After 30 years of orthodox socialism, in 1979 China opened the door to a market economy. The unleashed entrepreneurial spirit and rapid accumulation of savings and investment led to an unparalleled economic growth. Remarkably, investment, companies and even stock exchanges proceeded without accounting standards as known in the rest of the world. It would be another quarter century before Chinese accounting standards incorporated the fundamental accounting principles needed for guidance in the context of a modern flexible, and ever evolving, market economy. The paper attributes the lag to a combination of government control over accounting standards and the legacy of socialist concepts that equated accounting with bookkeeping rather than the modern accounting goal of accurately valuing measuring both receipts and outgoings and the value of entitlements and obligations to reveal to current and prospective owners, investors and lenders the true worth of an enterprise.
{"title":"The Evolution of Accounting Standards in Modern China as a Reflection of the Country’s Challenging Shift to a Market Economy","authors":"Yue Guo, R. Krever","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2020-019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2020-019","url":null,"abstract":"After 30 years of orthodox socialism, in 1979 China opened the door to a market economy. The unleashed entrepreneurial spirit and rapid accumulation of savings and investment led to an unparalleled economic growth. Remarkably, investment, companies and even stock exchanges proceeded without accounting standards as known in the rest of the world. It would be another quarter century before Chinese accounting standards incorporated the fundamental accounting principles needed for guidance in the context of a modern flexible, and ever evolving, market economy. The paper attributes the lag to a combination of government control over accounting standards and the legacy of socialist concepts that equated accounting with bookkeeping rather than the modern accounting goal of accurately valuing measuring both receipts and outgoings and the value of entitlements and obligations to reveal to current and prospective owners, investors and lenders the true worth of an enterprise.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41770916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract: The aim of this historical account is to set forth the background behind the three petitions that Arthur Andersen & Co. submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) between 1954 and 1965 – two rejected and one accepted – to reform GAAP for SEC registrants. This is the first time that the two petitions that have survived have been published in the literature.
{"title":"Arthur Andersen & Co. Thrice Petitioned the SEC to Reform GAAP, 1954-1965","authors":"S. Zeff","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2021-025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2021-025","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The aim of this historical account is to set forth the background behind the three petitions that Arthur Andersen & Co. submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) between 1954 and 1965 – two rejected and one accepted – to reform GAAP for SEC registrants. This is the first time that the two petitions that have survived have been published in the literature.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43787605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Auditing standards promulgated by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) outline four alternatives for auditors’ reports: unqualified, qualified, adverse, and disclaimer. However, at the present time, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) generally accepts only one of these alternatives: an unqualified opinion. Prior to the elimination of “subject to” qualified opinions in 1988, the SEC allowed such opinions in the case of material uncertainties. However, the SEC has not, as a general rule, accepted opinions qualified for departures from generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) since it issued Accounting Series Release (ASR) No. 4 on April 25, 1938. This paper describes an instance where the SEC agreed to accept opinions qualified for a departure from compliance with GAAP.
{"title":"Has the SEC ever been Willing to Accept Qualified Audit Opinions for a GAAP Departure?","authors":"J. D. Keyser","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2021-012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2021-012","url":null,"abstract":"Auditing standards promulgated by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) outline four alternatives for auditors’ reports: unqualified, qualified, adverse, and disclaimer. However, at the present time, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) generally accepts only one of these alternatives: an unqualified opinion. Prior to the elimination of “subject to” qualified opinions in 1988, the SEC allowed such opinions in the case of material uncertainties. However, the SEC has not, as a general rule, accepted opinions qualified for departures from generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) since it issued Accounting Series Release (ASR) No. 4 on April 25, 1938. This paper describes an instance where the SEC agreed to accept opinions qualified for a departure from compliance with GAAP.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44358978","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Being able to understand how double entry works is a critically important skill of an accountant but, few accounting graduates either understand or perform double entry at the level desired. It has always been taught using rules, never by principles. This paper responds to and rejects criticisms published in this journal by Richard Macve. They concern a paper I published in 2018 presenting Luca Pacioli’s approach to teaching double entry using a principles-based approach. My response also uses grounded theory to reject Professor Macve’s theory concerning the development of double entry by generating an opposing new theory to explain what motivated its emergence. Furthermore, it highlights problems in the use of literature in accounting history; and uses theories of pedagogy and studies on teaching DEB to reject his insistence that it should be taught using a balance sheet equation approach. Several other comments/suggestions in his wide-ranging article are addressed.
{"title":"The business needs that drove the emergence of double entry In defense of Pacioli, again… it is time to remove those dark glasses","authors":"A. Sangster","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2021-022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2021-022","url":null,"abstract":"Being able to understand how double entry works is a critically important skill of an accountant but, few accounting graduates either understand or perform double entry at the level desired. It has always been taught using rules, never by principles. This paper responds to and rejects criticisms published in this journal by Richard Macve. They concern a paper I published in 2018 presenting Luca Pacioli’s approach to teaching double entry using a principles-based approach. My response also uses grounded theory to reject Professor Macve’s theory concerning the development of double entry by generating an opposing new theory to explain what motivated its emergence. Furthermore, it highlights problems in the use of literature in accounting history; and uses theories of pedagogy and studies on teaching DEB to reject his insistence that it should be taught using a balance sheet equation approach. Several other comments/suggestions in his wide-ranging article are addressed.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49446759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It has long been argued that double-entry bookkeeping (‘DEB’) was important for enabling capitalism’s development in the West and heralded the beginning of ‘modern accounting’. However, these claims remain contested so it is important to understand the history of DEB’s emergence about 700 years ago and its underlying rationale. Sangster (2018a) [Pacioli's Lens: God, Humanism, Euclid, and the Rhetoric of Double Entry. The Accounting Review, 93(2): 299-314] argues that, in the first printed manual on DEB in 1494, Pacioli presented a novel ‘axiomatic’ approach to explaining DEB that requires a corresponding ‘paradigmatic shift’ in our appreciation of his contribution. This paper challenges Sangster’s interpretation of Pacioli’s mathematical contribution and calls for deeper understanding of the historical development of DEB in the West by comparison with accounting developments in the East.
长期以来，人们一直认为复式记账法对西方资本主义的发展很重要，并预示着“现代会计”的开始。然而，这些说法仍然存在争议，因此了解大约700年前DEB出现的历史及其基本原理很重要。Sangster（2018a）[Pacioli's Lens:God，Humanism，Euclid，and the Rheoric of Double Entry。the Accounting Review，93（2）：299-314]认为，在1494年第一本关于DEB的印刷手册中，Pacioli提出了一种新颖的“公理化”方法来解释DEB，这需要我们对他的贡献进行相应的“范式转换”。本文挑战了桑斯特对帕西奥利数学贡献的解释，并呼吁通过与东方会计发展的比较，更深入地理解西方DEB的历史发展。
{"title":"Pacioli’s Lens: Through a Glass, Darkly","authors":"R. Macve","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2021-004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2021-004","url":null,"abstract":"It has long been argued that double-entry bookkeeping (‘DEB’) was important for enabling capitalism’s development in the West and heralded the beginning of ‘modern accounting’. However, these claims remain contested so it is important to understand the history of DEB’s emergence about 700 years ago and its underlying rationale. Sangster (2018a) [Pacioli's Lens: God, Humanism, Euclid, and the Rhetoric of Double Entry. The Accounting Review, 93(2): 299-314] argues that, in the first printed manual on DEB in 1494, Pacioli presented a novel ‘axiomatic’ approach to explaining DEB that requires a corresponding ‘paradigmatic shift’ in our appreciation of his contribution. This paper challenges Sangster’s interpretation of Pacioli’s mathematical contribution and calls for deeper understanding of the historical development of DEB in the West by comparison with accounting developments in the East.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41334952","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study examines a Scottish public accountant’s association with West India slavery during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. It provides a hitherto unresearched perspective on the association of accounting and accountants with slavery and contributes to an ongoing debate about Scotland’s association with slavery.
{"title":"AN EARLY PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT’S ASSOCIATION WITH WEST INDIA SLAVERY","authors":"Thomas Lee","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2021-016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2021-016","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines a Scottish public accountant’s association with West India slavery during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. It provides a hitherto unresearched perspective on the association of accounting and accountants with slavery and contributes to an ongoing debate about Scotland’s association with slavery.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48523664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The aim of this article is to display, for the first time in the literature, the letters written in November 1970 by the senior partners of three of the Big 8 audit firms, notifying the AICPA of their lack of confidence in the Accounting Principles Board (APB). The letters were provoked by the “embarrassing” and much criticized Opinions 16 and 17 on accounting for pooling of interests and intangible assets.
{"title":"Three Big 8 Audit Firms Notify the AICPA in 1970 of Their Lack of Confidence in the Accounting Principles Board","authors":"S. Zeff","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2021-014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2021-014","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to display, for the first time in the literature, the letters written in November 1970 by the senior partners of three of the Big 8 audit firms, notifying the AICPA of their lack of confidence in the Accounting Principles Board (APB). The letters were provoked by the “embarrassing” and much criticized Opinions 16 and 17 on accounting for pooling of interests and intangible assets.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41679387","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
An innovative accounting theorist and educator, Sorter was concerned about how accounting information could be used in financial and management decision making. He formulated an events approach to accounting that called for providing a vast array of presumably relevant information to users of financial reports to allow them as individuals to select whichever data they deemed suitable to make their own long run forecasts and their own financial and management decisions. He emphasized that valuation of the firm is a subjective endeavor, a matter of individual user perception. He served as the research director of the AICPA’s Trueblood Report (1973), which laid the foundation for the FASB’s Conceptual Framework.
{"title":"George Sorter’s Influence on Accounting Thought","authors":"R. Bloom","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2020-015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2020-015","url":null,"abstract":"An innovative accounting theorist and educator, Sorter was concerned about how accounting information could be used in financial and management decision making. He formulated an events approach to accounting that called for providing a vast array of presumably relevant information to users of financial reports to allow them as individuals to select whichever data they deemed suitable to make their own long run forecasts and their own financial and management decisions. He emphasized that valuation of the firm is a subjective endeavor, a matter of individual user perception. He served as the research director of the AICPA’s Trueblood Report (1973), which laid the foundation for the FASB’s Conceptual Framework.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47613658","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This research analyzes, via an examination of documents from a frontier fort, Fort Abercrombie, Dakota Territory, the internal controls the U.S. Army had in place in the mid-1800s. Findings include: (1) that there are controls in place that safeguard assets, encourage efficient and effective use of funds, and comply with appropriations passed by the U.S. Congress; (2) the army's control system is similar in nature to the effective control system identified by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission; and (3) the army contributed to the evolution of internal controls in business.
{"title":"Early Internal Control Practices in the United States Army and the Evolution of Internal Control Practices in Businesses","authors":"W. Bowlin","doi":"10.2308/aahj-18-017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-18-017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This research analyzes, via an examination of documents from a frontier fort, Fort Abercrombie, Dakota Territory, the internal controls the U.S. Army had in place in the mid-1800s. Findings include: (1) that there are controls in place that safeguard assets, encourage efficient and effective use of funds, and comply with appropriations passed by the U.S. Congress; (2) the army's control system is similar in nature to the effective control system identified by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission; and (3) the army contributed to the evolution of internal controls in business.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43692791","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：