comparison to the previous regime) can be understood with reference to four overarching themes.
上一页 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] ... 下一页 >>
会计商誉减值英文文献和翻译 第3页下载如图片无法显示或论文不完整，请联系qq752018766
