Developing Conceptual Framework in Accounting

Developing Conceptual Framework in Accounting Accounting is playing an important role in nowadays society. It provides financial information to the user to make business decision. However, accountants have to follow accounting standards when they are providing the information. We may question what the principle of those standards is. Financial accounting theory was created as the principle in making standards, and conceptual framework for accounting built up. This essay is going to talk about whether developing a conceptual framework is an impossible possibility. In order to talk about this, I am going through some history of accounting, the definition and compare the conceptual framework under different standards. Accounting was created for thousands years ago. It dates back more than 7,000 years which is the time of ancient Babylon, Assyris and Sumeria. (Friedlob, G. Thomas Plewa, Franklin James, 1996) At that time, people did accounting for their personal need. With the change of the times, accounting no longer work for personal need. People need common standards for stakeholders to use when making decisions. Countries built up Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to set up rules for accountants to do accounting. When the business is becoming bigger, people find out that it is hard to understand other countries accounting report. People need international standards, so some international standards come out, Such as International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Financial Reporting Standards (FRS). They are built by International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and Accounting Standards Board (ASB). When standard-setters were making standards, they considered about accounting theories. Geoffrey (2007) stated out that three main approaches which are used to create current accounting theories: The empirical inductive approach. This consists of distillation of theoretical principles from accounting practice. The deductive approach. This is the logical derivation of theoretical principles by deduction from assumptions. The new empiricism based on positivism, derived from the Chicago school of economics. This regards theories as worthwhile only if they are testable against empirical evidence. à ¯Ã‚ ¼Ã‹â€ 2007à ¯Ã‚ ¼Ã¢â‚¬ ° Financial accounting theories were made in these three steps in present day. In 1976, FASB defined financial accounting theories as A coherent system of interrelated objectives and fundamentals that can lead to consistent standards. According to Elliot (2004), accounting is a mean which used to recording, classifying and summarizing financial activities which include cash flow, transactions and events. It means accounting is really important for users to analyse a company, such as shareholders, investors and employee. For example, investors want to invest a company. They need to know whether a company is good to invest, so they come to accountants and get the financial report. Without accounting standards, they may feel difficult in reading those reports. For this reason, accounting standards are necessary. To make accounting standards, the conceptual framework of accounting will be need. Carsberg (1984) described that conceptual framework of accounting is used to provide general support and improve the consistency of financial standards. It can reduce the cost of making the standards by helping the standard-setters on what information should be included and how the information should be displayed. It shows conceptual framework of accounting is necessary in making accounting standards. Conceptual framework set up the principle of accounting, so it improved the consistency of financial report and is beneficial to users in analysing the report. Furthermore, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦conceptual framework should be viewed as a kind of gyrocompass to help us in navigating our way through the self-interest and contending ideologies that always surrounded debate about regulation. (Edwards, 1981, p. 439) Based on this, Conceptual framework should work as guidance in making accounting standards. In 1975, The Corporate Report was the one of the reports which is about conceptual framework in the early stage. Our subject is, in essence, the fundamental aims of published financial reports and the means by which these aims can be achieved. (ASSC, 1975) The report shows the way how financial report should display the financial information. It provided structure for the following standards. In 2004, IASB/FASB started a project in developing a common conceptual framework for financial report. (Murphy, 2012, p.1) In 2006, it comes out some information about the framework. For example, it listed some user groups, such as entity investors, creditors, suppliers. In 2008, more information came out. In 2010, a recent version- Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting Chapter 1: The Objective of General Purpose Financial Reporting (IASB/FASB, 2010) was released. In this chapter, the efficiency and effectiveness of the entitys management and governing board in discharging their responsibilities to use the entitys resources is included. (IASB/FASB, 2010, para. OB4) In 2012, the IASB discussed how to restart the project on the conceptual framework. This time they believe the framework should focus on elements of financial statements, measurement, reporting entity, presentation and disclosure. (Peter Alan, 2012) The project of developing a common conceptual framework is so comp licated that IASB/FASB took lots of time to do it. Though it is still not complete, we know that it is becoming deeper from identify the users group to the elements of financial report. Statements of Standard Accounting Practice (SSAP) 2 (1971) gave out a conceptual framework of accounting before others. It was replaced by FRS 18 in year 2000. It showed that: Accounting policies assist in this process by providing a framework within which elements of financial statements, such as assets and liabilities, are recognized, measured and presented. They enhance the comparability of financial statements by helping to ensure that similar transactions are reflected in similar way.(ASB, 2000) It provided a way for how the financial standards should be defined and gives out a way for conceptual framework in how it should develop. From the recent standard in FRS, we see that the framework is completing. For example, FRS 30 is setting out the definition of Heritage Assets. A tangible asset with historical, artistic, scientific, technological, geophysical or environmental qualities that is held and maintained principally for its contribution to knowledge and culture. (ASB, 2009) From above, IASB and FASB which are from United States focus more on the methods on how to disclose the financial information. On the other hand, FRS which is used in United Kingdom put more time in building up the definition of building blocks of financial statements. The aspects they concern about are a part of the conceptual framework of accounting. To evaluate the statement, we need to look into the statement. Developing a conceptual framework is an impossible possibility We can go through the process of induction which is Observations-Laws/theories-Prediction. This is similar to the work of Geoffrey (2007) which I have mentioned. From observed IFRS and FRS, we may say that developing a conceptual framework is possible. It is the theory we get from the work have done. Then we come to prediction. We need to find out a fact that against our theory. If there are no such of fact, we may say that it is possible to build up a conceptual framework. We can also analyse it from the sources of knowledge. It includes perception, introspection, memory, intuition, testimony and so on. Through perception, the statement is not right. From above, we know that conceptual framework is made by IASB, FASB and other else. Although they are not perfect, they are rudiment and developing. When reading this statement with introspection, it cannot be an impossible job. Conceptual framework works as a guidance of accounting. It cannot be impossible to create guidance. In memory, since I learn about accounting standards, I consider the standards are made with invisible rules which I recently think it is the framework of accounting. From intuition, developing a conceptual framework may cost lots of time and difficult to complete, for it need to be agreed by different accounting facilities. Once it complete, it will benefit a lot in making accounting standards. Come to testimony, the people who agree with the statement may argue that some definitions of conceptual framework are still fuzzy, such as true and fair view. As I have said above, nowadays conceptual frameworks are rudiment. It is too early to assert that it is impossible to develop a conceptual framework. However, there are some evidences for the statement. Some parts of conceptual framework are based on fallacy. For example, Rayman (2007) has talked about IASB and FASB built their conceptual framework on the present value fallacy. In the IASB/FASB project, the income was showed: That definition of income is grounded in a theory prevalent in economics: that an entitys income can be objectively determined from the change in its wealth plus what it consumed during a period.(Hicks, 1946, pp. 178-179) (Bullen and Crook, 2005, p. 7; cf. Joint Working Group of Standard Setters, 2000, p. 233) This is similar to the work of Sterling (1970) which was provided as fallacy. There is general agreement on the definition of income among the various schools of thought: Income is the difference between wealth at two points in time plus consumption during the period. The problem centers around the method of determining the wealth or well-offness. (Sterling, 1970, p. 19) It looks like there are some mistakes in building the conceptual framework of accounting, but it is also one of the reasons for IASB/FASB to keep improving IFRS. Another evidence for the statement is True and Fair view. It does not have a clear rule or law for this. It works more like an invisible rule. When accountants making financial report, they should make those report bases on true and fair view. There is nothing specific when we look into the view. It depends on accountants culture and faith. Back to the statement I talked about, I think it is still too early to say that developing a conceptual framework is an impossible job. Though it used fallacy in the process of building the framework, it still in the middle of completing. We should give hope to it, for it is so important in making financial standards. In conclusion, the conceptual framework of accounting is vital. From the definition, we can see that the framework will help a lot in building financial standards which will benefit the users in making financial decision. Comparing different standards which are used in present day, we find out that they are still not perfect. At the meantime, there are some problems in the standards. Even though, it is still not good to conclude that it is impossible to come out a conceptual framework of accounting. I believe the conceptual framework of accounting will finally come out in the future.

The importance of early formal education Essay

Early formal education refers to the education that children obtain during early stages of their childhood. Early childhood is a crucial time period for the development of the mental functions of children. This development, including the emergence of the abilities and skills in areas such as language, motor skills, psychosocial cognitive, and learning, is now known to be greatly influenced by exogenous factors, including the nature of the educational environment to which the child is exposed during the first eight years of life. The benefits of early childhood education have long been disputed. For many years it was believed that children who receive early formal education have an advantage over those who start school at age five or six. Today, some educators challenge that view. They speculate that intellectual and emotional harm can result from putting very young children into structured learning situations. It is hard to deny the opponents opinion that children have always grown up to be intelligent and reliable young adults  without the benefits of early childhood education. However, in my opinion, I feel like children who receive early formal education will have advantages over those who start school at age five or six because early formal education can provide a good foundation for real learning for young children, encourage the children to organize their thoughts, communicate and social with other people, and develop children’s cognition and know the importance of friendship. First, providing a good start for real learning for young children in the future is one of the reasons that I think children should attend early formal education before first grade. Children can attend early formal education, such as preschool or kindergarten before they begin elementary schools. All human beings learn to speak a language that they hear.

Arguments of Christopher Browning versus Daniel John...

Arguments of Christopher Browning versus Daniel John Goldhagen Regarding The German View of the Holocaust The arguments of Christopher Browning and Daniel John Goldhagen contrast greatly based on the underlining meaning of the Holocaust to ordinary Germans. Why did ordinary citizens participate in the process of mass murder? Christopher Browning examines the history of a battalion of the Order Police who participated in mass shootings and deportations. He debunks the idea that these ordinary men were simply coerced to kill but stops short of Goldhagens simplistic thesis. Browning uncovers the fact that Major Trapp offered at one time to excuse anyone from the task of killing who was not up to it. Despite this offer, most of the†¦show more content†¦Goldhagen argues that for centuries, nearly every German was possessed of a homicidal animus towards Jews and thus 80 to 90 percent of Germans would have relished in the occasion to eliminate Jews. (Goldhagen dissents from Christopher Brownings estimates that 10-20 percent of the German police battalions refused to kill Jews as stret ching the evidence ). It is one of Goldhagens central arguments that the police battalions were prototypical of the murderous German mind-set. Goldhagens true distinction from Browning is to argue that German anti- Semitism was not only a significant but rather it was the sufficient condition for perpetrating the extermination of the Jews. Goldhagen observes that if it was not for Hitlers moral authority, the vast majority of Germans never would have contemplated the genocide against the Jews. He also argues that by the time Hitler came to power, the model of Jews that was the basis of his anti-Semitism was shared by the vast majority of Germans. To rebuttal his claim I must ask that if anti-Semitism was true to not only the Germans but also the other European countries then why didnt a massive scaleShow MoreRelatedOne Significant Change That Has Occurred in the World Between 1900 and 2005. Explain the Impact This Change Has Made on Our Lives and Why It Is an Important Change.1 63893 Words   |  656 PagesSouthern Life Lisa M. Fine, The Story of Reo Joe: Work, Kin, and Community in Autotown, U.S.A. Van Gosse and Richard Moser, eds., The World the Sixties Made: Politics and Culture in Recent America Joanne Meyerowitz, ed., History and September 11th John McMillian and Paul Buhle, eds., The New Left Revisited David M. Scobey, Empire City: The Making and Meaning of the New York City Landscape Gerda Lerner, Fireweed: A Political Autobiography Allida M. Black, ed., Modern American Queer History Eric

Biography of John Marshall, Supreme Court Chief Justice

John Marshall served as the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835. During Marshalls 34 year tenure, the Supreme Court attained stature and established itself as a fully co-equal branch of the government. When Marshall was appointed by John Adams, the Supreme Court was widely viewed as a weak institution with little impact on government or society. However, the Marshall court became a check on the power of the executive and legislative branches. Many opinions written during Marshalls tenure established precedents which still continue to define the powers of the federal government to this day. Fast Facts: John Marshall Occupation: Supreme Court chief justice, secretary of state, and lawyerBorn: September 24, 1755 in Germantown, VirginiaDied: July 6, 1835 Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaEducation: College of William MarySpouses Name: Mary Willis Ambler Marshall (m. 1783–1831)Childrens Names: Humphrey, Thomas, MaryKey Accomplishment: Raised the stature of the U.S. Supreme Court, established the Supreme Court as a co-equal branch of government Early Life and Military Service John Marshall was born on the Virginia frontier on September 24, 1755. His family was related to some of the wealthiest members of the Virginia aristocracy, including Thomas Jefferson. However, because of several scandals in previous generations, Marshalls parents had inherited little and subsisted as hard-working farmers. Marshalls parents were somehow able to acquire a number of books. They instilled a love of learning in their son, and he compensated for a lack of formal education through extensive reading. When the colonies rebelled against the British, Marshall enlisted in a Virginia regiment. He rose to the title of officer and saw combat at battles including Brandywine and Monmouth. Marshall spent the bitter winter of 1777-78 at Valley Forge. It was said that his sense of humor helped him and his friends cope with the great hardship. As the Revolutionary War neared its end, Marshall found himself sidelined, as most of the men in his regiment had deserted. He remained an officer, but he had no men to lead, so he spent time attending lectures on the law at the College of William and Mary—his only experience with formal education. Legal and Political Career In 1780, Marshall was admitted to the Virginia Bar and began a law practice. Two years later, in 1782, he entered politics, winning the election to the Virginia legislature. Marshall earned a reputation as a very good lawyer whose logical thinking made up for his lack of formal schooling. He attended the convention at which Virginians debated whether to ratify the Constitution. He argued forcefully for ratification. He took a particular interest in defending Article III, which deals with the powers of the judiciary, and embraced the concept of judicial review—foreshadowing of his later career on the Supreme Court. In the 1790s, as political parties began to form, Marshall became a leading Federalist in Virginia. He aligned himself with President George Washington and Alexander Hamilton, and was a proponent of a strong national government. Marshall avoided joining the federal government, preferring to stay in the Virginia legislature. This decision arose partly from the fact that his private law practice was doing very well. In 1797, he accepted an assignment from President Adams, who sent him to Europe as a diplomat during a time of tension with France. After returning to America, Marshall ran for Congress, and was elected in 1798. In early 1800, Adams, who had been impressed by Marshalls diplomatic work, appointed him secretary of state. Marshall was serving in that position when Adams lost the election of 1800, which was eventually decided in the House of Representatives. Appointment to the Supreme Court In the final days of John Adams presidency, a problem arose on the Supreme Court: the Chief Justice, Oliver Ellsworth, resigned due to failing health. Adams wanted to appoint a successor before leaving office, and his first choice, John Jay, turned down the job. Marshall delivered the letter that contained Jays rejection of the position to Adams. Adams was disappointed to read Jays letter turning him down, and asked Marshall who he should appoint. Marshall said he did not know. Adams replied, I believe I must nominate you. Though surprised, Marshall agreed to accept the position of chief justice. In an odd quirk, he did not resign from the post of secretary of state. Marshall was easily confirmed by the Senate, and for a brief period he was both chief justice and secretary of state, a situation that would be unthinkable in the modern era. As the post of chief justice was not considered a lofty position at the time, it was perhaps surprising that Marshall accepted the offer. It is possible that, as a committed Federalist, he believed serving on the nations highest court might be a check on the incoming administration of Thomas Jefferson. Landmark Cases Marshalls tenure leading the Supreme Court began on March 5, 1801. He sought to strengthen and unify the court, and at the outset he was able to convince his colleagues to stop the practice of issuing separate opinions. For his first decade on the court, Marshall tended to write the courts opinions himself. The Supreme Court also assumed its lofty position in the government by deciding cases which set important precedents. Some of the landmark cases of the Marshall era are: Marbury v. Madison, 1803 Perhaps the most discussed and influential legal case in American history, Marshalls written decision in Marbury v. Madison established the principle of judicial review and was the first Supreme Court case to declare a law was unconstitutional. The decision written by Marshall would provide future courts with a sturdy defense of judicial power. Fletcher v. Peck, 1810 The decision, which involved a land dispute case in Georgia, established that a state court could strike down a state law as being inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution. McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819 The case arose from a dispute between the state of Maryland and the Bank of the United States. The Supreme Court, led by Marshall, held that the Constitution gave the federal government implied powers and that a state could not regulate the power of the federal government. Cohens v. Virginia, 1821 The case, which arose from a dispute between two brothers and the state of Virginia, established that the federal courts could review state court decisions. Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824 In case involving the regulation of steamboats in the waters around New York City, the Supreme Court held that the Constitutions commerce clause gave the federal government broad powers to regulate commerce. Legacy During the 34 years of Marshall’s tenure, the Supreme Court became a fully co-equal branch of the federal government. It was the Marshall court that first declared a law passed by Congress to be unconstitutional and set important limits on state powers. Without Marshalls guidance in the early decades of the 19th century, it is unlikely the Supreme Court could have grown into the powerful institution it has become. Marshall died on July 6, 1835. His death was marked with public displays of grieving, and in Philadelphia, the Liberty Bell cracked while being rung in tribute to him. Sources Paul, Joel Richard. Without Precedent: Chief Justice John Marshall and His Times. New York, Riverhead Books, 2018.Marshall, John. Shaping of America, 1783-1815 Reference Library, edited by Lawrence W. Baker, et al., vol. 3: Biographies Volume 2, UXL, 2006, pp. 347-359. Gale Virtual Reference Library.Marshall, John. Gale Encyclopedia of American Law, edited by Donna Batten, 3rd ed., vol. 6, Gale, 2011, pp. 473-475. Gale Virtual Reference Library.John Marshall. Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2nd ed., vol. 10, Gale, 2004, pp. 279-281. Gale Virtual Reference Library.