国际会计第七版课后标准答案(第四章)__作者：弗雷德里克

国际会计答案第一章国际会计的形成和发展1。

讨论主题1.1为什么说市场，特别是货币市场和资本市场的国际化是会计国际化的主要驱动力？国际贸易和国际经济技术合作促进了会计成为国际商业语言。

特别是国际货币市场和资本市场的兴起，对进入市场的贷款人或融资人提出了提供具有国际可比性和可靠性的财务信息的要求(即国际财务报告趋同的要求)，成为会计国际化的主要驱动力。

1.2跨国公司100%促进会计国际化吗？解释你的观点不跨国公司推进会计国际化有两个方面:一方面，它们希望根据跨国经营和国际融资的需要，通过会计国际化来缩小和协调国家差异；另一方面，他们也非常重视利用各国现有的会计差异来寻求财务利益后者还促进了各国会计模式和重要会计方法的国际比较研究。

(注:“会计国际化”一般与“会计国际协调”的概念一致，与国际会计研究中的“国家会计”观点相反)1.3会计随着业务活动的扩大而扩展。

你同意这个说法吗？从历史发展过程谈一谈你的看法同意我们可以主要讨论历史事实，如会计从前殖民帝国向其前殖民地的传播，工业革命后西方会计的发展及其在世界上的广泛传播，以及第二次世界大战后美国会计的影响，这在一定程度上主导了世界各地会计的发展。

1.4哪些具体会计方法具有国际性质？将外币交易和外币报表转换引入会计领域是会计国际化带来的一个独特问题。

——4——自XXXX时代以来，它已成为国际会计研究中的“三大难题”，涉及并局限于跨国企业合并、国际合并财务报表和外币折算，以及如何应对和调整国际合并财务报表中各国价格变动的影响。

世纪之交，金融工具(尤其是衍生工具)创新引发的会计处理问题给传统会计观念和实务带来了巨大冲击，成为各国会计准则机构在共同研究中尚未妥善解决的难题。

此外，国际税务会计也是一个值得关注的话题1.5您如何看待会计国际化与国有化之间的矛盾及其消长？会计国际化与国有化之间的矛盾，实际上反映了经济全球化与各国国家利益及其兴衰过程之间的矛盾。

可以说，会计根植于各国的政治、经济、意识形态、文化等社会因素，会计的民族特征不能完全抹杀。

Chapter 12International Taxation and Transfer PricingDiscussion Questions1.Tax neutrality means that taxes have no (are neutral in their) effect on business decisions. In otherwords, business decisions are driven by economic fundamentals instead of taxes. Such decisions should result in an optimal allocation of resources. However, taxes have the potential to divertthis allocation of resources. Taxes are seldom neutral.Governments often use taxes for social purposes. This is not necessarily bad. For example,countries can use tax breaks to attract business investment, thereby promoting economic growth.Chapter 12 discusses harmful tax competition, a concern of both the OECD and EU. The concern is that some countries (tax havens) use taxes as an unfair competitive tool, depriving othercountries of taxes needed to support their infrastructure and government services. Transactionsare funneled through tax havens merely to avoid taxes; they have no real business purpose.Students should have fun debating whether this is good or bad.2.The types of taxes discussed in the book are:a.Income tax. Tax bases and tax rates vary from country to country. The effective tax rateis what is important, not the nominal rate.b.Withholding tax. These are withholdings on interest, dividend and royalty payments toinvestors.c.Value-added tax. This is a consumption tax popular in Europe and Canada. The tax islevied on each stage of production or distribution based on the incremental value added atthat stage. Companies that pay the tax in their own costs reclaim them later from the taxauthorities. Consumers ultimately bear the cost of this tax.d.Border tax. This is a customs or import duty.e.Transfer tax. This is a tax on the transfer of items between taxpayers.The two most common taxes are the income tax and the border tax.Philosophies of taxation vary with the types of taxes, since ultimately the question is who pays and how much. In the case of income taxes, philosophies vary as to whether income earned outside the country’s borders should be taxed (territorial versus worldwide).3.Tax credits reduce a business entity’s income tax liability dollar for dollar. The purpose of thesecredits in international taxation is to insure that profits earned abroad are not subject to doubletaxation. Accordingly, the country in which a parent company is domiciled will generallyrelinquish taxes on income earned abroad up to the amount of the foreign tax.Tax credits may fall short of their intended results because of how taxable income is definedunder domestic and foreign tax laws. The treatment of expenses is a case in point. Under U.S.law, for example, business expenses attributable to foreign source income must be so allocated in determining the foreign tax credit limitation. Distortions occur when the deduction is not allowed in determining taxable income in the foreign country. The result is usually an overstatement ofthe total amount of taxes paid and excess foreign tax credits recognized. Additional distortionsrelate to national differences in defining income sources and timing differences in the recognition of income and expenses.4.Tax Rate System Advantages DisadvantagesClassical Ease of administration Double taxation of corporateincomeSplit Rate Relief from double taxationprovided at the company level Higher tax rates on undistributed profits reduces the attractiveness of retained earnings as a financing sourceTax Credit Relief from double taxationprovided at the shareholderlevel If tax credit is denied foreign shareholders, investing across national boundaries becomes less attractive5.National differences in tax rates are indeed the least significant determinants of a company’seffective tax burden. The key term here is effective. While statutory tax rates define acompany’s nominal tax burden, this seldom indicates its effective tax burden. Widespreaddifferences in tax administration systems, allowable deductions, rates of depreciation allowances, tax credits, tax treaties, special tax incentives offered by foreign governments, and many indirect taxes (including deficient social overhead services in some low-tax countries) are some factors that affect real tax burdens on MNCs.6.Student responses to this question will naturally vary. Some will argue that multinationaloperations abroad are merely guests of their national hosts. Given the visibility and political sensitivity of their positions, therefore, these firms should fully disclose their earnings picture to local tax authorities and pay whatever taxes are called for. However, others will argue that the competitive position of the multinational corporation will be jeopardized if it does not emulate the tax evasion practices of its local corporate peers. Furthermore, since business ethics are colored by the cultural and social fabric of each individual nation, it is presumptuous for a multinational to impose its domestic mores in an environmental context where they may not be appropriate.7.Transfer pricing is a natural consequence of the decentralization of business organizations.Interactions between units of a decentralized system require the establishment of prices at which goods or services can be transferred among operating divisions. In a purely domestic setting, transfer pricing policy assures (a) a measure of performance that reflects a subunit’s use ofresources and (b) the optimal allocation of enterprise resources.Transfer pricing has assumed a more strategic role in management policy with multinational operations. Many MNCs use transfer prices to (a) reduce or hedge environmental risks, (b)develop favorable tax postures overseas, (c) support the competitive position of selected foreign subsidiaries, and (d) circumvent restrictions on fund movements between national boundaries. 8.(a) Transfer pricing objectives of a multinational company often produce results that directlyconflict with the objectives of a foreign affiliate’s minority shareholders. While the minority shareholders want maximum dividends, transfer prices may be designed to minimize theaffiliate’s income and thus its ability to pay dividends. (b and c) Both domestic and foreign tax authorities are interested in enacting laws and regulations to counteract pricing techniquesdesigned to minimize taxable income. Tax authorities want to claim their fair share of taxes. (d) Managers of foreign affiliates should be concerned because the manipulation of transfer prices destroys the usefulness of subsidiary profits as a measure of their performance. (e) Finally,headquarters managers are vitally concerned with the acceptability of their transfer prices togovernments where they do business. The cost of evoking the wrath of host governments who find transfer prices to be objectionable can far exceed any system-wide benefits that transferprices can achieve. Headquarters should also be concerned if transfer pricing distortsperformance measures because this can cause managers to behave dysfunctionally.9.Considerations that complicate the administration of transfer pricing systems internationallyinclude (but are not limited to) the following:a.Tax considerations -- to minimize its global tax bill, a multinational entity might raise(lower) the transfer prices of goods shipped from affiliates located in low-tax (high-tax)countries.b.Tariff considerations -- to minimize foreign tariffs, a firm can lower (raise) transfer priceson goods shipped to high (low) tariff countries.petitive considerations -- a local affiliate’s competitive position can be improved if itis charged low transfer prices on goods imported from a parent or manufacturing affiliate.d.Foreign inflation -- a parent company may raise transfer prices on goods shipped to anaffiliate located in a highly-inflationary country to minimize local funds subject to thatcountry s inflation.e.Foreign exchange risk -- to minimize foreign exchange risk, a parent may raise transferprices to an affiliate located in a devaluation prone country to move exposed assets to amore stable environment.f.Performance evaluation considerations -- to evaluate the performance of a foreign cost(service) center, a parent company might use transfer pricing to give the affiliate arevenue stream. This would enable the parent to evaluate the affiliate with traditionalprofitability measures.10.Transfer prices are generally based on market price or some variant of cost. Among theadvantages of using market prices are that they (a) encourage the efficient allocation of corporate resources, (b) provide meaningful criteria for performance evaluation, (c) assist in identifying profitable and unprofitable units, and (d) are easy to defend as arm’s-length prices to hostgovernments. Cost-based transfer pricing systems also have many advantages in that they are (a) simple to use, (b) based on readily available data, (c) easy to verify before tax authorities, and (d) easily routinized.The overall competitive and financial position of the MNC is a major consideration ininternational transfer pricing policy. Accordingly, a cost-based transfer pricing system is best from the viewpoint of headquarters management. The flexibility afforded by cost-based transfer prices (i.e., transfer prices can be adjusted by changing the cost base itself or markups on cost) is especially important in helping MNCs to cope with the many environmental risks and constraints which affect their international affairs. However, while cost-based transfer pricing systemspromise greater flexibility, increasing governmental scrutiny of transfer pricing decisions will undoubtedly limit their flexibility.11.An arm’s-length price is one that would have been paid to an unrelated party for the same orsimilar goods under identical or similar circumstances. The United States is not alone inmandating that international transfer prices be based on an arm’s-length price. As the chapter points out, many countries have enacted legislation giving their tax authorities the right toreallocate gross income, deductions, credits or allowances to prevent tax evasion or to moreclearly reflect the proper allocation of income.While the notion of an arm’s-length price provides a conceptual foundation on which to basetransfer prices, it is less than definitive in practical application. Accordingly, application of thearm’s-length principle is far from uniform internationally. Surveys of existing corporate transfer pricing practices reveal a variety of pricing modes often based on professional judgment andapproximation.12.Advance pricing agreements (APAs) are a negotiated agreement between a multinational and ataxing authority on an acceptable transfer pricing methodology. The APA is binding on bothparties for a fixed period of time. The main advantage of an APA is that transfer pricing conflicts can be eliminated or reduced, saving time and money for both the multinational and the taxingauthority. The certainty of transfer pricing treatment makes long-term strategic planning easierfor the multinational. The disadvantage is that the parties are locked in to the agreement, which can be a problem if circumstances change. Of course, time and effort are also needed to achieve the APA.Exercises1.At first blush, Company X promises the better performance as it has a higher pre-tax income.However, a closer examination shows that both companies promise identical after-tax returns. A return on sales of 12.0% yields after-tax earnings of $72 million (12% X $600 million) for both companies. Comparative income statements based on the ratios provided are ($ millions):Company X Company YSales 600600Operating expenses 480528Pre-tax income 12072Income taxes 48-0-Net income7272Thus, it appears that Country X has a 40% income tax rate. Country Y’s indirect taxes are buried in operating expenses. Moral: when comparing company investment performance, focus on after-tax returns.pany X is the better investment because the investor in Country Z is probably not entitled toa foreign tax credit for indirect taxes paid. This is illustrated below.Country X Country YPre-tax earnings $120.00 $72.00Income tax (40%) 48.00 -0-After-tax earnings72.00 72.00Country Z’s investment income:Dividends 36.00 36.00Gross-up forforeigntaxes paid(36/72 x 48 ) 24.00 -0-60.00 36.00Income tax (35%) 21.00 12.60- Foreign taxCredit a(24.00) (-0-)Income tax -0-12.60After-tax return 36.00 23.40a Excess tax credits can be carried back 1 year and forward 10 years.3.There are no taxes paid on these transactions. China and Australia tax corporate income (Exhibit12-2) but the subsidiaries there have no profits. The entire profit is in the Cayman Islandssubsidiary, where there is no corporate income tax.As discussed in the chapter, the Cayman Islands subsidiary would seem to be a brass plate subsidiary with no real work or employment attached to it. Such subsidiaries lack substantialactivities and merely funnel financial transactions through the tax haven country to avoid another country s taxes. The company involved is doing nothing illegal. The issue for the taxingauthorities of Australian and China is whether the company is paying its fair share of theirrespective national taxes. These taxing authorities might tax passive income or adjust the transfer pricing arrangement so that they capture some income tax. These are the implications for thecompany and the taxing authorities involved.4.Subpart F foreign base company income = $4,000,000 x U.S. tax at 35% =- Tax credit for foreign taxes paid($4,000,000 x 17.5%)Net U.S. taxes due $4,000,000 1,400,000 700,000 $ 700,000Students must refer to Exhibit 12-2 for the U.S. tax rate of 35%.5.Value added including tax (4,000 – 2,400) = 1,600 Value added excluding tax (1,600 ÷ 1.175) = 1,362 Value added tax (17.5% x 1,362) = 2386.Classical SystemCorporate income SEK1,500,000- Income tax (28%) 420,000= Net income 1,080,000 Dividend SEK540,000 Income to shareholder SEK540,000- Personal income tax (40%) 216,000=Net income SEK324,000 Total taxes paid:Corporate SEK420,000Individual 216,000Total SEK636,000Country A Country B Country C Country D Royalty paid $20.00Branch earnings $90.00Dividend paid $27.00 $27.00 Foreign withholding tax(10%)2.00 2.70 -0-Net payment to Alubar $18.00‗_‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗$24.30‗‗‗‗‗_$27.00‗‗‗‗‗‗U.S. income $20.00 $90.00 $27.00$27.00 Dividend gross-up(27.00/54.00 x 36) ____________ 18.00 -0-Taxable income $20.00 $90.00 $45.00$27.00 U.S. tax (35%) 7.00 31.50 15.75 9.45 Foreign tax creditPaid (2.00) (18.00) (2.70) -0-Deemed paid(27.00/54.00 x 36) __________(18.00)_____ Total (2.00) (18.00) (20.70) -0-U.S taxes — net 5.00 13.50 ( 4.95) 9.45 Foreign taxes 2.00 18.00 20.70 36.00 Total taxes 7.00 31.50 15.75 45.45Low Transfer Price (000s omitted)Country A Country B Consolidated Sales $1,000 $1,700 $1,700 Cost of sales 600 1,000 600 Gross margin 400 700 1,100 Operating expenses 100 100 200Pre-tax income 300 600 900 Income tax (35%) 105210 315Net income $ 195 $ 390 $ 585High Transfer Price (000s omitted)Country A Country B Consolidated Sales $1,200 $1,700 $1,700 Cost of sales 600 1,200 600 Gross margin 600 500 1,100 Operating expenses 100 100 200Pre-tax income 500 400 900 Income tax (35%) 175 140 315Net income $ 325 $ 260 $ 585 As long as corporate tax rates in both countries are the same, an increase in the transfer price charged by the manufacturing affiliate transfers income from Country B to Country A. The pricing action, however, has no effect on consolidated taxes or on consolidated income.Low Transfer Price (000s omitted)Country A Country B Consolidated Sales $1,000 $1,700 $1,700 Cost of sales 600 1,000 600 Gross margin 400 700 1,100 Operating expenses 100 100 200 Pre-tax income 300 600 900 Income tax (30%/40%) 90 240 330 Net income $ 210 $ 360 $ 570High Transfer Price (000s omitted)Country A Country B Consolidated Sales $1,200 $1,700 $1,700 Cost of sales 600 1,200 600 Gross margin 600 500 1,100 Operating expenses 100 100 200 Pre-tax income 500 400 900 Income tax (30%/40%) 150 160 310 Net income $ 350 $ 240 $ 590 Where tax rates differ between countries, an increase in the transfer price charged by themanufacturing affiliate transfers taxable income from the higher tax affiliate to the lower tax affiliate. As a result, consolidated taxes decrease by $20,000 and consolidated net incomerises by $20,000.10. a.There are at least three possible transfer prices based on the facts in this exercise. Thefirst is $120, the uncontrolled selling price in Country A. The second is $100, theminimum declared value legally allowed in Country B. The third is $103.20, based onallowing the affiliate in Country A to earn a reasonable (20%) profit on cost. $103.20 iscalculated as follows:Manufacturing cost Operating expenses Transportation costs Total cost per unit Normal profit (20%) Transfer price$ 60.0010.0016.00$ 86.0017.20$103.20($100,000 ÷ 10,000 units)Consolidated income using the three transfer prices is as follows:$120 Transfer Price (000s omitted)Country A Country B Consolidated Sales $1,200 $1,700 $1,700 Cost of sales 600 1,200 600 Gross margin $ 600 $ 500 $1,100 Operating expenses 100 100 200 Transportation costs 160 -0-160 Import duty (20%)-0-240240 Pre-tax income$ 340$ 160$ 500 Income tax (30%/40%)10264166 Net income $ 238$ 96 $ 334$103.20 Transfer Price (000s omitted)Country A Country B Consolidated Sales $1,032 $1,700 $1,700Cost of sales 600 1,032 600Gross margin $ 432 $ 668 $1,100Operating expenses 100 100 200Transportation costs 160 -0-160Import duty (20%)-0-206206Pre-tax income$ 172$ 362$ 534Income tax (30%/40%)52145197Net income $ 120$ 217 $ 337$100 Transfer Price (000s omitted)Country A Country B Consolidated Sales $1,000 $1,700 $1,700Cost of sales 600 1,000 600Gross margin $ 400 $ 700 $1,100Operating expenses 100 100 200Transportation costs 160 -0-160Import duty (20%)-0-200200Pre-tax income$ 140$ 400$ 540Income tax (30%/40%)42160202Net income $ 98$ 240 $ 338b.The three transfer prices have a minimal impact on consolidated income overall.However, it should be emphasized to students that one cannot just focus on the “bottomline.” The exercise points out the interaction of import duties and income taxes. Eventhough varying the transfer price between $100 and $120 has a negligible impact onconsolidated income, the income taxes paid to the two countries vary quite a bit. Themultinational must contend with income tax authorities of both countries and the customsofficials of Country B. The multinational must be able to justify the transfer price to allof these parties.11.Costs as a % of sales price:Operating expenses14%Profit margin 6%Total 20%TP= {[450 X (100% – 20%) – 1.50] ÷ (100% + 5%)} – 1.00= {[ 360 – 1.50] ÷ 1.05} – 1.00= $340.4312.Total manufacturing cost per unit = SEK 401.00Financing cost a % of total manufacturing cost[(7% x SEK45,000,000) ÷ SEK40,100,000] 7.86% 1.Required margin before adjustments:Required margin 8.00%Financing cost7.86%15.86%ernment subsidy adjustment 5.00%3.Adjusted margin in cash terms[(1.1586 ÷ 1.05) – 1] 10.34% 4.Adjusted margin with 60 day terms{1.1034 x [1 + (.07 x 60/360)]} – 1 = 11.63% Transfer price = (1.1163) x (SEK401.00) = SEK447.64Case 12-1The Shirts Off Their Backs1.We believe that wealthy nations have a moral responsibility to help alleviate poverty in poornations. Tax collections in poor countries are part of the solution to alleviating their poverty.Thus, the question of why wealthy nations should be concerned about seeing that poor onescollect their “fair share” of taxes is a moral one.The Christian Aid report lists three reasons why rich countries should be concerned about “tax justice” and help bring it about:a.Levying taxes is critical in alleviating poverty. As countries develop their economies,they need to use taxation to redistribute wealth and bolster public (government) financesto invest in infrastructure which will, in turn, foster economic development.b.Rich countries also lose income through tax avoidance.c.In a world increasingly affected by terrorism, a system of global finance built on secrecycannot be tolerated. After 9/11, the U.S. government acted swiftly to go after terroristfinancing, much of which involved tax havens. These actions show that it is not beyondthe power of authorities to track money around the world.2.There is no doubt that accountants and accounting firms have played a role in tax avoidanceschemes. Are they behaving ethically or stretching the limits of aggressive tax positions? As the case notes, Andersen facilitated Enron’s massive tax avoidance, setting up a global network of3,500 companies to keep from paying taxes. The case cites a U.S. GAO report that found that 60 percent of U.S. corporations with at least $250 million in assets reported no federal tax liabilityfor any year between 1996 and 2000. In 2003, Ernst & Young reached a $25 million settlement with the IRS over aggressive tax shelters that it marketed. In 2006, KPMG paid a $465 millionsettlement after it admitted selling unlawful tax shelter schemes. The anecdotal evidence, at least, gives accountants and accounting firms a black eye.How culpable they are in perpetuating poverty is an open issue. As discussed next in response to question 3, some would argue that accountants are merely responding to the national andinternational rules and systems. However, this argument ignores the ethical dimensions of their actions. Clearly accountants alone cannot solve the problems raised in the case. Greatertransparency is critical, including open information sharing among national tax authorities.International efforts to pry open secret tax haven countries are also necessary. Hurting the ability of developing countries to collect taxes is perhaps an unintended consequence of accountants’participation in tax avoidance schemes.3.In our view, tax planning is not wrong per se, but a natural behavioral response to tax rules inplace and the enforcement actions of tax administrations systems. One observer writes:[R]ules always affect behavior and not necessarily in the way expected or desired by the rulemaker. It is idle to suppose that behaviors will not be affected. Ensuring that unintendedconsequences are minimized and that the intended consequences are achieved is a difficult art. I see no reason why regulations should not be immune to this.I know that the benefits of living in a civilized and well organized society have to be paid for. Iaccept and do not argue against a duty to pay taxes. It is for the properly appointed government to decide how the necessary money should be raised by taxes and thus what each citizen’s share of the total tax bill should be. I recognize that some would say that citizens have a moral duty to pay their properly appointed share of the total. My problem is that I cannot see any justificationfor a suggestion that citizens should so organize their lives as to maximize (or at least avoidminimizing) the share of taxes that they must each pay.In this light, tax planning is not a crime: it is an inevitable human reaction to a particular set ofrules.At some point most people will have changed their behavior to use the provisions of tax law tosecure a benefit of some kind.1If accountants are playing within the rules, then minimizing taxes through proper planning isessentially benign. However, aggressive strategies that operate under the veil of secrecy stretch the limits of ethical behavior in general and accountants’ code of ethical conduct in particular.4.The first three policy recommendations, taken from the Christian Aid report, involve strongerinternational cooperation on the sharing of information.a.Open up the banking secrecy and confidentiality laws that operate in “uncooperative” taxhavens. As the chapter discusses, the OECD is trying to do this, but further cooperativeinternational government actions are necessary to provide transparency over thelegitimacy of transactions funneled through tax haven countries. The veil of secrecy thatoperates in some tax havens prevents governments from automatically exchanginginformation about cross-border income payments.b.Banks and other financial institutions should be required to disclose to relevantauthorities interest, dividends, royalties, and other income that they pay to citizens andcompanies around the world. As this information is shared across countries, theappropriate tax can then be levied by that country’s tax authority.c.Increase the exchange of information among the world’s tax authorities. In particular,increase cooperation and information sharing between the tax authorities of rich and poornations.d.Provide development aid to improve accounting expertise in poor countries. They needthis expertise to audit transfer pricing practices of multinational corporations.e. A unitary tax system (mentioned in the chapter) whereby the global profits ofmultinationals are divided among countries based on the extent of their activities, isadvocated by some. This would reduce or eliminate the need for complex transferpricing to minimize taxes. Each country could tax its share of global profits at the ratedesired.1 Chris Swinson, “Of Tax Rules and Their Consequences,” Accountancy (October 2005): 26.Case 12-2Muscle Max: Your Very Own Personal TrainerThis case raises a number of issues and should be a good vehicle to acquaint students with the many considerations that impact international transfer prices. One issue concerns host government relations, especially with customs officials. The fact that Muscle Max-Australia is being invoiced at two different prices for identical equipment could lead to Australian charges of "dumping" with regard to imports from Malaysia. Invoicing imported machines from Malaysia at the higher Canton price ([A$675 x 1.26] =A$850) or invoicing imported machines from Canton at the lower Malaysian price (A$675) would obviously involve tradeoffs dealing with taxes, competitive position, etc. Students should be encouraged to discuss the costs and benefits associated with such tradeoffs.Another issue relates to who should set transfer pricing policies. Here, affiliate managers appear to have much discretion in setting their transfer prices. The question is whether and under what circumstances this is superior to more centralized decision-making. Students will probably be divided on this issue. Ultimately, the conclusion of which posture is best will relate to management’s philosophy regarding the purpose of transfer pricing. If the purpose is to maximize system-wide results, e.g., minimize global taxes, a case can be made for centralizing transfer pricing policy. If the purpose is to comply with local requirements (legal or otherwise), decentralization may be better.Closely related to the centralization-decentralization issue is the basis upon which transfer prices should be based. Here, transfer prices are based on a cost-plus method. While this may constitute an arm’s-length price and is suited to a centralized management style, it has its limitations. Higher transfer prices paid for the same merchandise could affect Muscle Max-Australia’s local pricing policies with resulting unfavorable competitive effects. The artificially high transfer prices paid for imports from Canton may minimize system-wide taxes, but they must be balanced against lower resulting profit margins which could reduce the company’s local borrowing capacity. Accordingly, some students will argue that market-based prices are better. This approach appears to be more objective and in keeping with a decentralized profit center orientation. Moreover, market-based transfer prices encourage local managers to keep their local prices competitive, are easier to justify to host governments, and in some sense is a more ethically-based price. Even here, however, students can be expected to disagree as to what constitutes an acceptable market-based transfer price.The effect of transfer pricing policies on performance evaluation measures and, ultimately, management behavior also should be considered. The use of a single transfer price for both tax planning and financial control purposes is subject to debate. While the notion of dual transfer pricing systems is logical – i.e., one set of transfer prices for fiscal planning purposes and another for performance evaluation purposes – practice suggests that many firms are unwilling to use such a system because of the cost and time needed to set up and administer it.。

Chapter 4Comparative Accounting: The Americas and AsiaDiscussion Questions1. Public and private sector bodies are involved in regulating and enforcing financial reporting in theUnited States. The Financial Accounting Standards Board is a private sector body that determines U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The Securities and Exchange Commission has the authority to determine U.S. GAAP for publicly held companies, but defers to the FASB. The FASB and SEC have a close working relationship that ensures that FASB standards are acceptable to the SEC. The SEC enforces financial reporting rules for publicly held companies. It actively reviews the filings that companies make. Auditors are the enforcers for non-publicly held companies.Accounting standards in Mexico are issued by the Council for Research and Development of Financial Information Standards (CINIF), an independent public-private sector body patterned after the U.S. FASB. Its authority for issuing Mexican accounting standards is recognized by the National Banking and Securities Commission, the government agency that regulates the Mexican Stock Exchange. The Commission is responsible for enforcing financial reporting standards for listed companies. However, it is unclear how proactive the Commission is in investigating filings that it receives. Enforcement of financial reporting for non-listed companies effectively rests with auditors.Japanese accounting standards are set by a private sector body, the Accounting Standards Board of Japan. The establishment of the ASBJ is a recent development in Japan. Before, accounting standard setting was a government activity. Enforcement of financial reporting effectively rests with auditors. The stock exchange is regulated by the Financial Services Agency, a government body. However, it is unclear how proactive the FSA is in monitoring financial reporting by Japanese companies.Accounting standard setting is a government activity in China. The China Accounting Standards Committee is the authoritative body within the Ministry of Finance responsible for developing accounting standards. The China Securities Regulatory Committee is the government agency that regulates China’s two stock exchanges. The CSRC is also responsible fo r enforcing financial reporting for listed companies. Many question the effectiveness of the Chinese enforcement mechanism.The Institute of Chartered Accountants in India, a private sector professional body, develops accounting standards in India. The Securities and Exchange Board of India, an agency of the Ministry of Finance, regulates India’s 22 stock exchanges and is responsible for enforcing financial reporting rules. However, it is unclear how proactive the board is in monitoring financial reporting by Indian companies.Overall, the five countries vary in terms of private versus public sector responsibility for regulating and enforcing financial reporting. Enforcement is questionable in several countries.The United States has the strongest mechanism for regulating and enforcing financial reporting of the five countries.2. The United States and India are common law countries that have fair presentation orientedfinancial reporting. Mexico also has fair presentation oriented financial reporting because of U.S.influence. In addition, Mexico has inflation-adjusted accounting, in contrast to the other four countries. Japan is a code law country and its accounting has traditionally been characterized as conservative and tax-driven, just like other code law countries (such as France and Germany discussed in Chapter 3.) However, it is moving to fair presentation because of its commitment to converge Japanese accounting standards with IFRS. China is likewise moving toward fair presentation oriented accounting by adopting IFRS as Chinese GAAP. Despite adopting fair presentation principles, one can question whether the Chinese achieve it in application. There is an acute shortage of trained accountants in China and the profession remains undeveloped. The accounting profession is strong in the other four countries, including the “developing” economies of India and Mexico.3.The auditor oversight bodies discussed in this chapter are:a.United States – Public Company Accounting Oversight Boardb.Japan – Certified Public Accountant and Auditing Oversight BoardThe recent establishment of independent auditor oversight bodies in the United States and Japan is in response to recent worldwide accounting scandals. Both represent tightening control over auditors.4. Tax legislation pays a limited role in all five countries, with the exception of Japan. In the UnitedStates, financial and tax accounting are separate except for LIFO. Tax legislation has little influence on financial reporting practices in Mexico. For example, there are numerous differences between financial and tax accounting, such as the calculation of cost of sales, depreciation, and goodwill amortization. Tax legislation has traditionally been one side of the “triangular legal syste m” in Japan, exerting an influence on Japanese accounting standards. However, the influence of taxation is declining with the alignment of Japanese accounting standards to IFRS.Several years ago, tax legislation had some influence in China, but this has waned as China develops a more complete set of financial reporting standards. India, like other common law countries, separates financial and tax accounting.4.This question has been of interest in academia for quite some time. Is accounting expertise anecessary precondition for economic development, or can an economy advance without it? It would seem that an economy cannot advance very far without accounting expertise. But the relationship probably works both ways, just like demand creates supply and vice-versa.The example of China demonstrates the importance of developing accounting (standards, knowledge, etc.). Accounting is a part of the market reform packages in China, so the need has been recognized from the start. Mexico and India have been market-oriented longer than China, and their accounting is more developed. But again, it is apparent in these two countries that accounting supports economic development.6. U.K. standards (Chapter 3) and IFRS (Chapter 8) are said to reflect principles-based standards,while U.S. standards (this chapter) are said to be rules-based. Generally speaking, principles-based standards set forth broad objectives and fundamentals and require professional judgment for their implementation. They are more flexible than rules-based standards and are likely to result in more divergence in practice. Rules-based standards are more specific in their requirements and have more detailed implementation guidance than principles-based standards.They are likely to result in more comparability than principles-based standards, but are said tofoster a “check the box” mentality. The chapter says that U.S. GAAP is “probably more voluminous than in the rest of the world combined and substantially more detailed than in any oth er country.” Thus, one can argue that U.S. GAAP is rules-based.7. The U.K. and U.S. both follow fair presentation accounting, reflecting economic substance ratherthan legal form. Both the U.K. “true and fair” and the U.S. “presents fairly” reflect fa ir presentation. However, the U.K. has a true and fair override –accounting standards can be overridden if necessary to achieve a true and fair view. In the U.S., presents fairly means that generally accepted accounting principles have been followed.8. The most important reconciling item (i.e., the most significant difference between Mexican andU.S. accounting) relates to the use of general price level accounting in Mexico. Strict historical cost is used in the U.S. Two other differences noted in the chapter are (a) Mexico applies the equity method at 10 percent, whereas the U.S. applies it at 20 percent and (b) in Mexico development costs are capitalized and amortized after technological feasibility has been established; in the U.S., they are expensed.9.The bursting of the Japanese bubble economy in the 1990s prompted a review of Japanese financialreporting standards. It became clear that many accounting practices hid how badly many Japanese companies were actually doing. The accounting “big bang” was designed to make the financial condition of Japanese companies more transparent and bring Japanese accounting more in line with international norms.Practice changes include the following:a.Requiring listed companies to report a statement of cash flows.b.Subsidiary companies are consolidated based on control rather than ownership.c.Affiliated companies are accounted for using the equity method based on influence ratherthan ownership.d.Investments in securities are valued at market rather than cost.e.Deferred taxes are fully provided.f.Pension and other retirement obligations are accrued in full.10.Full and complete disclosure of reliable, evenhanded information is necessary to develop a fairand efficient stock market. The “Anglo-Saxon” model of a ccounting (discussed in Chapter 2), emphasizing a fair presentation of financial condition and results, and emphasizing stewardship, also fosters the development of a fair and efficient stock market. Countries with this accounting orientation (such as the U.S. and U.K.) have active, fair and efficient stock markets. There is alsoa legal structure and an effective enforcement of laws and accounting disclosures to make it allwork.China is developing accounting standards with the stock market orientation discussed above. So China is on the right track here –the standards themselves will support the development of a stock market. In addition, investors must have confidence that the standards are being followed,i.e., that the information disseminated by companies is reliable. Thus, good auditing by well-trained accounting professionals is important. China may have difficulty developing anaccounting profession, which would in turn be a hindrance to stock market development. China must also overcome the culture of secrecy developed under communism.11.The chapter mentions a number of examples where Chinese accounting standards are consistentwith world class practices. A selective list of the more important ones are the following:parative, consolidated financial statements including a balance sheet, incomestatement, cash flow statement, and notes.b.Accrual basis for recognizing revenues and expenses, matching, and consistency.c.Purchase method for business combinations with annual impairments test.d.Equity method for nonconsolidated affiliates.e of historical cost.f.Finance leases capitalized.12. The British influence on accounting in India is clear. India has a common law legal system andfair presentation accounting that accompanies it. Like Britain, financial statements must give a true and fair view and there is a strong self-regulated accounting profession. Professional accountants (auditors) are called chartered accountants in both countries. The financial reporting and accounting measurements described in this chapter for India are very similar to those described in Chapter 3 for the United Kingdom.Exercises1. United Statesa.Financial Accounting Standards Board.b.Securities and Exchange Commission.Mexicoa.The Council for Research and Development of Financial Information Standards.b.There is no definitive enforcement agency. However, the National Banking andSecurities commission regulates the Mexican Stock Exchange.Japana.The Accounting Standards Board of Japan.b.The Financial Services Agency for listed companies under the securities law and theMinistry of Justice, when company law is involved.Chinaa.The Chinese Accounting Standards Committee under the Ministry of Finance.b.The Chinese Institute of Certified Public Accountants, under the jurisdiction of theMinistry of Finance, regulates auditing.Indiaa.Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.b.Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.2.At the time of writing, the following organizations were linked to IFAC’s website:United StatesInstitute of Management AccountantsAmerican Institute of Certified Public AccountantsNational Association of State Boards of AccountancyMexicoInstituto Mexicano de Contadores PúblicosJapanJapanese Institute of Certified Public AccountantsChinaChinese Institute of Certified Public Accountants3.The question asked for five expressions, terms, or short phrases unfamiliar or unusual in thestudent’s home country. Taking the United States as the home countr y, here are twelve:a.Triangular legal system – A description of accounting regulation in Japan consisting ofthe interacting Company Law, Securities and Exchange Law, and Corporate Income TaxLaw.b.Socialist market economy – Used in China to describe its planned economy with marketadaptations.nd and industrial property rights –Still owned by the Chinese government, privatecompanies acquire the right to use these industrial assets.d.Pesos of current purchasing power – A term to describe general price level accounting inMexico.e.Tax compliance audit report –Mexican auditors must attest that no irregularities wereobserved regarding compliance with tax laws.f.Statement of changes in financial position –the financial statement in Mexico thatcorresponds to the statement of cash flow. However, the statement of changes infinancial position is prepared in constant pesos (adjusted for inflation), while the cashflow statement uses historical cost.g.Seniority premiums –compensation paid in Mexico at the termination of employmentbased on how long the employee has worked.h.Keiretsu– Interlocking giant conglomerates in Japan.i.Guanxi– Relationship culture in China that is based on mutuality and mutual duties.j.B-shares – Shares issued to foreign investors by Chinese listed companies.k.True and fair view – The requirement in India that financial statements present a true and fair view came from Britain.l.Amalgamation – The term used in India for a merger.4. The most important financial accounting practice or principle at variance with international normsis probably the following:United States – LIFO. Driven by tax law considerations, no other country uses LIFO to the extent found in the U.S. LIFO reduces reported earnings. Because older, lower costs of inventory are shown on the balance sheet, the debt to asset ratio will be higher. Companies using LIFO must report so-called LIFO reserves that enable an analyst to convert LIFO amounts to FIFO amounts.Mexico– Inflation adjustments. Most countries in the world value assets and related expenses at historical cost; few countries incorporate inflation adjustments. With inflation adjustments, earnings will be lower and the debt to asset ratio will probably be lower as well. It is unlikely that an analyst will be able to adjust Mexican accounts to historical cost. Of course, such an adjustment is unwise, given high inflation.Japan–Pooling of interests method for business combinations where no party obtains control over the other. The international norm is to treat all business combinations as a purchase.Compared to purchase accounting, pooling results in higher income and lower asset values.Therefore, the debt to asset ratio will be higher. An analyst will be unable to adjust for this accounting method.China– Showing the right to use land and industrial property owned by the government as an intangible asset. China is unusual in the extent to which the government owns land and industrial property. As long as these intangibles are fairly valued, there will be no effect on reported earnings or the debt to asset ratio. However, the analyst must realize that the intangible asset shown on a Chinese company’s balance sheet is a tangible asset on the balance sheets of companies from other countries.India– Pooling of interests method for amalgamations (mergers). As noted above for Japan, the international norm is to treat all business combinations as a purchase. Compared to purchase accounting, pooling results in higher income and lower asset values. Therefore, the debt to asset ratio will be higher. An analyst will be unable to adjust for this accounting method.5. At the time of writing, the following numbers are reported by the World Federation of StockExchanges:The significant number of listed companies in India may be surprising. It may also be surprising that the number of listed Japanese companies matches the numbers for the United States. Another potential surprise is the fact that the Mexican Stock Exchange has more foreign listed firms than domestic listed firms. Students will probably speculate that most of the foreign listed firms in Mexico are from other Latin American countries, a statement that is in fact true. The lack of foreign listed firms in China and India has two possible explanations –either the government does not allow foreign firms to list on domestic exchanges, or companies do not see these stock markets as an attractive place to raise capital. The latter explanation is why there are so few foreign listed firms in Japan.5.A comparison of the countries in Exhibit 4-5 reveals few differences among the United States,Mexico, and China. Thus, all three countries can claim that their GAAP are comparably oriented toward equity investors. However, of the three countries, the United States can probably claim to have GAAP most oriented toward equity investors. The chapter notes that the U.S. has the most voluminous and detailed accounting requirements in the world and that they are rigorously enforced. Thus, the nod goes to the United States.India and Japan both allow pooling of interests accounting, an accounting treatment now at variance with international norms. The treatment of goodwill in these two countries is also at variance with international norms. In addition, Japan’s lea se accounting treatment is at variance with international norms. Thus, Japan seems to be the country whose GAAP is least oriented toward equity investors.6.At the time of writing, the following companies are listed on the New York Stock Exchange fromMexico, Japan, India, and China:MexicoAmerica MovilCemexCoca-Cola FEMSADesarrolladora HomexEmpresas ICAFomento Economico MexicanoGRUMAGrupo Aeroportuario del PacificoGrupo Aeroportuario del SuresteGrupo Casa SabaGrupo Radio CentroGrupo TelevisaGrupo TMMIndustrias BachocoTelefonos de MexicoVitroJapanAdvantestCannonHitachiHonda MotorKonamiKubotaKyoceraMatsushita Electric IndustrialMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupMizuho Financial GroupNidecNippon Telegraph and TelephoneNIS Group Co.Nomura HoldingsNTT DoCoMoOrixSonyTDKToyota MotorIndiaDr. Reddy’s LaboratoriesHDFC BankICICI BankMahanagar Telephone NigamPatni Computer SystemsSatyam Computer ServicesTata MotorsVidesh Sanchar NigamWiproWNS HoldingsChinaAluminum Corporation of ChinaAmerican Oriental BioengineeringChina Eastern AirlinesChina Life InsuranceChina MobileChina Netcom GroupChina Petroleum and ChemicalChina Southern AirlinesChina TelecomChina UnicomGuangshen RailwayHuaneng Power InternationalMindray Medical InternationalNew Oriental Education and TechnologyPetroChinaSemiconductor Manufacturing InternationalSinopec Shanghai PetrochemicalSuntech Power HoldingsTrina SolarYanzhou Coal MiningMexico has 16 companies listed on the NYSE, ranking third after Brazil (35) and Chile (17).This is perhaps surprising given the strong economic links between the United States and Mexico discussed in the chapter. One would expect Mexico to have the most of any Latin American country. Of the countries in the Asia-Pacific region, China has the most number of companies listed on the NYSE (20); Japan is second (19); and India is third (10). As discussed in the chapter, the economies of China and India are growing rapidly. The relatively large numbers of NYSE listed Chinese and Indian companies probably reflect a need for capital by their larger companies. That Japan has approximately the same number of NYSE listed companies as China is perhaps surprising. However, the chapter discusses how debt financing dominates equity financing in Japan.8. a. The two major areas of difference are asset valuation and accounting for goodwill. In theU.K., assets may be valued at historical cost, current cost, or a mixture of the two. Whenfixed assets are revalued, depreciation and amortization must be calculated using therevalued amounts. Only historical cost is allowed in the U.S. In the U.K., goodwill canbe impairments tested, as in the U.S., but may also be amortized over 20 years or less.Other differences between U.K. and U.S. GAAP relate to LIFO and the calculation of long-term deferred taxes. LIFO is rarely used in the U.K., but is relatively more commonin the U.S. In the U.K., long-term deferred taxes may be valued at discounted presentvalue. Finally, opportunities for income smoothing are probably greater in the U.K. thanin the U.S.b.Research has documented that U.S. GAAP earnings is systematically moreconservative than U.K. GAAP earnings (see, for example, P. Weetman and S.J. Gray,International Financial Analysis and Comparative Corporate Performance: The Impactof U.K. versus U.S. Accounting Principles on Earnings, Journal of InternationalFinancial Management and Accounting(Summer & Autumn 1990), pp. 111-130).However, many of the accounting principles on which this research study is based havenow changed.Goodwill accounting should result in a more conservative income amount for U.K.companies if they systematically amortize it over 20 years. However, the occasionalimpairments write-downs that U.S. companies will have will result in a lower incomeamount in the year of write-down. The use of LIFO in the U.S. will result in moreconservatively measured U.S. income amount. However, U.K. companies will reportlower earnings if assets are revalued, because corresponding depreciation charges will behigher. The effects of U.K. smoothing activities are unclear, but it seems likely thatcompanies would be more inclined to smooth toward higher earnings rather than lower.On balance, we think that U.S. companies will have somewhat more conservativeearnings amounts, but U.K and U.S. GAAP are converging.9. The chapter identifies the following major changes that have occurred since the Japanese “bigbang”:rge companies must prepare consolidated financial statements, not just listed ones.b.Listed companies must report a statement of cash flows.c.Consolidation is based on control rather than ownership.e of the equity method is based on significant influence rather than ownership.e.Goodwill is calculated based on fair market value of net assets acquired rather than bookvalue.f.Goodwill is amortized over 20 years rather than 5 years. It is also impairments tested.g.Investments in securities are valued at fair market value rather than cost.h.Inventory is valued at the lower of cost or net realizable value rather than cost.i.Deferred taxes are now fully provided.j.Pension and other retirement obligations are now fully accrued.k.Research and development is now expensed rather than deferred in some cases.l.For foreign currency translation, revenues and expenses are now translated at the average rate (rather than a choice between year-end or average rates) and the translationadjust ment is in stockholders’ equity (rather than shown as an asset or liability).10.The chapter identifies the following major changes that have occurred in Chinese accounting sincethe 1990s:a.The ASBE issued in 2006 represent a comprehensive set of Chinese accounting standardsthat are substantially in line with IFRS.b.The ASBE issued in 2006 also contains auditing standards similar to InternationalStandards on Auditing. All Chinese accounting firms and auditors are required to followthese audit standards.c. A cash flow statement is now required.d.Goodwill is impairments tested rather than amortized.e of the equity method is based on influence rather than ownership percentage.f.Consolidation of subsidiary companies is based on control rather than ownershippercentage.g.Foreign currency translation of overseas subsidiaries is based on the primary economicenvironment in which they operate.h.Tangible assets are depreciated over their expected useful lives rather than based on taxlaw.i.Lower of cost or market is now used to value inventory.j.LIFO is no longer an acceptable inventory costing method.k.Finance leases are now capitalized.l.Deferred taxes are now provided in full for all temporary differences.m.Contingent obligations are now provided for when they are both probable and a reliable estimate can be made of their amount.11.12. a. Japan and India allows pooling, while the others do not. Pooling usually results in lowernoncurrent asset amounts and higher income amounts. Goodwill and subsequentamortization is also excluded under pooling. To the extent that pooling is used byJapanese and Indian companies, they are likely to have higher debt to equity and debt toasset ratios. The numerator (return) and the denominators (assets and equity) in the twoprofitability ratios should all be higher, but the effect on the ratio is indeterminate.Liquidity ratios should be unaffected.b.Japan and India both require goodwill to be capitalized and amortized. This should haveno effect on the either liquidity ratio. The amortization will result in a lower amount ofincome going to retained earnings. Thus, the debt to equity ratio will be higher than whatit would be without amortization. The debt to asset ratio will also be higher. The effecton the profitability ratios is unclear. The numerator (income) will be lower than what itwould be without amortization. However the denominators in each case (assets andequity) will also be lower.c.The equity method is used in all five countries, so there is no effect on comparative ratios.d.Price-level adjusted accounting is practiced in Mexico and Indian companies may revaluetheir tangible assets to current values. The result is higher asset values, higher equity, and lower income (because of higher depreciation and cost of goods sold charges), compared to historical cost. The current ratio will be higher, but cash flow from operations to current liabilities will be unaffected. Both solvency ratios will be lower because their denominators (assets and equity) will be higher. Both profitability ratios will be lower. The numerator (income) will be lower and the denominators (assets and equity) will be higher.e.Depreciation in Japan is tax-based, which is normally higher than economics-baseddepreciation. This will reduce income and lower the profitability ratios. The more rapid write-off of fixed assets will cause lower total asset values. Thus, the debt to asset ratio should be higher. The debt to equity ratio and both liquidity ratios should be unaffected.f.LIFO is used in the United States. It is permitted in Japan, but not widely used.Companies using LIFO should have lower income, so lower profitability ratios.Inventory will probably be lower, causing the debt to asset ratio to increase and the current ratio to decrease. Cash flow to current liabilities will be unaffected. With less income going to retained earnings, the debt to equity ratio will be higher.g.Probable losses are accrued in all five countries, so there is no effect on comparativeratios.h.Not all finance leases are capitalized in Japan. Companies will report comparativelylower noncurrent liabilities and noncurrent assets. Income will also be affected, but the amount is probably immaterial. The liquidity ratios should be unaffected. Both solvency ratios should be lower and return on assets will be higher. The effect on return on equity is probably immaterial.i.Deferred taxes are accrued in all five countries, so there is no effect on comparative ratios. j.Some opportunity for income smoothing exists in India. Income smoothing has an indeterminate effect on income in any given year. Therefore it is not possible to know how the profitability ratios are affected. The effect of creating reserves is to shift amounts that would otherwise be in retained earnings into the reserve accounts. Since both of these are in shareholders’ equity, this total is unaffected. Therefore, the solvency ratios are likely to be unaffected. The two liquidity ratios will be unaffected.。

2020年国际会计考试题库258题[含参考答案]一、填空题1．国际会计准则委员会的总部设在，是民间机构。

【参考答案：英国伦敦】2．国际会计准则委员会理事会复查国际会计准则草案，经修改并需经过理事会（）的多数同意后，公布该国际会计准则。

A.2/3B.1/2C.1/4D.3/4【参考答案：D】3．的会计实务体系被公认为当今在世界范围内影响最大的会计模式。

【参考答案：美国】4．指在机构和组织中，等级制度和权力的不公平分配能被接受的程度。

【参考答案：权利距离】5．衍生金融工具是从基本金融工具中派生出来的创新的金融工具，也称为。

【参考答案：金融衍生工具】6．国际会计准则委员会的总部设在，是民间机构。

【参考答案：英国伦敦】7．除外，不要求对外公布财务报告，会计报表中对信息的披露要求不够充分。

【参考答案：上市公司】8．荷兰《年度报表法》和《所得税法》的会计要求并不完全一致。

报告收益与应税收益之间的暂时性差异，要通过所得税的程序调节。

【参考答案：跨期摊配】9．与资产负债表中财务状况的计量直接联系的要素是： ..。

【参考答案：资产 ;负债 ;权益】10．的会计实务体系被公认为当今在世界范围内影响最大的会计模式。

【参考答案：美国】11．指在机构和组织中，等级制度和权力的不公平分配能被接受的程度。

【参考答案：权利距离】12．市场是商品经济的产物（第1章知识点1会计的国际传承）A.正确B.错误【参考答案：A】13．采用账户式资产负债表的大多数英联邦国家的企业，把资产列在，负债和业主权益列在。

【参考答案：右方 ;左方】14．经济合作与发展组织在会计的国际协调化方面发布的重要文件有（）A.《跨国公司行为规范中的会计披露要求》B.《关于在跨国公司投资的指南》C.《外国发行者证券跨国上市的首次挂牌交易的国际披露准则概要》D.《国际会计准则和欧洲会计指令间一致性的考察》【参考答案：B】15．除外，不要求对外公布财务报告，会计报表中对信息的披露要求不够充分。

第一章导论2.会计可以被看做是包括三个部分：计量、披露和审计。

这种分类的优点和缺点是什么？你能提出其他有效的分类吗？Advantage: Some might argue that measurement, disclosure, and external auditing are three distinct (although related) processes, involving different members of the company. For example, corporate attorneys often are involved in disclosure issues, but seldom intervene in measurement ssues. The Board of Directors works with the external auditors but not necessarily with the comptroller s office. Thus, discussion of accounting requirements and voluntary accounting choices in different jurisdictions is simplified by focusing on the three components of accounting. Disadvantage: measurement, disclosure and auditing are interdependent, and should not be viewed in isolation of one another. A company choosing to disclose as little as possible, for example, may use accounting measurement approaches that reduce the information content of financial statements, and select an external auditor who will be relatively lenient in enforcing accounting requirements. One alternative classification might include accounting (measurement and disclosure), and auditing. A second classification might include financial reporting (annual and interim reporting, regulatory filings) and ad hoc disclosure (press releases, analyst meetings, etc). Any classification is arbitrary, and potentially useful depending on its purpose.优势：一些人可能认为测量，披露和外部审计是三个不同的（虽然相关）流程，涉及公司的不同成员。

国际会计作业IASB：国际会计准则理事会内涵与背景国际会计准则理事会是制定及批准国际财务报告准则的一个独立私营机构。

国际会计准则理事会在国际财务报告准则基金会的监督下运作。

国际会计准则理事会于2001年成立，取代了先前的国际会计准则委员会。

国际会计准则理事会（International Accounting Standards Board ，简称IASB）。

IASB的前身是国际会计准则委员会（International Accounting Standards committee，简称IASC），在2000年进行全面重组并于2001年初改为国际会计准则理事会。

IASC是由来自澳大利亚、加拿大、法国、德国、日本、墨西哥、荷兰、英国和爱尔兰以及美国的会计职业团体于1973年发起成立的。

从1983年起，作为国际会计师联合会（International Federation of Accountants，简称“IFAC”）成员的所有会计职业团体均已成为IASC的成员。

中国于1998年5月正式加入IASC和国际会计师联合会。

IASC的目标是，制定和发布国际会计准则，促进国际会计的协调。

重组前，国际会计准则制定工作由国际会计准则委员会理事会（IASC Board）承担。

理事会由13个国家的会计职业团体的代表以及不超过4个在财务报告方面利益相关的其他组织的代表组成。

除理事会外，IASC 还成立了咨询团（Consultative Group）、顾问委员会（Advisory Council）和常设解释委员会（Standing Interpretation Committee）三个机构。

咨询团定期开会，与理事会讨论国际会计准则项目中的技术问题、IASC的工作计划及战略，在IASC制定国际会计准则的应循程序（Due Process）以及推动承认国际会计准则方面发挥重要作用。

顾问委员会的作用是提高国际会计准则的可信度，推动国际会计准则广泛承认。

国际会计答案第一章国际会计的形式与发展第一题选择题1、国际会计的三大课题是（ABC ）A 国际物价变动影响的调整B 国际财务报表的合并C 外币报表的折算D 国际税务会计2、现有的国际性会计事务所（会计公司）中所谓的“四大”包括（ABCD ）A普华永道B毕马威国际C德勤D永安国际E安达信国际3、跨国公司兴起导致的独特的会计问题是（B ）A 国际物价变动影响的调整B 国际财务报表的合并C 外币报表的折算D 国际税务会计4、“四大”会计师事务所的业务扩展与委托人的联系使用的是（A ）A 同一名称和同一语言B 不同名称和同一语言C 不同名称和不同语言D 同一名称和不同语言5、国内性质的会计师事务所为从事国际业务而进行的临时协作一般要通过哪些途径联系？（ABC ）A 国际性的职业届会议B 双方直接联系C 各国的执业会计师协会下设的国际联络委员会D 各国政府6、我国注册会计师考试的报考者的条件包括（AB ）A 具有大专或大专以上学历B 具有会计、审计、统计、经济中级或中级以上的专业技术职称C 有两年的会计师事务所工作经验D 必须是中国公民7、自1994年，我国已允许（ABCD ）参加我国注册会计师统一考试。

A 我国大陆公民B 香港居民C 澳门居民3D 台湾居民E 外国籍公民（该国法律允许中国公民参加该国注册会计师考试）8、第一次国际会计师大会举行的时间、地点是（A ）A 1904年圣路易斯B 1952年伦敦C 1962年纽约D 1972年悉尼9、1977年于慕尼黑举行的第十一次国际会计师大会上创建的国际会计师联合会（IFAC）的前身是（A ）A 会计职业界国际协调委员会（ICCAP）B 国际会计准则委员会(IASC)C 国际审计事务委员会(IAPC)D 国际会计师大会技术委员会10、20世纪70年代国际会计的研究中，悲观主义者的“国别会计”观的主要观点包括（ABC ）A 各国会计的差异是各国不同的经济、政治、社会、法律、文化等环境影响所形成，不大可能协调一致。