SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2

INTERNATIONAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD’S PERSPECTIVE ON PERFORMANCE REPORTING: WHAT HAS CHANGED FROM 1989 TO 2018?

ULUSLARARASI MUHASEBE STANDARTLARI KURULU’NUN PERFORMANS RAPORLAMASINA BAKIŞ AÇISI: 1989’DAN 2018’E NE DEĞİŞTİ?

Pınar OKAN GÖKTEN
Pages
475–496
Publication Date
2019-07-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition, findings of the studies in literature on the usefulness of the comprehensive income presentation are discussed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Defining income and expenses as derivatives of assets and liabilities in all published conceptual frameworks shows that the International Accounting Standards Board has continued to adopt the balance sheet approach from 1989 to present.
📊
Key Findings & Data:On the other hand, the inclusion of the concept of comprehensive income in the conceptual framework published in 2018 reveals that the importance given to performance reporting has increased.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, findings of the studies in literature on the usefulness of the comprehensive income presentation are discussed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Gelir · Kapsamlı Gelir · Kavramsal Çerçeve

Abstract

Defining income and expenses as derivatives of assets and liabilities in all published conceptual frameworks shows that the International Accounting Standards Board has continued to adopt the balance sheet approach from 1989 to present. On the other hand, the inclusion of the concept of comprehensive income in the conceptual framework published in 2018 reveals that the importance given to performance reporting has increased. However, Board has not yet determined a principle approach to which items will be reported in other comprehensive income. Therefore, the Board is criticized for failing to provide a specific framework for performance reporting. This study examines the assigned role to performance reporting by International Accounting Standards Board from past to present based on the criticisms emerged in the literature. In addition, findings of the studies in literature on the usefulness of the comprehensive income presentation are discussed.

Özet

Gelirlerin ve giderlerin yayınlanan tüm kavramsal çerçevelerde varlıkların ve yükümlülüklerin türevi olarak tanımlanması, Uluslararası Muhasebe Standartları Kurulu'nun 1989'dan günümüze kadar bilanço yaklaşımını benimsemeye devam ettiğini göstermektedir. Diğer taraftan, 2018’de yayınlanan kavramsal çerçeve içeriğinde kapsamlı gelir kavramının yer alması, performans raporlamasına verilen önemin arttığını ortaya koymaktadır. Ancak, Kurul halen hangi kalemlerin diğer kapsamlı gelirler içerisinde raporlanacağına ilişkin ilkesel bir yaklaşım belirlememiştir. Bu nedenle Kurul, performans raporlamasına ilişkin özgün bir çerçeve ortaya koyamadığı için eleştirilmektedir. Bu çalışma, geçmişten günümüze literatürde ortaya çıkan eleştirilere dayalı olarak, Uluslararası Muhasebe Standartları Kurulu tarafından performans raporlamasına biçilen rolü irdelemektedir. Ayrıca, kapsamlı gelir sunumunun faydalı olup olmadığına ilişkin literatürde yapılan çalışmaların bulguları ele alınmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖKTEN, P. O. (2019). INTERNATIONAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD’S PERSPECTIVE ON PERFORMANCE REPORTING: WHAT HAS CHANGED FROM 1989 TO 2018?. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2, 475–496. https://ajindex.com/articles/910492

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Andersson, P., & Hellman, N. (2007). Does pro forma reporting bias analyst forecasts?. European Accounting Review, 16(2), 277-298.
  2. Barker, R. (2010). On the definitions of income, expenses and profit in IFRS. Accounting in Europe, 7(2), 147-158.
  3. Barker, R., & Teixeira, A. (2018). Gaps in the IFRS conceptual framework. Accounting in Europe, 15(2), 153-166.
  4. Biddle, G. C., & Choi, J. H. (2006). Is comprehensive income useful?. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 2(1), 1-32.
  5. Bloomfield, R., & Libby, R. (1996). Market reactions to differentially available information in the laboratory. Journal of Accounting Research, 183-207.
  6. Brouwer, A., Faramarzi, A., & Hoogendoorn, M. (2014). Does the new conceptual framework provide adequate concepts for reporting relevant information about performance?. Accounting in Europe, 11(2), 235-257.
  7. Chambers, D., Linsmeier, T. J., Shakespeare, C., & Sougiannis, T. (2007). An evaluation of SFAS No. 130 comprehensive income disclosures. Review of Accounting Studies, 12(4), 557-593.
  8. Chambers, R. J. (1974).
  9. Accounting, Evaluation and Economic Behavior. Houston, Scholars Book, 1974.
  10. Cheng, A.C.S., Cheung, J. K., & Gopalakrishnan, V. (1993). On the usefulness of operating income, net income and comprehensive income in explaining security returns. Accounting and Business Research, 23(91), 195-203.
  11. Choi, J., & Zang, Y. (2006). Implications of Comprehensive Income Disclosure for Future Earning and Analysts' Forecasts. Seoul Journal of Business, 12(2), 77–109.
  12. Cooper, S. (2007). Performance measurement for equity analysis and valuation. Accounting in Europe, 4(1), 1-49.
  13. Devalle, A. (2012). Assessing the value relevance of total comprehensive income under IFRS: an empirical evidence from European stock exchanges. International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, 8, 43-68.
  14. Dhaliwal, D., Subramanyam, K. R., & Trezevant, R. (1999). Is comprehensive income superior to net income as a measure of firm performance? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 26(1-3), 43-67.
  15. Dichev, I. D. (2008). On the balance sheet-based model of financial reporting. Accounting Horizons, 22(4), 453-470.
  16. Edwards, E. O. & Bell, P. W. (1973). The Theory and Measurement of Business Income. Berkeley, University of California Press. EFRAG, (2013) Getting a Better Framework – The Asset/Liability Approach, European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (Brussels: EFRAG). Elliott, W. B. (2006). Are investors influenced by pro forma emphasis and rec