会计学论文外文文献及翻译--国际会计准则第号或有负债和或有资产(可编辑)
英文会计学论文2500字_英文会计学毕业论文范文模板
英文会计学论文2500字_英文会计学毕业论文范文模板英文会计学论文2500字(一)：中外合作办学项目中英文会计学基础课程教学法创新与实践论文摘要：中外合作办学各个项目中，商学院的合作重点且热门，在商学院的课程中，开设遵循一般会计准则（GAAP）的全英文会计授课非常普遍，如何在全英文授课模式下应对常见的语言和思维问题，会计学科中常见的学习问题成为教学法创新的一个重点。
本文结合实际实践阐述全英文授课模式下的中国本科生会计学基础课程教学法创新与实践。
关键词：会计学基础课；会计本科教学；中外合作办学留学热潮以来，商科一直是留学生和家长心目中的热门选择，商业全球化大趋势下，很多学生和家长会选择“1+3”“2+2”或“3+1”这种考虑长远的项目，以此开始自己的专业学习，而此类和各国高校合作的项目里，以美国大学的商学院为例，会计学科的学习是几乎所有商学专业的学生的基础必修课。
因此，全英文授课模式下的会计学基础课程也变得尤为重要，然而，相对于其他的商学专业，会计学科尤其是会计学基础（AccountingPrinciples），财务会计学（Financial Accounting），乃至会计学专业的专业课中级会计（IntermediaryAccounting），对于学生来说是较为枯燥且考察细节的，怎样提高学生的兴趣和学习动力，高效率地学习会计类基础课程，成为中美商学院合作项目中的重要创新研究对象。
一、一般会计准则（USGAAP）下的中国本科生全英文会计学基础课程的培养目标与中国特色（一）会计知识的储备和应用基础专业知识的学习对于任何专业都是极为重要的，对于会计学来说也不例外。
会计是商业的奠基石，是信息传递的重要媒介之一。
学生学习基础会计学，掌握财务信息，绘制财务报表，能更清晰地看到整个商业的运作，不管是不是从事财务工作，都能更好的创作更多的职业价值。
（二）中国公认会计准则（PRCGAAP），一般会计准则（USGAAP）和国际财务报告准则（IFRS）的学习齐头并进中美合作办学中的全英文会计基础课程选用的一般是遵循一般会计准则（US GAAP）的会计教材，在此类教材中，也会对相关内容做出一些一般会计准则（U SGAAP）和国际财务报告准则（IFRS）的比较教学，而通过对中国公认会计准则（PRCGAAP）的补充教学，可以让学生不管是毕业之后选择不同的国家继续攻读研究生教育，还是选择外企，考取不同的会计类证书，对不同的地区或证书遵循的不同的会计准则，都可以有一个较好的了解。
国际会计准则第 37号——准备、或有负债和或有资产〉中的负债计量(征求意见稿)》简介
附件1：《〈国际会计准则第37号——准备、或有负债和或有资产〉中的负债计量（征求意见稿）》简介一、《征求意见稿》发布背景2005年6月，IASB发布了全面修订《国际会计准则第37号——准备、或有负债和或有资产》的征求意见稿（以下简称“2005征求意见稿”），旨在消除IAS37与其他国际财务报告准则（如IFRS3——企业合并、IAS39——金融工具：确认和计量）和美国公认会计原则在负债确认方面的不一致，以及对IAS37中的负债计量做出进一步明确规定。
“2005征求意见稿”建议以资产负债表日企业结清（Settle）或将负债转移(Transfer)给第三方所应支付的合理金额而非IAS37中的“最佳估计数”（Best Estimate）来计量预计负债，并在确定负债金额时，应当将所有可能结果考虑在内。
反馈意见认为，2005征求意见稿虽然在一定程度上消除了IAS37与其他IFRS及美国公认会计原则的差异，但对负债计量的规定仍不清晰。
例如，“结清”是指取消（Cancel）还是履行（Fulfil）？如果结清义务的数额与转移义务的数额不同，预计负债应当以哪个金额进行计量？为了解决负债计量问题，IASB设立了IAS37中负债计量改进项目,于2010年1月15日发布了《〈国际会计准则第37号——准备、或有负债和或有资产〉中的负债计量（征求意见稿）》（以下简称“2010征求意见稿”），征求意见截止日期原定为2010年4月12日。
由于“2010征求意见稿”中负债计量方法的改变引发了较大争议，IASB于4月中旬决定将征求意见截止日期延后至2010年5月19日。
二、《征求意见稿》的主要内容（一）计量目标“2010征求意见稿”提出负债计量的基本目标是对企业在资产负债表日如要解除义务而应合理支付的金额进行计量。
“在资产负债表日为解除义务而合理支付的金额”一般是指为履行义务所需资源的现值；对该金额的估计要考虑预期的资源流出、货币的时间价值和实际流出可能最终与预期不一致的风险。
会计准则外文文献翻译-财务会计专业
会计准那么外文文献及翻译-财务会计专业(含：英文原文及中文译文)文献出处：Buschhüter M, Striegel A. IAS 37 – Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets[M]// Kommentar Internationale Rechnungslegung IFRS. Gabler, 2021:955-974.英文原文Accounting Standard (AS) 37Contingent Liabilities and Contingent AssetsBuschhüter M, Striegel AThis International Accounting Standard was approved by the IASC Board in July 1998 and became effective for financial statements covering periods beginning on or after 1 July 1999.Introduction1. IAS 37 prescribes the accounting and disclosure for all provisions, contingent liabilities and contingent assets, except:(a) those resulting from financial instruments that are carried at fair value;(b) those resulting from executory contracts, except where the contract is onerous. Executory contracts are contracts under which neither party has performed any of its obligations or both parties have partially performed their obligations to an equal extent;(c) those arising in insurance enterprises from contracts with policyholders;(d) those covered by another International Accounting Standard. Provisions2. The Standard defines provisions as liabilities of uncertain timing or amount. A provision should be recognised when, and only when:(a) an enterprise has a present obligation (legal or constructive) as a result of a past event; (b) it is probable (i.e. more likely than not) that an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits will be required to settle the obligation;(c) a reliable estimate can be made of the amount of the obligation. The Standard notes that it is only in extremely rare cases that a reliable estimate will not be possible.3. The Standard defines a constructive obligation as an obligation that derives from an enterprise's actions where:(a) by an established pattern of past practice, published policies or a sufficiently specific current statement, the enterprise has indicated to other parties that it will accept certain responsibilities; (b) as a result, the enterprise has created a valid expectation on the part of those other parties that it will discharge those responsibilities.4. In rare cases, for example in a law suit, it may not be clear whether an enterprise has a present obligation. In these cases, a past event is deemed to give rise to a present obligation if, taking account of all available evidence, it is more likely than not that a present obligation exists at thebalance sheet date. An enterprise recognises a provision for that present obligation if the other recognition criteria described above are met. If it is more likely than not that no present obligation exists, the enterprise discloses a contingent liability, unless the possibility of an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits is remote.5. The amount recognized as a provision should be the best estimate of the expenditu required to settle the present obligation at the balance sheet date, in other words, the amount that an enterprise would rationally pay to settle the obligation at the balance sheet date or to transfer it to a third party at that time.6. The Standard requires that an enterprise should, in measuring a provision: (a) take risks and uncertainties into account. However, uncertainty does not justify the creation of excessive provisions or a deliberate overstatement of liabilities;(b) discount the provisions, where the effect of the time value of money is material, using a pre-tax discount rate (or rates) that reflect(s) current market assessments of the time value of money and those risks specific to the liability that have not been reflected in the best estimate of the expenditure. Where discounting is used, the increase in the provision due to the passage of time is recognised as an interest expense;(c) take future events, such as changes in the law and technological changes, into account where there is sufficient objective evidence thatthey will occur; and(d) not take gains from the expected disposal of assets into account, even if the expected disposal is closely linked to the event giving rise to the provision.7. An enterprise may expect reimbursement of some or all of the expenditure required to settle a provision (for example, through insurance contracts, indemnity clauses or suppliers' warranties). An enterprise should:(a) recognise a reimbursement when, and only when, it is virtually certain that reimbursement will be received if the enterprise settles the obligation. The amount recognised for the reimbursement should not exceed the amount of the provision; and(b) recognise the reimbursement as a separate asset. In the income statement, the expense relating to a provision may be presented net of the amount recognised for a reimbursement. 8. Provisions should be reviewed at each balance sheet date and adjusted reflect thecurrent best estimate. If it is no longer probable that an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits will be required to settle the obligation, the provisioshould be reversed.9. A provision should be used only for expenditures for which the provision was originally recognised.Provisions - Specific Applications10. The Standard explains how the general recognition and measurement requirements for provisions should be applied in three specific cases: future operating losses; onerous contracts; and restructurings. Contingent Liabilities11. An enterprise should not recognise a contingent liability. , unless the12. A contingent liability is disclosed, as required by paragraph 86possibility of an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits is remote.13. Where an enterprise is jointly and severally liable for an obligation, the part of tobligation that is expected to be met by other parties is treated as a contingentThe enterprise recognises a provision for the part of the obligation for which an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits is probable, except in the extremely rare circumstances where no reliable estimate can be made.14. Contingent liabilities may develop in a way not initially expected. Therefore, theare assessed continually to determine whether an outflow of resources embodying probable. If it becomes probable that an outflow of economic benefits has become future economic benefits will be required for an item previously dealt with as a contingent liability, a provision is recognised in the financial statements of the period in which the change in probability occurs (except in the extremely rare circumstances where no reliable estimate can be made).Contingent Assets15. An enterprise should not recognise a contingent asset.16. Contingent assets usually arise from unplanned or other unexpected events that give rise to the possibility of an inflow of economic benefits to the enterprise. An example is a claim that an enterprise is pursuing through legal processes, where the outcome is uncertain. 17. Contingent assets are not recognised in financial statements since this may result in the recognition of income that may never be realised. However, when the realisation of income is virtually certain, then the related asset is not a contingent asset and its recognition is appropriate. 18. A contingent asset is disclosed, as required by paragraph 89 economic benefits is probable.19. Contingent assets are assessed continually to ensure that developments are appropriately reflected in the financial statements. If it has become virtually certain that an inflow of economic benefits will arise, the asset and the related income are recognised in the financial statements of the period in which the change occurs. If an inflow of economic benefits has become probable, an enterprise discloses the contingent asset.Measurement20. The amount recognised as a provision should be the best estimate of the expenditure required to settle the present obligation at the balance sheet date.21. The best estimate of the expenditure required to settle the present obligation is the amount that an enterprise would rationally pay to settle the obligation at the balance sheet date or to transfer it to a third party at that time. It will often be impossible or prohibitively expensive to settle or transfer an obligation at the balance sheet date. However, the estimate of the amount that an enterprise would rationally pay to settle or transfer the obligation gives the best estimate of the expenditure required to settle the present obligation at the balance sheet date. 22. The estimates of outcome and financial effect are determined by the judgement of the management of the enterprise, supplemented by experience of similar transactions and, in some cases, reports from independent experts. The evidence considered23. Uncertainties surrounding the amount to be recognised as a provision are dealt with by various means according to the circumstances. Where the provision being measured involves a large population of items, the obligation is estimated by weighting all possible outcomes by their associated probabilities. The name for thistatistical method of estimation is 'expected value'. The provision will therefore be different depending on whether the probability of a loss of a given amount is, for example, 60 per cent or 90 per cent. Where there is a continuous range of possible outcomes, and each point in that range is as likely as any other, the mid-point of thrange is used. 24. Where a single obligation is beingmeasured, the individual most likely outcome may be the best estimate of the liability. However, even in such a case, the enterprise considers other possible outcomes. Where other possible outcomes are either mostly higher or mostly lower than the most likely outcome, the best estimate will be a higher or lower amount. For example, if an enterprise has to rectify a serious fault in a major plant that it has constructed for a customer, the individual most likely outcome may be for the repair to succeed at the first attempt at a cost of1,000, but a provision for a larger amount is made if there is a significant chance that further attempts will be necessary.25. The provision is measured before tax, as the tax consequences of the provision, , Income Taxes. and changes in it, are dealt with under IAS 12,Income Taxes.Risks and Uncertainties26. The risks and uncertainties that inevitably surround many events and the best estimate of a circumstances should be taken into account in reachin the best estmeate of a provision.27. Risk describes variability of outcome. A risk adjustment may increase the amount at which a liability is measured. Caution is needed in making judgements under conditions of uncertainty, so that income or assets are not overstated and expenses or liabilities are not understated. However, uncertainty does not justify the creation of excessive provisions or adeliberate overstatement of liabilities. For example, if the projected costs of a particularly adverse outcome are estimated on a prudent basis, that outcome is not then deliberately treated as more probable than is realistically the case. Care is needed to avoid duplicating adjustments for risk and uncertainty with consequent overstatement of a provision. Present Value28. Where the effect of the time value of money is material, the amount ofa provision should be the present value of the expenditures expected to be required to settle the obligation.29. The discount rate (or rates) should be a pre-tax rate (or rates) that reflect(s) current market assessments of the time value of money and the risks specific to the liability. The discount rate(s) should not reflect risks for which future cash flow estimates have been adjusted. Future Events 30. Future events that may affect the amount required to settle an obligation should be reflected in the amount of a provision where there is sufficient objective evidence that they will occur.31. Expected future events may be particularly important in measuring provisions. For example, an enterprise may believe that the cost of cleaning up a site at the end of its life will be reduced by future changes in technology. The amount recognised reflects a reasonable expectation of technically qualified, objective observers, taking account of all available evidence as to the technology that will be available at the time of theclean-up. Thus it is appropriate to include, for example, expected cost reductions associated with increased experience in applying existing technology or the expected cost of applying existing technology to a larger or more complex clean-up operation than has previously been carried out. However, an enterprise does not anticipate the new technology for cleaning up unless it is supported by development of a completel sufficient objective evidence.32. The effect of possible new legislation is taken into consideration in measuring an existing obligation when sufficient objective evidence exists that the legislation is virtually certain to beenacted. The variety of circumstances that arise in practice makes it impossible to specify a single event that will provide sufficient, objective evidence in every case. Evidence is required both of what legislation will demand and of whether it is virtually certain to be enacted and implemented in due course. In many cases sufficient objective evidence will not exist until the new legislation is enacted.Expected Disposal of Assets33. Gains from the expected disposal of assets should not be taken into account in measuring a provision.34. Gains on the expected disposal of assets are not taken into account in measuring a provision, even if the expected disposal is closely linked to the event giving rise to the provision. Instead, an enterprise recognisesgains on expected disposals of assets at the time specified by the International Accounting Standard dealing with the assets concerned. Reimbursements35. Where some or all of the expenditure required to settle a provision is expected to be reimbursed by another party, the reimbursement should be recognised when, and only when, it is virtually certain that reimbursement will be received if the enterprise settles the obligation. The reimbursement should be treated as a separate asset. The amount recognised for the reimbursement should not exceed the amount of the provision.36. In the income statement, the expense relating to a provision may be presented net of the amount recognised for a reimbursement.37. Sometimes, an enterprise is able to look to another party to pay part or all of the expenditure required to settle a provision (for example, through insurance contracts, indemnity clauses or suppliers' warranties). The other party may either reimburse amounts paid by the enterprise or pay the amounts directly.38. In most cases the enterprise will remain liable for the whole of the amount in question so that the enterprise would have to settle the full amount if the third party failed to pay for any reason. In this situation, a provision is recognised for the full amount of the liability, and a separate asset for the expected reimbursement is recognised when it is virtuallycertain that reimbursement will be received if the enterprise settles the liability.39. In some cases, the enterprise will not be liable for the costs in question if the third party fails to pay. In such a case the enterprise has no liability for those costs and they are not included in the provision.40. As noted in paragraph 29,severally liable is a contingent liability to the extent that it is expected that the obligation will be settled by the other parties.Changes in Provisions41. Provisions should be reviewed at each balance sheet date and adjusted to reflect the current best estimate. If it is no longer probable that an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits will be required to settle the obligation, the provision should be reversed.42. Where discounting is used, the carrying amount of a provision increases in each period to reflect the passage of time. This increase is recognised as borrowing cost.Use of Provisions43. A provision should be used only for expenditures for which the provision was originally recognised.44. Only expenditures that relate to the original provision are set against it. Setting expenditures against a provision that was originally recognised for another purpose would conceal the impact of two different events.Future Operating Losses45. Provisions should not be recognised for future operating losses.46. Future operating losses do not meet the definition of a liability in paragraph 10.the general recognition criteria set out for provisions in paragraph 1447. An expectation of future operating losses is an indication that certain assets of the operation may be impaired. An enterprise tests these assets for impairment under IAS 36, Impairment of Assets.Onerous Contracts48. If an enterprise has a contract that is onerous, the present obligation under the contract should be recognised and measured as a provision. 49. Many contracts (for example, some routine purchase orders) can be cancelled without paying compensation to the other party, and therefore there is no obligation. Other contracts establish both rights and obligations for each of the contracting parties. Where events make such a contract onerous, the contract falls within the scope of this Standard and a liability exists which is recognised. Executory contracts that are not onerous fall outside the scope of this Standard. 50. This Standard defines an onerous contract as a contract in which the unavoidable costs of meeting the obligations under the contract exceed the economic benefits expected to be received under it. The unavoidable costs under a contract reflect the least net cost of exiting from the contract, which is the lower ofthe cost of fulfilling it and any compensation or penalties arising from failure to fulfil it.51. Before a separate provision for an onerous contract is established, an enterprise recognises any impairment loss that has occurred on assets dedicated to that contract(see IAS 36, Impairment of Assets). Restructuring52. The following are examples of events that may fall under the definition of restructuring: (a) sale or termination of a line of business; (b) the closure of business locations in a country or region or the relocation of business activities from one country or region to another; (c) changes in management structure, for example, eliminating a layer of management; (d) fundamental reorganisations that have a material effect on the nature and focus of the enterprise's operations.53. A provision for restructuring costs is recognised only when the general recognition are met. Paragraphs 72-83 set out how criteria for provisions set out in paragraph 14the general recognition criteria apply to restructurings.54. A constructive obligation to restructure arises only when an enterprise:(a) has a detailed formal plan for the restructuring identifying at least: (i) the business or part of a business concerned;(ii) the principal locations affected;(iii) the location, function, and approximate number of employees whowill be compensated for terminating their services;(iv) the expenditures that will be undertaken;(v) when the plan will be implemented;(b) has raised a valid expectation in those affected that it will carry out the restructuring by starting to implement that plan or announcing its main features to those affected by it. . Evidence that an enterprise has started to implement a restructuring plan would be provided, 55for example, by dismantling plant or selling assets or by the public announcement of the main features of the plan. A public announcement of a detailed plan to restructure constitutes a constructive obligation to restructure only if it is made in such a way and in sufficient detail (i.e. setting out the main features of the plan) that it gives rise to valid expectations in other parties such as customers, suppliers and employees (or their representatives) that the enterprise will carry out the restructuring.56. For a plan to be sufficient to give rise to a constructive obligation when communicated to those affected by it, its implementation needs to be planned to begin as soon as possible and to be completed in a timeframe that makes significant changes to the plan unlikely. If it is expected that there will be a long delay before the restructuring begins or that the restructuring will take an unreasonably long time, it is unlikely that the plan will raise a valid expectation on the part of others that theenterprise is at present committed to restructuring, because the timeframe allows opportunities for the enterprise to change its plans.57. A management or board decision to restructure taken before the balance sheet date does not give rise to a constructive obligation at the balance sheet date unless the enterprise has, before the balance sheet date:(a) started to implement the restructuring plan;(b) announced the main features of the restructuring plan to those affected by it in a sufficiently specific manner to raise a valid expectation in them that the enterprise will carry out the restructuring. In some cases, an enterprise starts to implement a restructuring plan, or announces its main features to those affected, only after the balance sheet date. Disclosure may be , Events After the Balance Sheet Date, if the restructuring is of required under IAS 10 such importance that its non-disclosure would affect the ability of the users of the financial statements to make proper evaluations and decisions.58. Although a constructive obligation is not created solely by a management decision, an obligation may result from other earlier events together with such a decision. For example, negotiations with employee representatives for termination payments, or with purchasers for the sale of an operation, may have been concluded subject only to board approval. Once that approval has been obtained and communicated to the other parties, the enterprise has a constructive obligation to restructure, if theconditions of paragraph 72 are met.. 59. In some countries, the ultimate authority is vested in a board whose membership gement (e.g. employees) includes representatives of interests other than those of managment.or notification to such representatives may be necessary before the board decision is taken. Because a decision by such a board involves communication to these representatives, it may result in a constructive obligation to restructure.60. No obligation arises for the sale of an operation until the enterprise is committed to the sale, i.e. there is a binding sale agreement.61. Even when an enterprise has taken a decision to sell an operation and announced that decision publicly, it cannot be committed to the sale until a purchaser has been identified and there is a binding sale agreement. Until there is a binding sale agreement, the enterprise will be able to change its mind and indeed will have to take another course of action if a purchaser cannot be found on acceptable terms. When the sale of an operation is envisaged as part of a restructuring, the assets of the operation , Impairment of Assets. When a sale is only are reviewed for impairme-ent under IAS 36part of a restructuring, a constructive obligation can arise for the other parts of the restructuring before a binding sale agreement exists.62. A restructuring provision should include only the direct expenditures arising form the restrict-uring,which are those that are both:(a) necessarily entailed by the restructuring; and(b) not associated with the ongoing activities of the enterprise.63. A restructuring provision does not include such costs as:(a) retraining or relocating continuing staff;(b) marketing; or(c) investment in new systems and distribution networks.These expenditures relate to the future conduct of the business and are not liabilities for restructuring at the balance sheet date. Such expenditures are recognised on the same basis as if they arose independently of a restructuring.64. Identifiable future operating losses up to the date of a restructuring are not included in a provision, unless they relate to an onerous contract as defined in paragraph 10. , gains on the expected disposal of assets are not taken65. As required by paragraph 51into account in measuring a restructuring provision, even if the sale of assets is envisaged as part of the restructuring.Disclosure66. For each class of provision, an enterprise should disclose:(a) the carrying amount at the beginning and end of the period;(b) additional provisions made in the period, including increases toexisting provisions; (c) amounts used (i.e. incurred and charged against the provision) during the period; (d) unused amounts reversed during the period; and(e) the increase during the period in the discounted amount arising from the passage of time and the effect of any change in the discount rate. Comparative information is not required67. An enterprise should disclose the following for each class of provision:(a) a brief description of the nature of the obligation and the expected timing of any resulting outflows of economic benefits;(b) an indication of the uncertainties about the amount or timing of those outflows. Where necessary to provide adequate information, an enterprise should disclose the major assumptions made concerning future events, as addressed in paragraph 48(c) the amount of any expected reimbursement, stating the amount of any asset that has been recognised for that expected reimbursement.68. Unless the possibility of any outflow in settlement is remote, an enterprise should disclose for each class of contingent liability at the balance sheet date a brief description of the nature of the contingent liability and, where practicable:;(a) an estimate of its financial effect, measured under paragraphs 36(b) an indication of the uncertainties relating to the amount or timing of any outflow; (c) the possibility of any reimbursement.69. In determining which provisions or contingent liabilities may be aggregated to form a class, it is necessary to consider whether the nature of the items is sufficiently similar for a single statement about them to fulfil the requirements of paragraphs 85(a)and (b) and 86(a) and (b). Thus, it may be appropriate to treat as a single class of provision amounts relating to warranties of different products, but it would not be appropriate to treat as a single class amounts relating to normal warranties and amounts that are subject to legal proceedings.70. Where a provision and a contingent liability arise from the same set of -86 in a circumstances, an enterprise makes the disclosures required by paragraphs 84 that shows the link between the provision and the contingent liability.71. Where an inflow of economic benefits is probable, an enterprise should disclose a brief description of the nature of the contingent assets at the balance sheet date, and, where practicable, an estimate of their financial effect, measured using the principles set out for provisions in paragraphs 3672. It is important that disclosures for contingent assets avoid giving misleading ndications of the likelihood of income arising.73 In extremely rare cases, disclosure of some or all of the information required by paragraphs 84-89 can be expected to prejudice seriously the position of the enterprise a dispute with other parties on the subject matterof the provision, contingent or contingent asset. In such cases, an enterprise need not disclose the information, but should disclose the general nature of the dispute, together with the fact that, and reason why, the information has not been disclosed. Transitional Provisions74. The effect of adopting this Standard on its effective date (or earlier) should be reported as an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings for the period in which the Standard is first adopted. Enterprises are encouraged, but not required, to adjust the opening balance of retained earnings for the earliest period presented and to restate comparative information. If comparative information is not restated, this fact should be disclosed. , Net Profit or Loss for the75. The Standard requires a different treatment from IAS 8requires Period, Fundamental Errors and Changes in Accounting Policies. IAS 8comparative information to be restated (benchmark treatment) or additional pro forma comparative information on a restated basis to be disclosed (allowed alternative reatment) unless it is impracticable to do so.。
会计专业财务会计中英文对照外文翻译文献
(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)中英文对照外文翻译附件：外文翻译译文战略财务会计在中小企业摘要：随着社会经济的发展和科学技术的进步,中国的企业在一个充满机会和危险的阶段。
介绍了安全会计的含义和意义战略财务会计中存在的问题,阐述了财务策略进行小中型企业一起,最后提出了一些对策和原因。
关键词：中小企业的战略财务会计、问题、对策一个企业的不确定性的金融环境其财务活动充满风险。
除了机会,有许多的危险从时间,以时间,其财务会计。
因此,它已经成为了成功的关键一个企业的财务会计是否能跟踪的趋势变化什么是有用的吸收。
应当拒绝接受什么是有害的。
战略会计思想是非常重要的在企业的财务会计,因为我们必须努力去分析和把握一般环境和发展一个企业的发展趋势,从而提高适应能力、可变性和适用性的金融中心会计不确定环境。
目前,中小企业在100年通过了工商登记、以企业总数的90%。
因此,其战略财务会计是特别重要的,这也是本论文的主题。
1 简介战略性的财务会计是财务会计理论,根据该融资应该的在最适当的方式进行,采集到的资本必须利用和会计的最有效的方式虽然企业和决策和利润分配应该最合理。
根据其内涵,总结三个主要内容的战略财务会计,包括融资策略,投资战略和利润分配决策策略。
详情如下:融资策略高度发达的现代企业具有的销售急剧增长。
当面对这样一种局势,企业倾向于有很大的要求从股票和应收账款是资本的提升。
更大的为销售增长的张力,但更大的资本要求。
因此,在融资策略都具有十分重要的意义战略会计财务。
融资策略的功能在于明确的指导方针融资、铺设融资目标下,建立整体规模、融资渠道和方法,安排战略资本结构优化方案,从各方面对此作了相应的对策,以达到融资目标,最后预测和收集的大量资金的企业的需要。
投资策略为核心的战略财务会计,这种策略决定一个企业只能分配它的首都资源合理而有效的方法。
投资策略包括确认投资固定资产的方向、公司规模和资本规模、投资选择相关的外部扩张或内部扩张,改革旧的产品或开发新的、独立或联合操作,自有资金投资决定或贷款之间的百分比固定资产、流动资产、投资策略和风险和那些在通货膨胀。
会计学财务报表中英文对照外文翻译文献
会计学财务报表中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)译文：中美财务报表的区别(1)财务报告内容构成上的区别1)美国的财务报告包括三个基本的财务报表，除此之外，典型的美国大公司财务报告还包括以下成分：股东权益、收益与综合收益、管理报告、独立审计报告、选取的5-10年数据的管理讨论与分析以及选取的季度数据。
2)我国财务报告不注重其解释，而美国在财务报告的内容、方法、多样性上都比较充分。
中国的评价部分包括会计报表和财务报表，财务报表是最主要的报表，它包括前述各项与账面不符的描述、财会政策与变化、财会评估的变化、会计差错等问题，资产负债表日期，关联方关系和交易活动等等，揭示方法是注意底部和旁注。
美国的财务范围在内容上比财务报表更加丰富，包括会计政策、技巧、添加特定项目的报告, 报告格式很难反映内容和商业环境等等，对违反一致性、可比性原则问题，评论也需要披露的，但也揭示了许多方面，比如旁注、底注、括号内、补充声明、时间表和信息分析报告。
(2)财务报表格式上的比较1)从资产负债表的格式来看，美国的资产负债表有账户类型和报告样式两项描述，而我国是使用固定的账户类型。
另外，我们的资产负债表在项目的使用上过于标准化，不能够很好的反映出特殊的商业项目或者不适用于特殊类型的企业。
而美国的资产负债表项目是多样化的，除此之外，财务会计准则也是建立在资产负债表中资产所有者投资和支出两项要素基础上的，这一点也是中国的财会准则中没有的。
2)从损益表格式的角度来看，美国采用的是多步式，损益表项目分为两部分，营业利润和非营业利润，但是意义不同。
我国的营业利润在范围上比美国的小，例如投资收益在美国是归类为营业利润的而在我国则不属于营业利润。
另外，我国的损益表项目较美国的更加规范和严格，美国校准损益表仅仅依赖于类别和项目。
报告收可以与销售收入及其他收入相联系，也可以和利息收益、租赁收入和单项投资收益相联系；在成本方面，并不是严格的划分为管理成本、财务成本、和市场成本，并且经常性销售费用、综合管理费用以及利息费用、净利息收益都要分别折旧。
2024年会计论文外文参考文献
[18] 王斌，李苹莉. 关于企业预算目标确定及其分解的理论分析[J]. 会计研究. 2001(08)
[19] 《管理会计应用与发展的典型案例研究》课题组，林斌，刘运国，谭光明，张玉虎. 作业成本法在我国铁路运输企业应用的案例研究[J]. 会计研究. 2001(02)
[6] 余绪缨. 关于培养高层次管理会计人才的认识与实践[J]. 财会月刊. 2007(22)
[7] 余绪缨. 管理会计学科建设的方向及其相关理论的新认识[J]. 财会通讯(综合版). 2007(02)
[8] 于增彪，王竞达，袁光华. 中国管理会计的未来发展：研究方法、热点实务和人才培养[J]. 首都经济贸易大学学报. 2006(01)
2024年会计论文外文参考文献
会计论文外文参考文献1
[1]徐静.我国企业社会责任会计信息披露探析[J].企业导报.2012(15) :22-25.
[2]张明霞.李云鹏.企业社会责任会计信息披露问题研究[J].经济研究导刊.2011(20)：40-43.
[3] 路秀平.任会来.我国社会责任会计信息披露模式现实选择 [J]. 会计之友 (上旬刊).2012(12)：89-92.
[20] 胡玉明. 21世纪管理会计主题的转变--从企业价值增值到企业核心能力培植[J]. 外国经济与管理. 2001(01)
本文来源：网络收集与整理，如有侵权，请联系作者删除，谢谢！
[4]林斌，饶静.上市公司为什么自愿披露内部控制鉴证报告.一基于信号传递理论的实证研宄[J].会计研究，2009 (2)： 45-52.
国际会计准则中英文对照外文翻译文献
中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)译文:译文（一）世界贸易的飞速发展和国际资本的快速流动将世界经济带入了全球化时代。
在这个时代, 任何一个国家要脱离世界贸易市场和资本市场谋求自身发展是非常困难的。
会计作为国际通用的商业语言, 在经济全球化过程中扮演着越来越重要的角色, 市场参与者也对其提出越来越高的要求。
随着市场经济体制的逐步建立和完善，有些国家加入世贸组织后国际化进程的加快，市场开放程度的进一步增强，市场经济发育过程中不可避免的各种财务问题的出现，迫切需要完善的会计准则加以规范。
然而，在会计准则制定过程中，有必要认真思考理清会计准则的概念，使制定的会计准则规范准确、方便操作、经济实用。
由于各国家的历史、环境、经济发展等方面的不同,导致目前世界所使用的会计准则在很多方面都存在着差异,这使得各国家之间的会计信息缺乏可比性,本国信息为外国家信息使用者所理解的成本较高,在很大程度上阻碍了世界国家间资本的自由流动。
近年来,许多国家的会计管理部门和国家性的会计、经济组织都致力于会计准则的思考和研究,力求制定出一套适于各个不同国家和经济环境下的规范一致的会计准则,以增强会计信息的可比性,减少国家各之间经济交往中信息转换的成本。
译文（二）会计准则就是会计管理活动所依据的原则, 会计准则总是以一定的社会经济背景为其存在基础, 也总是反映不同社会经济制度、法律制度以及人们习惯的某些特征, 因而不同国家的会计准则各有不同特点。
但是会计准则毕竟是经济发展对会计规范提出的客观要求。
它与社会经济发展水平和会计管理的基本要求是相适应的,因而,每个国家的会计准则必然具有某些共性:1. 规范性每个企业有着变化多端的经济业务,而不同行业的企业又有各自的特殊性。
而有了会计准则,会计人员在进行会计核算时就有了一个共同遵循的标准,各行各业的会计工作可在同一标准的基础上进行,从而使会计行为达到规范化,使得会计人员提供的会计信息具有广泛的一致性和可比性,大大提高了会计信息的质量。
会计学中英文对照外文翻译文献
(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)中英文资料外文翻译文献Title:Future of SME finance（Background – the environment for SME finance has changedFuture economic recovery will depend on the possibility of Crafts, Trades and SMEs to exploit their potential for growth and employment creation.SMEs make a major contribution to growth and employment in the EU and are at the heart of the Lisbon Strategy, whose main objective is to turn Europe into the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world. However, the ability of SMEs to grow depends highly on their potential to invest in restructuring, innovation and qualification. All of these investments need capital and thereforeaccess to finance.Against this background the consistently repeated complaint of SMEs about their problems regarding access to finance is a highly relevant constraint that endangers the economic recovery of Europe.Changes in the finance sector influence the behavior of credit institutes towards Crafts, Trades and SMEs. Recent and ongoing developments in the banking sector add to the concerns of SMEs and will further endanger their access to finance. The main changes in the banking sector which influence SME finance are:•Globalization and internationalization have increased the competition and the profit orientation in the sector;•worsening of the economic situations in some institutes (burst of the ITC bubble, insolvencies) strengthen the focus on profitability further;•Mergers and restructuring created larger structures and many local branches, which had direct and personalized contacts with small enterprises, were closed;•up-coming implementation of new capital adequacy rules (Basel II) will also change SME business of the credit sector and will increase its administrative costs;•Stricter interpretation of State-Aide Rules by the European Commission eliminates the support of banks by public guarantees; many of the effected banks are very active in SME finance.All these changes result in a higher sensitivity for risks and profits in the finance sector.The changes in the finance sector affect the accessibility of SMEs to finance.Higher risk awareness in the credit sector, a stronger focus on profitability and the ongoing restructuring in the finance sector change the framework for SME finance and influence the accessibility of SMEs to finance. The most important changes are: •In order to make the higher risk awareness operational, the credit sector introduces new rating systems and instruments for credit scoring;•Risk assessment of SMEs by banks will force the enterprises to present more and better quality information on their businesses;•Banks will try to pass through their additional costs for implementing and running the new capital regulations (Basel II) to their business clients;•due to the increase of competition on interest rates, the bank sector demands more and higher fees for its services (administration of accounts, payments systems,etc.), which are not only additional costs for SMEs but also limit their liquidity;•Small enterprises will lose their personal relationship with decision-makers in local branches –the credit application process will become more formal and anonymous and will probably lose longer;•the credit sector will lose more and more its “public function” to provide access to finance for a wide range of economic actors, which it has in a number of countries, in order to support and facilitate economic growth; the profitability of lending becomes the main focus of private credit institutions.All of these developments will make access to finance for SMEs even more difficult and / or will increase the cost of external finance. Business start-ups and SMEs, which want to enter new markets, may especially suffer from shortages regarding finance. A European Code of Conduct between Banks and SMEs would have allowed at least more transparency in the relations between Banks and SMEs and UEAPME regrets that the bank sector was not able to agree on such a commitment.Towards an encompassing policy approach to improve the access of Crafts, Trades and SMEs to financeAll analyses show that credits and loans will stay the main source of finance for the SME sector in Europe. Access to finance was always a main concern for SMEs, but the recent developments in the finance sector worsen the situation even more. Shortage of finance is already a relevant factor, which hinders economic recovery in Europe. Many SMEs are not able to finance their needs for investment.Therefore, UEAPME expects the new European Commission and the new European Parliament to strengthen their efforts to improve the framework conditions for SME finance. Europe’s Crafts, Trades and SMEs ask for an encompassing policy approach, which includes not only the conditions for SMEs’ access to lending, bu t will also strengthen their capacity for internal finance and their access to external risk capital.From UEAPME’s point of view such an encompassing approach should be based on three guiding principles:•Risk-sharing between private investors, financial institutes, SMEs and public sector;•Increase of transparency of SMEs towards their external investors and lenders;•improving the regulatory environment for SME finance.Based on these principles and against the background of the changing environment for SME finance, UEAPME proposes policy measures in the following areas:1. New Capital Requirement Directive: SME friendly implementation of Basel IIDue to intensive lobbying activities, UEAPME, together with other Business Associations in Europe, has achieved some improvements in favour of SMEs regarding the new Basel Agreement on regulatory capital (Basel II). The final agreement from the Basel Committee contains a much more realistic approach toward the real risk situation of SME lending for the finance market and will allow the necessary room for adaptations, which respect the different regional traditions and institutional structures.However, the new regulatory system will influence the relations between Banks and SMEs and it will depend very much on the way it will be implemented into European law, whether Basel II becomes burdensome for SMEs and if it will reduce access to finance for them.The new Capital Accord form the Basel Committee gives the financial market authorities and herewith the European Institutions, a lot of flexibility. In about 70 areas they have room to adapt the Accord to their specific needs when implementing it into EU law. Some of them will have important effects on the costs and the accessibility of finance for SMEs.UEAPME expects therefore from the new European Commission and the new European Parliament:•The implementation of the new Capital Requirement Directive will be costly for the Finance Sector (up to 30 Billion Euro till 2006) and its clients will have to pay for it. Therefore, the implementation – especially for smaller banks, which are often very active in SME finance –has to be carried out with as little administrative burdensome as possible (reporting obligations, statistics, etc.).•The European Regulators must recognize traditional instruments for collaterals (guarantees, etc.) as far as possible.•The European Commission and later the Member States should take over the recommendations from the European Parliament with regard to granularity, access to retail portfolio, maturity, partial use, adaptation of thresholds, etc., which will easethe burden on SME finance.2. SMEs need transparent rating proceduresDue to higher risk awareness of the finance sector and the needs of Basel II, many SMEs will be confronted for the first time with internal rating procedures or credit scoring systems by their banks. The bank will require more and better quality information from their clients and will assess them in a new way. Both up-coming developments are already causing increasing uncertainty amongst SMEs.In order to reduce this uncertainty and to allow SMEs to understand the principles of the new risk assessment, UEAPME demands transparent rating procedures –rating procedures may not become a “Black Box” for SMEs:•The bank should communicate the relevant criteria affecting the rating of SMEs.•The bank should inform SMEs about its assessment in order to allow SMEs to improve.The negotiations on a European Code of Conduct between Banks and SMEs , which would have included a self-commitment for transparent rating procedures by Banks, failed. Therefore, UEAPME expects from the new European Commission and the new European Parliament support for:•binding rules in the framework of the new Capital Adequacy Directive, which ensure the transparency of rating procedures and credit scoring systems for SMEs;•Elaboration of national Codes of Conduct in order to improve the relations between Banks and SMEs and to support the adaptation of SMEs to the new financial environment.3. SMEs need an extension of credit guarantee systems with a special focus on Micro-LendingBusiness start-ups, the transfer of businesses and innovative fast growth SMEs also depended in the past very often on public support to get access to finance. Increasing risk awareness by banks and the stricter interpretation of State Aid Rules will further increase the need for public support.Already now, there are credit guarantee schemes in many countries on the limit of their capacity and too many investment projects cannot be realized by SMEs.Experiences show that Public money, spent for supporting credit guaranteessystems, is a very efficient instrument and has a much higher multiplying effect than other instruments. One Euro form the European Investment Funds can stimulate 30 Euro investments in SMEs (for venture capital funds the relation is only 1:2).Therefore, UEAPME expects the new European Commission and the new European Parliament to support:•The extension of funds for national credit guarantees schemes in the framework of the new Multi-Annual Programmed for Enterprises;•The development of new instruments for securitizations of SME portfolios;•The recognition of existing and well functioning credit guarantees schemes as collateral;•More flexibility within the European Instruments, because of national differences in the situation of SME finance;•The development of credit guarantees schemes in the new Member States;•The development of an SBIC-like scheme in the Member States to close the equity gap (0.2 – 2.5 Mio Euro, according to the expert meeting on PACE on April 27 in Luxemburg).•the development of a financial support scheme to encourage the internalizations of SMEs (currently there is no scheme available at EU level: termination of JOP, fading out of JEV).4. SMEs need company and income taxation systems, which strengthen their capacity for self-financingMany EU Member States have company and income taxation systems with negative incentives to build-up capital within the company by re-investing their profits. This is especially true for companies, which have to pay income taxes. Already in the past tax-regimes was one of the reasons for the higher dependence of Europe’s SMEs on bank lending. In future, the result of rating will also d epend on the amount of capital in the company; the high dependence on lending will influence the access to lending. This is a vicious cycle, which has to be broken.Even though company and income taxation falls under the competence of Member States, UEAPME asks the new European Commission and the new European Parliament to publicly support tax-reforms, which will strengthen the capacity of Crafts, Trades and SME for self-financing. Thereby, a special focus on non-corporate companies is needed.5. Risk Capital – equity financingExternal equity financing does not have a real tradition in the SME sector. On the one hand, small enterprises and family business in general have traditionally not been very open towards external equity financing and are not used to informing transparently about their business.On the other hand, many investors of venture capital and similar forms of equity finance are very reluctant regarding investing their funds in smaller companies, which is more costly than investing bigger amounts in larger companies. Furthermore it is much more difficult to set out of such investments in smaller companies.Even though equity financing will never become the main source of financing for SMEs, it is an important instrument for highly innovative start-ups and fast growing companies and it has therefore to be further developed. UEAPME sees three pillars for such an approach where policy support is needed:Availability of venture capital•The Member States should review their taxation systems in order to create incentives to invest private money in all forms of venture capital.•Guarantee instruments for equity financing should be further developed.Improve the conditions for investing venture capital into SMEs•The development of secondary markets for venture capital investments in SMEs should be supported.•Accounting Standards for SMEs should be revised in order to ease transparent exchange of information between investor and owner-manager.Owner-managers must become more aware about the need for transparency towards investors•SME owners will have to realise that in future access to external finance (venture capital or lending) will depend much more on a transparent and open exchange of information about the situation and the perspectives of their companies.•In order to fulfil the new needs for transparency, SMEs will have to use new information instruments (business plans, financial reporting, etc.) and new management instruments (risk-management, financial management, etc.).外文资料翻译题目：未来的中小企业融资背景：中小企业融资已经改变未来的经济复苏将取决于能否工艺品，贸易和中小企业利用其潜在的增长和创造就业。
国际会计准则--或有事项和资产负债表
国际会计准则--或有事项和资产负债表国际会计准则第1O号或有事项和资产负债表日以后发生的事项（1978年10月公布，1994年11月格式重排）范围1．本号准则适用于或有事项和资产负债表日以后发生的事项的会计处理和揭示。
2．下列事项，可能产生或有事项，但是不包括在本号准则的范围之内：（1）人寿保险公司因签发保险单而产生的负债；（2）退休金计划下的付款责任（见国际会计准则第19号“退休金费用”）；（3）因长期租赁合同产生的承诺（见国际会计准则第17号“租赁会计”）；（4）所得税（见国际会计准则第12号“所得税会计”）。
定义3．本号准则所使用的下列术语，具有特定的含义：或有事项，是指这样的一种状况或情况，其最终结果是收益或亏损，并且只有在一项或若干项不确定的未来事项发生或不发生时才能予以证实。
资产负债表以后发生的事项，是指那些在资产负债表日和财务报表批准公布日之间发生的有利和不利的事项，可以分为以下两类事项：（1）为资产负债表日存在的状况提供进一步证据的事项；（2）能够说明资产负债表日以后发生的状况的事项。
或有事项4．本号准则所使用的或有事项一词，仅限于在资产负债表日存在的状况或情况，并且其财务影响将由可能发生或可能不发生的未来事项所决定。
许多这样的状况或情况，根据权责发生制的基本会计概念，在财务报表上反映为应计项目。
5．在财务报表中，对企业正在进行和经常发生的许多活动需要作出估计。
虽然确定财务报表所呈报的金额的程序是相似的，但估计所涉及的事实本身并不产生那种作为或有事项的特点的不确定性。
例如，采用估计的使用年限来确定折旧这一事实，并不使折旧成为或有事项。
资产使用年限的最后终止，并不是不确定的。
另外，因接受劳务而产生的付款金额，也不是第3段所定义的或有事项，尽管该金额可能是估计的，但发生这些债务的事实却是确定无疑的。
6．与未来事项有关的不确定性可用结果的一个变动范围来表。
这种变动范围可以表现为用数字表示的概率，但在大多数情况下，其准确程度不能以现有资料加以证明。
【会计】会计学英文文献
【关键字】会计FAIR V ALUE ACCOUNTING AND SUB-PRIMEMichael r. YoungINTRODUCTIONA proposition creeping its way into the discussion about the financial market dislocations arising fromsub-prime loans is that it’s really our accounting system that is to blame. The argument is that new accounting rules are requiring writedowns that actually exaggerate losses and that financial markets are thereby being driven to levels that are artificially low. A consequence, as summarized by The Wall Street Journal, is a “rebellion” by those who are “blaming accounting rules” for exaggerated losses a nd calling for new rules that would, in essence, dampen financial market volatility.That is certainly one way of looking at it. And, no doubt, the billions in writedowns of mortgage-backed instruments and accompanying volatility in financial markets since this past summer have been no fun. Still, we should be slow to blame the accountants or new accounting standards for the sub-prime meltdown. To the contrary, some may be expected to point out that the aftermath of the sub-prime difficulties has put to the test a financial reporting system that has responded as it should.BEHIND THE SCENES: FAS 157For those inclined to blame the accounting, the real culprit in the sub-prime mess is a fairly new standard, “Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. or “FAS 157.” Issued in September 2006 and scheduled to take effect this past November, GAS 157 speaks to the valuation of certain kinds of assets, namely assets that should be recorded at fair value. Applicable to, among other things, financial instruments of the sort relevant to sub-prime loans, the standard specifies that such assets are to be recorded at the price for which they could be sold, that is, “the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.” Among accountants, this concept is referred to in shorthand as the “exit price.”In speaking to the proper valuation of assets, FAS 157 is the latest contribution to one of the oldest debates in accounting. That is whether assets are better recorded at “cost” or at their “fair”（or market）value. The issue is one that has been vigorously debated for years, one of the reasons being that each side has had excellent argumen ts to support its position. Advocates of the “cost” approach assert that cost is the best, most reliable, and most objective indication of “fair value” at the time a transaction takes place.The existence of an invoice or a contract typically makes the evidence supporting the asset value all but irrefutable. Making the valuation even more reliable, such concrete evidence can be independently examined by an outside auditor of the financial statements. Accordingly, under the cost approach, there is comparatively little need for judgment and, therefore, little opportunity for blunders or the manipulation of financial results.But that is only one side of the argument. The other is that historical cost, while objectively reliable atthe moment a transaction takes place, can become outdated fairly quickly. That is particularly so for assets that are traded in active markets – such as financial instruments. What is the logic, the fair value adherents assert, of keeping a share of stock on the books at its purchase price when the price has increased or decreased in market trading thereafter? More broadly, insistence upon cost as the ultimate measure of asset value can lead to reported results that make no sense. A FASB member made the point at one meeting through the example of an office building. Under GAAP, the building would be recorded at cost and then, over the succeeding quarters and years, depreciated. The result would be that, for financial reporting purposes, its reported value would go down. At the same time, the economic reality may be that its value was actually increasing. Hence, the “cost” approach would have two results. The first is that the information would be objectively reliable. The second is that it would be completely wrong.The present détente in this debate is an approach to accounting that seeks to acknowledge the good points made by each side. The approach is to require certain assets to be recorded at fair value and other assets generally to be recorded at cost. Among those assets to be recorded at fair value are certain kinds of financial instruments, the thinking being that financial instruments are often traded in active markets with an observable price. It is hardly an insurmountable challenge, the logic goes, to look up the price each time the financial statements are updated.While that may be true in many or most cases, though, it is not true all the time, and then things start to get a little tricky. FAS 157 acknowledges that there may be instances in which assets will have to be recorded at fair value but in which an observable market price in an active market does not exist. FAS 157 deals with this through the adoption of an approach that focuses attention on the methods used to estimate fair value. Basically, FAS 157 puts in pla ce a “fair value hierarchy” that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques according to their objectivity and observability. At the top are “Level 1 inputs,” which are defined as “quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or li abilities that the reporting entity has the ability to access at the measurement date.” Next down in the hierarchy are “Level 2 inputs,” which are inputs “other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability” such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active. Lowest on the list are “Level 3 inputs” which are simply “unobservable,” i.e., there really are no active markets. Under Level 3, inputs are to be “developed based on the best information available in the circumstances.” Often that will mean that, in the absence of an active market, resort will be had to models that seek to figure out what the price to be received in a hypothetical sale of the asset would be.When a draft of FAS 157 was circulated to the financial community for public comment, not everyone was enthusiastic about its three-level approach, and thoughtful commentators were understandably concerned about the reliability of hypothetical values that would result from the use of Level 3 inputs. Still, the standard seemed to be the best available resolution to a knotty problem. Some large financial institutions even adopted FAS 157 earlier than required. As they implemented its approach, overall thingsseemed to go okay. Among those areas where FAS 157 seemed to be working satisfactorily was financial instruments related to subprime loans.MARKET DISLOCATIONSThat changed this past summer. We’re all too familiar with what happened. Two Bear Stearns funds ran into problems, and the result was increasing financial community uncertainty about the value of mortgage-backed financial instruments, particularly collateralized debt obligations or “CDOs.” As investors tried to delve into the details of the value of CDO assets and the reliability of their cash flows, the extraordinary complexity of the instruments provided a significant impediment to insight into the underlying financial data. Financial markets can deal with bad news, but an information vacuum is another thing altogether. The problem with CDOs was not disappointing value. The problem was that the value of the underlying assets could not be figured out.As a result, the markets seized. In other words, everyone got so nervous that active trading of many instruments all but stopped. Largely unnoticed behind the scenes was the fact that, with the disappearance of active markets, much CDO valuation was no longer eligible for “Level treatment under FAS 157. For that matter, often there was not even sufficient analogous market activity so that CDOs could be valued under Level 2. So financial officers and accountants quickly found themselves needing to cope with Level 3. That meant they were faced with the need to resort to financial models that would somehow recreate what the price received in a hypothetical sale would be.But they quickly encountered a problem. Because CDOs to that point had been valued based on Level 1, established models for valuing the instruments at Level 3 were not in place. Just as all this was happening, moreover, another well intended aspect of our financial reporting system kicked in: the desire to report fast-breaking financial developments to investors quickly. For those with financial reporting responsibility, therefore, the circumstances were exceedingly uncharitable. To their credit, they wanted to get updated value information on their sub-prime instruments to financial markets fast. But historical approaches to valuation were suddenly unavailable.What to do? Come up with the best possible models under Level 3 as the circumstances would allow. But that was no easy feat. Models valuing sub-prime investments might conceivably want to take into account such imponderables as the future of housing prices, the future of interest rates, and how homeowners could be expected to react to such things. One way or another, well meaning preparers found a way to come up with their best estimates and report them to investors. Not all investors seemed to appreciate, though, the extent to which the reported declines in value, presented numerically and thereby suggesting a level of precision that numerical presentation often implies, were necessarily based upon financial models that relied upon predictions about an inherently unknowable future.It is hardly surprising, therefore, that in some instances asset values had to be revised either because models were being adjusted or because predictions were being updated as things seemed to get worse. Tosome, particularly to those who never liked fair value accounting to begin with, this was all evidence that fair value accounting is a folly. According to one managing director at a risk research firm, “All this volatility we now have in reporting and disclosure, it’s just absolute madness.”The frustration is understandable. But defenders of fair value accounting would point out that keeping financial assets on the books at levels well above that for which they could be sold is not exactly a model of transparency in financial reporting. The point is that it is a function of financial reporting to tell people what is going on. And while the news has not been particularly pleasant for anyone, one benefit to fair value accounting –and FAS particular –is that it has given outside investors real-time insight into market gyrations of the sort that, under old accounting regimes, only insiders could see. True, trying to deal with those gyrations can be difficult and the consequences are not always desirable. But that is just another way of saying that ignorance is bliss.BUT WHAT ABOUT LITIGATION ?Whatever one thinks of fair value accounting, though, one feature of the sub-prime aftermath has the potential to be completely counterproductive. It is the extent to which our system of litigation and regulatory oversight results in unjustified assertions of “fraud” against those who were doing their best under circumstances that were exceedingly difficult.In this regard, the aftermath of the sub-prime mess may be a harbinger of things to come. For the very aspects of fair value accounting that make it susceptible to second guessing – the absence of concrete data, the need for judgment, the importance of predictions – are likely to increasingly become more prominent features of financial reporting generally. That is particularly so as the seeks to evolve beyond a preoccupation with detailed rules into a more principles-based system.At issue in the aftermath of the sub-preime valuation challenges, therefore, is going to be the extent to which our system of litigation and regulatory oversight puts in place legal penalties in situations where there is no practical alternative to making tough judgments. If it does turn out that financial statement preparers and auditors are to be penalized where good faith judgment calls turned out to be wrong, then continued progress in financial reporting –at least in the highly litigious environment of the –will foreseeably be frozen in its tracks. No responsible accountant or auditor will want to make difficult judgment calls when doing so is almost necessarily a career-terminating event. The sub-prime crisis, therefore, may present the opportunity for us to come to grips with a much bigger question. That is the extent to which we are to permit our present system of litigation and regulatory second-guessing to impede continued evolution in financial reporting.March 7, 2008公允价值会计和次贷导言一个关于由次级存款产生的金融市场混乱的命题逐渐进入我们的讨论，这确实应该由我们的会计制度负责。
国际会计准则第37号准备、或有负债和或有资产
国际会计准则第37号准备、或有负债和或有资产目的本准则的目的是确保将适当的确认标准和计量基础运用于准备、或有负债和或有资产，并确保在财务报表的附注中披露充分的信息，以使使用者能够理解它们的性质、时间和金额。
范围1．本准则适用于所有企业对以下各项之外的准备、或有负债和或有资产的会计核算：（1）以公允价值计量的金融工具形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产：（2）执行中的合同（除了亏损的执行中的合同）形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产；（3）保险公司与保单持有人之间签订的合同形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产；以及（4）由其他国际会计准则规范的准备、或有负债和或有资产。
2．本准则适用于不是以公允价值计量的金融工具（包括担保）。
3．执行中的合同是指双方均未履行任何义务或双方均同等程度地履行了部分义务的合同。
本准则不适用于执行中的合同，除非它是亏损的。
4．本准则适用于保险公司的准备、或有负债和或有资产，但不适用于其与保单持有人之间签订的合同形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产。
5．如果其他国际会计准则规范了特定的准备、或有负债和或有资产，企业应运用该准则而不是本准则，例如，关于以下项目的准则也规范了特定的准备：（1）建造合同（参见《国际会计准则第11号建造合同》）；（2）所得税（参见《国队会计准则第12号所得税》）；（3）租赁（参见《国际会计准则第17号租赁》），但是，《国际会计准则第17号》未对已变为亏损的经营租质的核算提出具体要求，因而本准则应适用于这些情况；（4）雇员福利（参见《国际会计准则第19号一雇员福利》）。
6．一些作为准备处理的金额可能与收入的确认有关，例如企业提供担保以收取费用，本准则不涉及收入确认，《国际会计准则第18号收入》明确了收入确认标准，并就确认标准的应用提供了实务指南，本准则不改变《国际会计准则第18号》的规定。
7．本准则将准备定义为时间或金额不确定的负债，在某些国家，“准备”也与一些项目相联系使用，例如折旧，资产减值和坏账：这些是对资产账面金额的调整，本准则不涉及。
会计学论文外文文献及翻译--国际会计准则第号或有负债和或有资产(可编辑)
会计学论文外文文献及翻译--国际会计准则第37号或有负债和或有资产LNTU---Acc附录A国际会计准则第 37 号或有负债和或有资产目的本准则的目的是确保将适当的确认标准和计量基础运用于准备、或有负债和或有资产,并确保在财务报表的附注中披露充分的信息,以使使用者能够理解它们的性质、时间和金额。
范围1.本准则适用于所有企业对以下各项之外的准备、或有负债和或有资产的会计核算:(1)以公允价值计量的金融工具形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产:(2)执行中的合同(除了亏损的执行中的合同)形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产;(3)保险公司与保单持有人之间签订的合同形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产;(4)由其他国际会计准则规范的准备、或有负债和或有资产。
2.本准则适用于不是以公允价值计量的金融工具(包括担保)。
3.执行中的合同是指双方均未履行任何义务或双方均同等程度地履行了部分义务的合同。
本准则不适用于执行中的合同,除非它是亏损的。
4.本准则适用于保险公司的准备、或有负债和或有资产,但不适用于其与保单持有人之间签订的合同形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产。
5.如果其他国际会计准则规范了特定的准备、或有负债和或有资产,企业应运用该准则而不是本准则,例如,关于以下项目的准则也规范了特定的准备:(1)建造合同(参见《国际会计准则第11号建造合同》);(2)所得税(参见《国队会计准则第12号所得税》);(3)租赁(参见《国际会计准则第17 号租赁》),但是,《国际会计准则第 17 号》未对已变为亏损的经营租质的核算提出具体要求,因而本准则应适用于这些情况;(4)雇员福利(参见《国际会计准则第19号一雇员福利》)。
6.一些作为准备处理的金额可能与收入的确认有关,例如企业提供担保以收取费用,本准则不涉及收入确认,《国际会计准则第 18 号收入》明确了收入确认标准,并就确认标准的应用提供了实务指南,本准则不改变《国际会计准则第 18 号》的规定。
国际会计准则40【外文翻译】
外文文献翻译一、外文原文原文：International Accounting Standard 40Investment Property Scope1 This Standard shall be applied in the recognition, measurement and disclosure of investment property.2 Investment property is held to earn rentals or for capital appreciation or both. Therefore, an investment property generates cash flows largely independently of the other assets held by an entity. This distinguishes investment property from owner-occupied property. The production or supply of goods or services (or the use of property for administrative purposes) generates cash flows that are attributable not only to property, but also to other assets used in the production or supply process. IAS3 Property, Plant and Equipment applies to owner-occupied property.Recognition15 Investment property shall be recognised as an asset when, and only when:(a) it is probable that the future economic benefits that are associated with the investment property will flow to the entity; and(b) the cost of the investment property can be measured reliably. Measurement at recognition4 An investment property shall be measured initially at its cost. Transaction costs shall be included in the initial measurement.5 The cost of a purchased investment property comprises its purchase price and any directly attributable expenditure. Directly attributable expenditure includes, for example, professional fees for legal services, property transfer taxes and other transaction costs.Measurement after recognition6 This Standard requires all entities to determine the fair value of investmentproperty, for the purpose of either measurement (if the entity uses the fair value model) or disclosure (if it uses the cost model). An entity is encouraged, but not required, to determine the fair value of investment property on the basis of a valuation by an independent valuer who holds a recognised and relevant professional qualification and has recent experience in the location and category of the investment property being valued.Fair value model7 After initial recognition, an entity that chooses the fair value model shall measure all of its investment property at fair value, except in the cases described in paragraph 47.8 A gain or loss arising from a change in the fair value of investment property shall be recognised in profit or loss for the period in which it arises.9 The fair value of investment property is the price at which the property could be exchanged between knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm’s length transaction (see paragraph 5). Fair value specifically excludes an estimated price inflated or deflated by special terms or circumstances such as atypical financing, sale and leaseback arrangements, special considerations or concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.10 An entity determines fair value without any deduction for transaction costs it may incur on sale or other disposal.11 The fair value of investment property shall reflect market conditions at the end of the reporting period.EC staff consolidated version as of 16 September 2009, EN – EU IAS 40 FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY12 Fair value is time-specific as of a given date. Because market conditions may change, the amount reported as fair value may be incorrect or inappropriate if estimated as of another time. The definition of fair value also assumes simultaneous exchange and completion of the contract for sale without any variation in price that might be made in an arm’s length transaction between knowledgeable, willing parties if exchange and completion are not simultaneous.13 The fair value of investment property reflects, among other things, rentalincome from current leases and reasonable and supportable assumptions that represent what knowledgeable, willing parties would assume about rental income from future leases in the light of current conditions. It also reflects, on a similar basis,any cash outflows (including rental payments and other outflows) that could be expected in respect of the property. Some of those outflows are reflected in the liability whereas others relate to outflows that are not recognised in the financial statements until a later date (eg periodic payments such as contingent rents).14 The definition of fair value refers to ‘knowledgeable, willing parties’. In this context, ‘knowledgeable’ means th at both the willing buyer and the willing seller are reasonably informed about the nature and characteristics of the investment property, its actual and potential uses, and market conditions at the end of the reporting period.A willing buyer is motivated, but not compelled, to buy. This buyer is neither over-eager nor determined to buy at any price. The assumed buyer would not pay a higher price than a market comprising knowledgeable, willing buyers and sellers would require.to sell at any price, nor one prepared to hold out for a price not considered reasonable in current market conditions. The willing seller is motivated to sell the investment property at market terms for the best price obtainable. The factual circumstances of the actual investment property owner are not a part of this consideration because the willing seller is a hypothetical owner (eg a willing seller would not take into account the particular tax circumstances of the actual investment property owner).15 The definition of fair value ref ers to an arm’s length transaction. An arm’s length transaction is one between parties that do not have a particular or special relationship that makes prices of transactions uncharacteristic of market conditions. The transaction is presumed to be between unrelated parties, each acting independently.16 The best evidence of fair value is given by current prices in an active market for similar property in the same location and condition and subject to similar lease and other contracts. An entity takes care to identify any differences in the nature, location or condition of the property, or in the contractual terms of the leases and othercontracts relating to the property.17 In the absence of current prices in an active market of the kind described in paragraph 45, an entity considers information from a variety of sources, including:(a) current prices in an active market for properties of different nature, condition or location (or subject to different lease or other contracts), adjusted to reflect those differences;(b) recent prices of similar properties on less active markets, with adjustments to reflect any changes in economic conditions since the date of the transactions that occurred at those prices; and(c) discounted cash flow projections based on reliable estimates of future cash flows, supported by the terms of any existing lease and other contracts and (when possible) by external evidence such ascurrent market rents for similar properties in the same location and condition, and using discount rates that reflect current market assessments of the uncertainty in the amount and timing of the cashflows.18 In some cases, the various sources listed in the previous paragraph may suggest different conclusions about the fair value of an investment property. An entity considers the reasons for those differences, in order to arrive at the most reliable estimate of fair value within a range of reasonable fair value estimates.EC staff consolidated version as of 16 September 2009, EN –EU IAS 40 FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY19 In exceptional cases, there is clear evidence when an entity first acquires an investment property (or when an existing property first becomes investment property after a change in use) that the variability in the range of reasonable fair value estimates will be so great, and the probabilities of the various outcomes so difficult to assess, that the usefulness of a single estimate of fair value is negated. This may indicate that the fair value of the property will not be reliably determinable on a continuing basis (see paragraph 47).20 Fair value differs from value in use, as defined in IAS 36 Impairment ofAssets. Fair value reflects the knowledge and estimates of knowledgeable, willing buyers and sellers. In contrast, value in use reflects the entity’s estimates, including the effects of factors that may be specific to the entity and not applicable to entities in general. For example, fair value does not reflect any of the following factors to the extent that they would not be generally available to knowledgeable, willing buyers and sellers:(a) additional value derived from the creation of a portfolio of properties in different locations;(b) synergies between investment property and other assets;(c) legal rights or legal restrictions that are specific only to the current owner; and(d) tax benefits or tax burdens that are specific to the current owner.21 In determining the carrying amount of investment property under the fair value model, an entity does not double-count assets or liabilities that are recognised as separate assets or liabilities. For example:(a) equipment such as lifts or air-conditioning is often an integral part of a building and is generally included in the fair value of the investment property, rather than recognised separately as property,plant and equipment.(b) if an office is leased on a furnished basis, the fair value of the office generally includes the fair value of the furniture, because the rental income relates to the furnished office. When furniture is included in the fair value of investment property, an entity does not recognise that furniture as a separate asset.(c) the fair value of investment property excludes prepaid or accrued operating lease income, because the entity recognises it as a separate liability or asset.22 The fair value of investment property does not reflect future capital expenditure that will improve or enhance the property and does not reflect the related future benefits from this future expenditure.23 In some cases, an entity expects that the present value of its payments relating to an investment property(other than payments relating to recognised liabilities) will exceed the present value of the related cash receipts. An entity applies IAS 37Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets to determine whether to recognise a liability and, if so, how to measure it.Inability to determine fair value reliably24 There is a rebuttable presumption that an entity can reliably determine the fair value of an investment property on a continuing basis. However, in exceptional cases, there is clear evidence when an entity first acquires an investment property (or when an existing property first becomes investment property after a change in use) that the fair value of the investment property is not reliably determinable on a continuing basis. This arises when, and only when, comparable market transactions are infrequent and alternative reliable estimates of fair value (for example, based on discounted cash flow projections) are not available. If an entity determines that the fair value of an investment property under construction is not reliably determinable but expects the fair value of the property to be reliably determinable when construction is complete, it shall measure that investment property under construction at cost until either its fair value becomes reliably determinable or construction is completed (whichever is earlier).If an entity determines that the fair value of an investment property (other than an investment property under construction) is not reliably determinable on a continuing basis, the entity shall EC staff consolidated version as of 16 September 2009, EN –EU IAS 40 FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY8 measure that investment property using the cost model in IAS 16. The residual value of the investment property shall be assumed to be zero. The entity shall apply IAS 16 until disposal of the investment property.25 In the exceptional cases when an entity is compelled, for the reason given in paragraph 53, to measure an investment property using the cost model in accordance with IAS 16, it measures at fair value all its other investment property, including investment property under construction. In these cases, although an entity may use the cost model for one investment property, the entity shall continue to account for each of the remaining properties using the fair value model.26 If an entity has previously measured an investment property at fair value, it shall continue to measure the property at fair value until disposal (or until the propertybecomes owner-occupied property or the entity begins to develop the property for subsequent sale in the ordinary course of business) even if comparable market transactions become less frequent or market prices become less readily available. Cost model27 After initial recognition, an entity that chooses the cost model shall measure all of its investment property in accordance with IAS 16’s requirements for that model, other than those that meet the criteria to be classified as held for sale (or are included in a disposal group that is classified as held for sale) in accordance with IFRS 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations. Investment properties that meet the criteria to be classified as held for sale (or are included in a disposal group that is classified as held for sale) shall be measured in accordance with IFRS 5. Transfers28 Transfers to, or from, investment property shall be made when, and only when, there is a change in use, evidenced by:(a) commencement of owner-occupation, for a transfer from investment property to owner-occupied property;(b) commencement of development with a view to sale, for a transfer from investment property to inventories;(c) end of owner-occupation, for a transfer from owner-occupied property to investment property; or(d) commencement of an operating lease to another party, for a transfer from inventories to investment property.29 Paragraph 51(2) requires an entity to transfer a property from investment property to inventories when, and only when, there is a change in use, evidenced by commencement of development with a view to sale. When an entity decides to dispose of an investment property without development, it continues to treat the property as an investment property until it is derecognised (eliminated from the statement of financial position) and does not treat it as inventory. Similarly, if an entity begins to redevelop an existing investment property for continued future use as investment property, the property remains an investment property and is notreclassified as owner-occupied property during the redevelopment.30 Paragraphs 54-59 apply to recognition and measurement issues that arise when an entity uses the fair value model for investment property. When an entity uses the cost model, transfers between investment property, owner-occupied property and inventories do not change the carrying amount of the property transferred and they do not change the cost of that property for measurement or disclosure purposes.31 For a transfer from investment property carried at fair value to owner-occupied property or inventories, the property’s deemed cost for subsequent accounting in accordance with IAS 16 or IAS 2 shall be its fair value at the date of change in use.61 If an owner-occupied property becomes an investment property that will be carried at fair value, an entity shall apply IAS 16 up to the date of change in use. The entity shall treat any difference at that date between the carrying amount of the property in accordance with IAS 16 and its fair value in the same way as a revaluation in accordance with IAS 16.32 Up to the date when an owner-occupied property becomes an investment property carried at fair value, an entity depreciates the property and recognises any impairment losses that have occurred. The entity treats any difference at that date between the carrying amount of the property in accordance with IAS 16 and its fair value in the same way as a revaluation in accordance with IAS 16. In other words:(a) any resulting decrease in the carrying amount of the property is recognised in profit or loss.However, to the extent that an amount is included in revaluation surplus for that property, thedecrease is recognised in other comprehensive income and reduces the revaluation surplus withinequity.(b) any resulting increase in the carrying amount is treated as follows:(i) to the extent that the increase reverses a previous impairment loss for that property, the increase is recognised in profit or loss. The amount recognised in profit or loss does not exceed the amount needed to restore the carrying amount to the carrying amount thatwould have been determined (net of depreciation) had no impairment loss been recognised.(ii) any remaining part of the increase is recognised in other comprehensive income and increases the revaluation surplus within equity. On subsequent disposal of the investment property, the revaluation surplus included in equity may be transferred to retained earnings. The transfer from revaluation surplus to retained earnings is not made through profit or loss.33 For a transfer from inventories to investment property that will be carried at fair value, any difference between the fair value of the property at that date and its previous carrying amount shall be recognised in profit or loss.34 The treatment of transfers from inventories to investment property that will be carried at fair value is consistent with the treatment of sales of inventories.35 When an entity completes the construction or development of a self-constructed investment property that will be carried at fair value, any difference between the fair value of the property at that date and its previous carrying amount shall be recognised in profit or loss.Disposals36 An investment property shall be derecognised (eliminated from the statement of financial position) on disposal or when the investment property is permanently withdrawn from use and no future economic benefits are expected from its disposal.37、The disposal of an investment property may be achieved by sale or by entering into a finance lease. In determining the date of disposal for investment property, an entity applies the criteria in IAS 18 for recognising revenue from the sale of goods and considers the related guidance in the Appendix to IAS 18.IAS 17 applies to a disposal effected by entering into a finance lease and to a sale and leaseback.38 Gains or losses arising from the retirement or disposal of investment property shall be determined as the difference between the net disposal proceeds and the carrying amount of the asset and shall be recognised in profit or loss (unless IAS 17 requires otherwise on a sale and leaseback) in the period of the retirement or disposal.39 The consideration receivable on disposal of an investment property isrecognised initially at fair value. In particular, if payment for an investment property is deferred, the consideration received is recognised initially at the cash price equivalent. The difference between the nominal amount of the consideration and the cash price equivalent is recognised as interest revenue in accordance with IAS 18 using the effective interest method.40 An entity applies IAS 37 or other Standards, as appropriate, to any liabilities that it retains after disposal of an investment property.DisclosureFair value model and cost model41 The disclosures below apply in addition to those in IAS 17. In accordance with IAS 17, the owner of an investment property provides lessors’ disclosures about leases into which it has entered. An entity that holds an investment property under a finance or operating lease provides lessees’ disclosures for finance leases and lessors’ disclosures for any operating leases into which it has entered.42 An entity shall disclose:(a) when classification is difficult (see paragraph 14), the criteria it uses to distinguish investment property from owner-occupied property and from property held for sale in the ordinary course of business.(b) the methods and significant assumptions applied in determining the fair value of investment property, including a statement whether the determination of fair value was supported by market evidence or was more heavily based on other factors (which the entity shall disclose) because of the nature of the property and lack of comparable market data.(c) the extent to which the fair value of investment property (as measured or disclosed in the financial statements) is based on a valuation by an independent valuer who holds a recognised and relevant professional qualification and has recent experience in the location and categoryof the investment property being valued. If there has been no such valuation, that fact shall be disclosed.(d) the amounts recognised in profit or loss for:(i) rental income from investment property;(ii) direct operating expenses (including repairs and maintenance) arising from investment property that generated rental income during the period; and (iii) direct operating expenses (including repairs and maintenance) arising from investment property that did not generate rental income during the period.(e) the existence and amounts of restrictions on the realisability of investment property or the remittance of income and proceeds of disposal.(f) contractual obligations to purchase, construct or develop investment property or for repairs,maintenance or enhancements.Fair value model43 In addition to the disclosures required by paragraph 66, an entity that applies the fair value model in paragraphs 27-49 shall disclose a reconciliation between the carrying amounts of investment property at the beginning and end of the period, showing the following:(a) additions, disclosing separately those additions resulting from acquisitions and those resultingfrom subsequent expenditure recognised in the carrying amount of an asset;(b) additions resulting from acquisitions through business combinations;(c) assets classified as held for sale or included in a disposal group classified as held for sale in accordance with IFRS 5 and other disposals;(d) net gains or losses from fair value adjustments;(e) the net exchange differences arising on the translation of the financial statements into a different presentation currency, and on translation of a foreign operation into the presentation currency of the reporting entity;(f) transfers to and from inventories and owner-occupied property; and(g) other changes.44 shall disclose amounts EC staff consolidated version as of 16 September 2009, EN –EU IAS 40 FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY 12 relating to that investment property separately from amounts relating to other investment property. In addition, an entity shall disclose:(a) a description of the investment property;(b) an explanation of why fair value cannot be determined reliably;(c) if possible, the range of estimates within which fair value is highly likely to lie; and(d) on disposal of investment property not carried at fair value:(i) the fact that the entity has disposed of investment property not carried at fair value;(ii) the carrying amount of that investment property at the time of sale; and(iii) the amount of gain or loss recognised.Cost model45 In addition to the disclosures required by paragraph 66, an entity that applies the cost model in paragraph 50 shall disclose:(a) the depreciation methods used;(b) the useful lives or the depreciation rates used;(c) the gross carrying amount and the accumulated depreciation (aggregated with accumulated impairment losses) at the beginning and end of the period;(d) a reconciliation of the carrying amount of investment property at the beginning and end of the period, showing the following:(i) additions, disclosing separately those additions resulting from acquisitions and those resulting from subsequent expenditure recognised as an asset;(ii) additions resulting from acquisitions through business combinations;(iii) assets classified as held for sale or included in a disposal group classified as held for sale in accordance with IFRS 5 and other disposals;(iv) depreciation;(v) the amount of impairment losses recognised, and the amount of impairment losses reversed, during the period in accordance with IAS 36;(vi) the net exchange differences arising on the translation of the financial statements into a different presentation currency, and on translation of a foreign operation into the presentation currency of the reporting entity;(vii) transfers to and from inventories and owner-occupied property; and(viii) other changes; and(e) the fair value of investment property. In the exceptional cases described in paragraph 47,when an entity cannot determine the fair value of the investment property reliably, it shalldisclose:(i) a description of the investment property;(ii) an explanation of why fair value cannot be determined reliably; and(iii) if possible, the range of estimates within which fair value is highly likely to lie.Transitional provisionsFair value model46 An entity that has previously applied IAS 40 (2000) and elects for the first time to classify and account for some or all eligible property interests held under operating leases as investment property shall recognise the effect of that election as an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings for the period in which the election is first made. In addition:(a) if the entity has previously disclosed publicly (in financial statements or otherwise) the fair value of those property interests in earlier periods (determined on a basis that satisfies the definition of fair value in paragraph 5 and the guidance in paragraphs 29-46), the entity is encouraged, but not required:(i) to adjust the opening balance of retained earnings for the earliest period presented for which such fair value was disclosed publicly; and(ii) to restate comparative information for those periods; and(b) if the entity has not previously disclosed publicly the information described in (a), it shall not restate comparative information and shall disclose that fact.47 This Standard requires a treatment different from that required by IAS 8. IAS 8 requires comparative information to be restated unless such restatement is impracticable.48 When an entity first applies this Standard, the adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings includes the reclassification of any amount held inrevaluation surplus for investment property.Cost model49 IAS 8 applies to any change in accounting policies that is made when an entity first applies this Standard and chooses to use the cost model. The effect of the change in accounting policies includes the reclassification of any amount held in revaluation surplus for investment property.Effective date50 This international accounting standards on income from 1 January 2001 or after the date began annual financial statements and effective. Encourage early adoption. If the enterprise will these standards used in since 2001 start before January 1, the income, it shall disclose this fact51 This Standard supersedes IAS 40 Investment Property..Source: International accounting standards committee[M], International Accounting Standard40，2001二、翻译文章译文：国际会计准则40投资性房地产范围1、本准则适用于投资性房地产的确认、计量和披露。
会计专业外文文献翻译原文及译文
企业的社会责任：一种趋势和运动，但社会责任是什么，是为了什么？1企业社会责任（CSR ）已成为一个全球趋势，涉及企业，国家，国际组织和民间社会组织。
但这远远不能清楚CSR的主张，有什么真正的趋势，是从哪里开始，在哪里发展，谁是项目的主要行动者。
如果把它作为一种社会运动，我们必须要问：什么运动和谁执行？讨论有助于我们反思形成的趋势和如何管理某些特点来迅速和广泛地在全球各地进行扩展，并增加了以下体制变革,特别是对变化中国家之间、企业法人和民间社会组织关系之间的界限的作用。
企业社会责任的趋势在三个方面：作为一个管理框架，新的要求，地方企业;作为动员企业行为，以协助国家的发展援助;和作为管理趋势。
每一个这些画像表明，中心的某些行为，关系，驾驭团队和利益。
我的例子表明，没有人对这些意见似乎比别人更准确，而是，活动包括规范的不同利益、作用因素、起源和轨迹。
这些多重身份的趋势可以部分描述其成功以及它的争论，脆弱性和流动性。
许多公司现在有具体的计划和小节在其网站上处理企业社会责任。
在过去，软条例和指导网络，国际公认的规则一直是一种重要机制，作用在公司、国家和国家间组织的需求，例如，发布指导方针和条例的公司。
在这背景下，国际组织仍然是重要的行动者，他们正在寻求与跨国公司进行对话，而不是试图通过国家控制企业社会责任。
各国际组织不是对企业的社会责任监管机构;而他们却是监管和自我约束的倡议之间的经纪人的最合适人选。
对社会负责行为和监测这些行为的需求越来越多地以国家以外的这些组织为渠道，并强调赞成高比例的自律。
因此，我们看到了软法律(Morth, 2004)的出现，或者是Knill 和Lehmkuhl (2002) 所说的“被规管的自律”，和Moran (2002)所归纳的“精细”或“非正式”规章。
我更喜欢“软法律”和“软规章”的说法，因为他们并不总是非正式的。
软规章常常包括正式报告和统筹程序。
还有，从统筹和行政的观点来看，那些规章和精细还是相去甚远的。
会计学毕业论文中英文资料外文翻译文献
会计学中英文资料外文翻译文献外文资料原文Title:Future of SME finance（Background–the environment for SME finance has changedFuture economic recovery will depend on the possibility of Crafts,T rades and SMEs to exploit their potential for growth and employment creation.SMEs mak e a major contribution t o growth and employment in th e EU and are at the heart of the Lisbon Strategy,whose main objective is to turn Europe into the mos t competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world.However,the ability of SMEs to grow depends highly on their potential t o invest in restructuring, innovation and qualification.All of these investments need capital and therefore access to finance.Against this back gr ound the consistently r epea t ed complaint of SMEs a bo u t their problems regarding access to finance is a highly relevant constraint that endangers the economic recovery of Europe.Changes in the finance sector influence the behavior of credit institutes towards Crafts,T rades and SMEs.R ecent and ongoing developments in the banking sector add t o the concerns of SMEs and will further en dan ge r their access to finance.The main changes in the banking sector which influence SME finance are:•Globalization and internationalization have increased the competition and the profit orientation in the sector;•worsening of the economic situations in some institutes(burst of the ITC bubble,insolvencies)str engthen the focus on profitability further;•Mergers and restructuring created larger structures and many local branches, which had direct and personalized contacts with small enterprises,were closed;•up-coming implementation of new capital adequacy rules(Basel II)will also change SME business of the credit sector and will increase its administrative costs;•Stricter interpretation of State-Aide Rules by the European Commission eliminates the support of banks by public guarantees;many of the effected banks arevery active in SME finance.All these changes result in a higher sensitivity for risks and profits in the finance sector.The changes in the finance sector affect the accessibility o f SMEst o finance.Higher risk awareness in the credit sector,a stronger focus on profitability and the ongoing restructuring in the finance sector change the framework for SME finance and influence the accessibility of SMEs t o finance.The mo s t important changes are:•In order t o mak e the higher risk awareness operational,the credit sector introduces new rating systems and instruments for credit scoring;•Risk assessment of SMEs by banks will force the enterprises t o pr esent mo r e and better quality information on their businesses;•Banks will try to pass thr ough their additional costs for implementing and running the new capital regulations(Basel II)t o their business clients;•due to the increase of competition on interest rates,the bank sector demands mo r e and higher fees for its services(administration of accounts,payments systems, etc.),which are no t only additional costs for SMEs bu t also limit their liquidity;•Small enterprises will lose their personal relationship with decision-makers in local branches–the credit application process will become mo r e formal and anonymous and will probably lose longer;•the credit sector will lose more and more its“public function”to provi de access to finance for a wide range of economic actors,which it has in a n u mbe r of countries,in order to support and facilitate economic growth;the profitability of lending be co mes the main focus of private credit institutions.All of these developments will mak e access to finance for SMEs even mo r e difficult and/or will increase the cost of external finance.Business start-ups and SMEs,which want t o enter new markets,may especially suffer from shortages regarding finance.A European Code of Conduct betw een Banks and SMEs would have allowed at least mo r e transparency in the relations betw een Banks and SMEs and UEAPME regrets that the bank sector was not able t o agr ee on such a commitment.T owards an encompassing policy appr o ach t o improve the access of Crafts, T rades and SMEs to financeAll analyses show that credits and loans will stay the main source of finance forthe SME sector in Europe.Access to finance was always a main concern for SMEs, bu t the recent developments in the finance sector worsen the situation even more. Shortage of finance is already a relevant factor,which hinders economic recovery in Europe.Many SMEs are no t able t o finance their ne eds for investment.Therefore,UEAPME expects t he new European Commission and the new European Parliament t o strengthen their efforts to improve the framework conditions for SME finance.Europe’s Crafts,Trades and SMEs ask for an encompassing policy approach,which includes not only the conditions for SMEs’access to lending,but will also str engthen their capacity for internal finance and their access to external risk capital.From UEAPME’s point of view such an encompassing approach should be based on three guiding principles:•Risk-sharing betw een private investors,financial institutes,SMEs and public sector;•Increase of transparency of SMEs towards their external investors and lenders;•improving the regulatory environment for SME finance.Based on these principles and against the back gr ound of the changing environment for SME finance,UEAPME pr oposes policy measur es in the following areas:1.New Capital Requirement Directive:SME friendly implementation o f Basel IIDue t o intensive lobbying activities,UEAPME,together with other Business Associations in Europe,has achieved some improvements in favour of SMEs regarding the new Basel Agreement on regulatory capital(Basel II).The final a gr ee ment from the Basel Committee contains a much mo r e realistic appr o ach toward the real risk situation of SME lending for the finance market and will allow the necessary room for adaptations,which respect the different regional traditions and institutional structures.However,the new regulatory system will influence the relations betw een Banks and SMEs and it will depend very much on the way it will be implemented into European law,whether Basel II be co mes bu r dens ome for SMEs and if it will reduce access to finance for them.The new Capital Accord form the Basel Committee gives the financial marketauthorities and herewith the European Institutions,a lot of flexibility.In a bo u t70 areas they have room to ad a pt the Accord to their specific n e eds when implementing it into EU law.Some of them will have important effects on the costs and the accessibility of finance for SMEs.UEAPME expects therefore from the new European Commission and the new European Parliament:•The implementation of the new Capital R equirement Directive will be costly for the Finance Sector(up t o30Billion Euro till2006)and its clients will have t o pay for it.Therefore,the implementation–especially for smaller banks,which are o ften very active in SME finance–has to be carried o ut with as little administrative bu r de ns o me as possible(reporting obligations,statistics,etc.).•The European Regulators must recognize traditional instruments for collaterals(guarantees,etc.)as far as possible.•The European Commission and later the Member S tates should take over the r ecommendations from the European Parliament with regar d t o granularity,access t o retail portfolio,maturity,partial use,adaptation of thresholds,etc.,which will ease the bur den on SME finance.2.SMEs need transparent rating proceduresDue to higher risk awareness of the finance sector and the need s of Basel II, many SMEs will be confronted for the first time with internal rating procedures or credit scoring systems by their banks.The bank will require mo r e and better quality information from their clients and will assess them in a new way.Both up-coming developments are already causing increasing uncertainty a mo n gs t SMEs.In order to reduce this uncertainty and to allow SMEs to understand the principles of the new risk assessment,UEAPME demands transparent rating procedures–rating procedures may not become a“Black Box”for SMEs:•The bank should communicate the relevant criteria affecting the rating of SMEs.•The bank should inform SMEs abo u t its assessment in order t o allow SMEs t o improve.The negotiations on a European Code of Conduct betw een Banks and SMEs, which would have included a self-commitment for transparent rating procedures by Banks,failed.Therefore,UEAPME expects from the new European Commission andthe new European Parliament support for:•binding rules in the framework of the new Capital Adequacy Directive, which ensure the transparency of rating procedures and credit scoring systems for SMEs;•Elaboration of national Codes of Conduct in order t o improve the relations betw een Banks and SMEs and to support the adaptation of SMEs to the new financial environment.3.SMEs need an extension o f credit guarantee systems with a special focus on Micro-LendingBusiness start-ups,the transfer of businesses and innovative fast growth SMEs also depended in the past very often on public support t o get access t o finance. Increasing risk awareness by banks and the stricter interpretation of S tate Aid Rules will further increase the need for public support.Already now,there are credit guarant ee schemes in many countries on the limit of their capacity and too many investment projects cannot be realized by SMEs.Experiences show that Public money,spent for supporting credit guarantees systems,is a very efficient instrument and has a much higher multiplying effect than other instruments.One Euro form the European Investment Funds can stimulate30 Euro investments in SMEs(for venture capital funds the relation is only1:2).Therefore,UEAPME expects t he new European Commission and the new European Parliament t o support:•The extension of funds for national credit guarantees schemes in the framework of the new Multi-Annual Pr ogra mme d for Enterprises;•The development of new instruments for securitizations of SME portfolios;•The recognition of existing and well functioning credit guarantees schemes as collateral;•More flexibility within the European Instruments,because of national differences in th e situation of SME finance;•The development of credit guarantees schemes in the new Member States;•The development of an SBIC-like scheme in the Member States t o close the equity gap(0.2–2.5Mio Euro,according t o the expert meeting on PACE on April27 in Luxemburg).•the development of a financial support scheme to encourage the internalizations of SMEs(currently there is no scheme available at EU level:termination of JOP,fading ou t of JEV).4.SMEs need company and income taxation systems,which strengthen their capacity for self-financingMany EU Member States have comp any and income taxation systems with negative incentives to build-up capital within the company by re-investing their profits.This is especially true for companies,which have t o pay income taxes. Already in the p ast tax-regimes was one of the reasons for the higher dependence of Europe’s SMEs on bank lending.In future,the result of rating will also depend on the amount of capital in the company;the high dependence on lending will influence the access to lending.This is a vicious cycle,which has to be broken.Even though company and income taxation falls under the competence of Member States,UEAPME asks the new European Commission and the new European Parliament t o publicly support tax-reforms,which will str engthen the capacity of Crafts,T rades and SME for self-financing.Thereby,a special focus on non-corporate companies is needed.5.Risk Capital–equity financingExternal equity financing do es not have a real tradition in the SME sector.On the one hand,small enterprises and family business in general have traditionally no t been very open towards external equity financing and are no t used to informing transparently abo u t their business.On the other hand,many investors of venture capital and similar forms of equity finance are very reluctant regarding investing their funds in smaller companies,which is mo r e costly than investing bigger a moun ts in larger companies.Furthermore it is much mo r e difficult t o set ou t of such investments in smaller companies.Even though equity financing will never become the main source of financing for SMEs,it is an important instrument for highly innovative start-ups and fast growing companies and it has therefore t o be further developed.UEAPME sees three pillars for such an appr o ach where policy support is needed:Availability of venture capital•The Me mber S tates should review their taxation systems in order to create incentives to invest private money in all forms of venture capital.•Guarantee instruments for equity financing should be further developed.Improve the conditions for investing venture capital into SMEs•The development of secondary markets for venture capital investments inSMEs should be supported.•Accounting S tandards for SMEs should be revised in order to ease transparent exchange of information betw een investor and owner-manager.Owner-managers must become mo r e aware a bo u t the need for transparency towards investors•SME owners will have t o realise that in future access to external finance (venture capital or lending)will depend much mo r e on a transparent and open exchange of information a bo u t the situation and the perspectives of their companies.•In order t o fulfil the new n ee ds for transparency,SMEs will have t o use new information instruments(business plans,financial reporting,etc.)and new management instruments(risk-management,financial management,etc.).外文资料翻译题目：未来的中小企业融资背景：中小企业融资已经改变未来的经济复苏将取决于能否工艺品，贸易和中小企业利用其潜在的增长和创造就业。
会计 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 新会计准则
附录外文资料：On February 15, 2006, the Ministry of Finance issued 1 item of basic accounting standards and 38 specific guidelines, the new set of accounting standards system. Standards issued, the community gave wide attention, the securities industry, business circles, academic circles gave height the opinion, think this is the second in 1993 accounting reform after another is of great significance to the accounting reform, marking China's convergence with international financial reporting standards of enterprise accounting standards system formally established, to improve the China's socialist market economic system, improve the level of opening up and accelerate China's integration into the global economy has important significance.Also expressed their concerns and worries, mainly reflected in the following aspects: a fair value is difficult to "fair", and is very likely to become the profit manipulation tools; two is the enterprise may to adjust earnings manipulation debt restructuring, debt restructuring will once again become the darling of the securities market; three is the new standard published may induce "fair" phenomenon, which may lead to the end of 2006 enterprises will impairment assault back, at the same time accounts receivable impairment will still give listing Corporation profit adjustment leaves lots of space. These concerns whether it can become a reality? The new standards will become the corporate profits manipulation of the tool? Here we have to this a few worry about one to launch the analysis:A moderate, fair value applicationThe history of our country is a listing Corporation with the fair value of profit manipulation. Fair value appeared in 1998 in "debt recombines", "non monetary transactions" specific accounting standards, after the actual operation in many companies the abuse of fair value and profit manipulation in 2001 revised guidelines by the restriction of the use of. The new criterion system in financial tool, real estate investment, not the combination under common control, debt restructuring andnon-monetary transactions etc. are carefully adopted the fair value accounting standards, thus becoming the one large window. Past episodes of "story" will repeat itself? To this one problem we analyzed from the following aspects:First of all, the fair value of the assets can be achieved by using fair value valuation is the international accounting standards, the United States and most market economic countries accounting standards in general practice. International already crossed the "want" present value and fair value debate stage, and mainly in "how to use" stage; International did not because of "Enron event" appear and delay the study and adopt present value and the fair value of the process. From the beginning of 1975, 30 years, FASB on the fair value measurement system research has not stopped, the fair value in the accounting standards in the United States are used more and more widely. As of 2004, at the end of 12, FASB has released a total of 153 financial accounting standards, fair value accounting standards and related 60 (forever, 2005).Fair value has a profound theoretical basis for the ten, it accords with the economic income concept, the comprehensive income concept, cash flow and market price of accounting assumption, accounting goal, modern relevance and reliability of quality characteristics of accounting elements, essential characteristics, future basic accounting, value and value concept, measurement values and net surplus theory and financial statements of the primitive logic (Xie Sifone, 2005).The use of fair value can effectively enhance the relevance of accounting information for investors, creditors, and other stakeholders to provide more help to the information for decision making. Take the investment real estate, book 20000000 yuan, if the city price rises to $200000000 accounting should reflect 200000000 yuan, such information is really true and useful. If still persist in the statements that the 20000000 yuan, accounting treatment is simple, but this information does not help the decision-making of investors, even misleading. Any reform will not give up eating for fear of choking, accounting reform is no exception. In line with international standards is the direction, is to represent the general trend, this point is in the affirmative.Secondly, suitable for the application of the fair value of the "soil" preliminary already form. Fair value is the product of the market economy. In 2003 the Central Committee made on perfecting the socialist market economic system a number of issues, symbolizes that our country market economy already from start-up to improve, the market economy status of China has been established. The securities market of our country after ten years of development and perfection, to strengthen corporategovernance, improve operational transparency, clear violations, establishing listing Corporation integrated supervision system has made great progress. China Securities Regulatory Commission promoting the share-trading reform pilot, listing and financing program, has issued a number of regulations, strengthen the listing Corporation information disclosure and fraud and strength; the Ministry of finance to increase the quality of accounting information and the CPA audit quality inspection; listing Corporation governance level rises further, CPA, assets assessment division, independent directors such as rational economic choice for listing Corporation irregularities built several "firewall"; the majority of investors in the analysis of accounting information to judge, effective screening capacity is enhanced, the effectiveness of the securities market gradually improve. In addition, after joining the WTO, large amount of foreign capital into China, financial derivatives trading activity, produce a number, different features of derivative financial instruments, such as futures (Futures), option (Options), forward contract (Forwards Contract), swap (Swaps) etc.. As the derivative financial instruments no initial net investment is required, or very few requirements of net investment, the historical cost of its incapable of action, only the fair value to carry on the accurate recognition and measurement..FASl33 stated: fair value measurement of financial instruments is the best measurement attribute, the derivative financial instruments, fair value measurement attribute is the only. Potential of time shift, which contributes to the application of the fair value of the environment is preliminary already implementation. We must adopt the development strategy view ", not" once bitten, twice shy of ten years".In third, the fair value of the criteria in the new application is more cautious, does not lead to abuse. Compared with international financial reporting standards: China accounting standards system in determining the scope of the application of fair value, the more fully consider China's national conditions, the improvement was prudent. The use of fair value must satisfy certain conditions, in the basic guidelines in section forty-third clearly pointed out that the replacement cost, net realizable value of, present value, fair value, should be to ensure that the identified elements of accounting amounts can be obtained and the reliable measurement. In relation to specific standards, the use of fair value measurement, has clearly defined constraints. For example, in real estate investment criteria specified by the fair value measurement model, the following conditions shall be met simultaneously: one is the investmentproperty real estate located in active trading market of real estate; two is the enterprise can from the real estate trading market on the same or similar real estate market prices and other information, thus the investment real estate to make a reasonable estimate of fair value.Visible in the investing real estate standards, ban contains more hypothetical valuation techniques used, only in a certain reliability on the basis that the use of fair value, and not all of the investment real estate can be applied the fair value. So as long as the strictly in accordance with the standards, fair value will really be fair.For instance in non monetary transactions for the use of fair value, the new standards in exchange of non-monetary assets, fair value and change the carrying value of the assets included in the current profits and losses of the difference between the two conditions, namely the exchange must be commercial in nature, and a change of assets or the fair value of the assets surrendered can be measured reliably. Commercial essence refers to, must be changed in the future cash flow of the assets at risk, time and amount of assets surrendered and were significantly different, or substitution of assets and the assets surrendered the present value of estimated future cash flows are different, and the difference between the assets and the change of the fair value of the assets is more significant than the. The new guidelines are also provided to determine whether is commercial in nature, an enterprise shall pay attention to whether or not the transacting parties are related party relationship. Related party relationship may lead to the occurrence of non monetary assets exchange is not commercial in nature. These preconditions, will effectively restricted to non monetary assets exchange way of earnings manipulation behavior. From these rules, we can see that, the application of fair value is strictly restricted conditions, the fair value is not allowed to abuse.The new standards require that the fair value to "reliable" and not "just, fair value estimate" is no longer the eraser ruler. The author thinks, fair value to be profit manipulation tools need to also have three elements: the listing Corporation management deliberate fraud, accounting audit staff lose occupation moral and securities market regulatory failure. In fact with the three elements, any system can effectively play a protective role, therefore, establishing and perfecting accounting standards supporting management system is urgent.Two, the debt restructuring reform from the bottomThe new debt restructuring guidelines stipulated in debt restructuring gains can be included in the current profits and losses. As a debtor's listing Corporation, the new debt restructuring guidelines means that, once the creditor concessions, listing Corporation acquired interests will be directly included in the current income, into a profit report. Debt restructuring is likely to increase profits, improve earnings per share. But this approach achieved with the international convergence of financial reporting standards, reflects the essence of transaction debt restructuring, debt restructuring gains is after all the creditors rather than owners concessions, the past will not pass the profit and loss statement directly included in the capital reserve, it is under the special background of a matter of expediency, now be included in the profit and loss, is not "white" the "black", but the reform from the bottom. The new guidelines on the definition of debt restructuring, made clear only in "the debtor's financial difficulties." the premise condition, can get debt concession confirmed as debt restructuring gains. This condition will be restricted to a certain extent, the new guidelines on abuse, prevent inappropriate acknowledgement of debt reorganization gains.Some people think that some affiliates can also through a remit a debt, a high performance to price manipulation, insider trading, is still small shareholders suffered losses. In fact, this fear is a bit much. This is because, first, for *ST and ST company, fantasy on debt restructuring benefit, reaching for the stars is futile. Because the 2004 amendment of the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchange rules, one is freed, after deducting non-recurring profits and losses, net profit is positive. Debt restructuring to listing Corporation profits, in actual accountant operation, will be included in operating income, which belongs to the non-recurring profit and loss, thus can in St, the stars are deducted from; second, has experienced more than 10 years of stock market investors' groundless talk, analysis and judgment ability and self protection consciousness had very big rise, debt restructuring guidelines requiring companies to disclose the fair value of the methods and basis for the ascertainment, investors can easily recognize the debt restructuring packaging profits, in order to make a rational choice .Investors blindly follow Zhuang, slaughter age has gone for ever.In three, the impairment of Chinese characteristicsNew guidelines for asset impairment provisions, asset impairment loss is confirmed, in the later period may not be back. It is based on the real situation of our country, last ditch of major change, it is with international accounting standards, with substantial differences in the. New guidelines for asset impairment will effectively curb the use impairment as a "secret reserve" adjusting profit situation. Guidelines for the implementation, use impairment adjusting profit space will become more and more small, the provision of manual adjustment of profits will be more and more difficult. Some people write civil point out new guidelines for asset impairment induced by releasing will "go" phenomenon, cause some "hidden profits" of the industry and Related Companies, possible impairment in 2006 will be ready to strike back, "crow change Phoenix" may reproduce. We analyze, first of all, if the listing Corporation snatches in the new guidelines before the implementation of the 2006 year rushs impairment, we must first examine whether such actions are the reasonable basis, namely the original has provision for the impairment of an asset value now is really picks up, and if so, to adjust the asset value will make the accounting information more real, related; secondly, in 2006 large red back impairment must make appropriate evidence of the original provision for the impairment of appropriateness, otherwise the previous provision is the abuse of accounting estimation results, should be in accordance with the accounting error handling, a reversal of impairment cannot be used as the 2006 annual profit. Moreover, the financial sector has been aware of this problem, and takes positive and effective measures, prevent the assault to adjust profit listing Corporation. In addition, some time ago the market that new guidelines will make A shares listing Corporation in 2006 to increase net profit 20000000000 Yuan hearsay, the survey is author's subjective, concerned media specially clarification.Others receivables and other four impairment expressed worry, think accounts receivable (especially the "shareholders of account") will become the "eight project" of the main means of profit manipulation. In fact, in the new guidelines, receivables is as financial assets, and the depreciation detailed provisions, requires that there must be "objective evidence" of impairment to provision for impairment, such evidence includes the debtor serious financial difficulties, is likely to fail or other financial restructuring. Can be said that the criterion is more and more perfect, then the "this year that cannot take back full provision, next year 'efforts' and back", this "to practice deception" approach, which itself has violated rules, to pass the CPA audit and hidfrom investors eye, I'm afraid some difficulty.Through the above analysis, we can see some people on the new criterion a few concerns, many in reality does not exist, or is in the process of the reform of the price to be paid for, and far from their imagination so serious. But these concerns also remind standards departments in the formulation of standards to the full attention of guidelines for the technical and economic consequences, in the setting of the new guidelines in the process, give full consideration to guideline implementation may arise in the course of the various problems, and further make a specific interpretation and explanation, improving guidelines operation, improve accounting information quality.Also need to point out in particular, accounting standards is a production of accounting information of the specification, it is to solve the problem of "how to do". On the accounting standards of the malicious misuse of guidelines for the implementation of the "people", from the perspective of the listing Corporation is the ecological problems, to strengthen supervision, occupation moral construction, improve the ability of investors screening accounting information system engineering to solve, cannot be attributed to the guidelines themselves. And the new accounting and auditing standards system come on stage; it is to promote the improvement of listing Corporation governance ecology effective measure. Say from this meaning, we are not going to worry about me, but "criteria for the beat and breathe out".Note: ① according to the "Shanghai Stock Exchange Listing Rules (2004 Revision)" provisions, *ST indicated the presence of terminating the listing of special processing and ST risk for other special treatment.Main referencesMinistry of finance. In 2006 accounting standards for business enterprises. Economic Science PressYu Monishing. The 2005 fair value in the United States of America's application research. Financial theory, 9Xie Stiffen, wearing Zili.2005 present value and fair value accounting: financial reform is the important premise of twenty-first Century. Theory and practice of Finance and economics, 9中文资料：2006年2月15日，财政部发布了包括1项基本准则和38项具体准则在内的新的一整套企业会计准则体系。
关于会计的英文文献原文（带中文翻译）
The Optimization Method of Financial Statements Based on Accounting Management TheoryABSTRACTThis paper develops an approach to enhance the reliability and usefulness of financial statements. International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) was fundamentally flawed by fair value accounting and asset-impairment accounting. According to legal theory and accounting theory, accounting data must have legal evidence as its source document. The conventional “mixed attribute” accounting system should be replaced by a “segregated” system with historical cost and fair value being kept strictly apart in financial statements. The proposed optimizing method will significantly enhance the reliability and usefulness of financial statements.I.. INTRODUCTIONBased on international-accounting-convergence approach, the Ministry of Finance issued the Enterprise Accounting Standards in 2006 taking the International Financial Reporting Standards (hereinafter referred to as “the International Standards”) for reference. The Enterprise Accounting Standards carries out fair value accounting successfully, and spreads the sense that accounting should reflect market value objectively. The objective of accounting reformation following-up is to establish the accounting theory and methodology which not only use international advanced theory for reference, but also accord with the needs of China's socialist market economy construction. On the basis of a thorough evaluation of the achievements and limitations of International Standards, this paper puts forward a stand that to deepen accounting reformation and enhance the stability of accounting regulations.II. OPTIMIZATION OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SYSTEM: PARALLELING LISTING OF LEGAL FACTS AND FINANCIAL EXPECTATIONAs an important management activity, accounting should make use of information systems based on classified statistics, and serve for both micro-economic management and macro-economic regulation at the same time. Optimization of financial statements system should try to take all aspects of the demands of the financial statements in both macro and micro level into account.Why do companies need to prepare financial statements? Whose demands should be considered while preparing financial statements? Those questions are basic issues we should consider on the optimization of financial statements. From the perspective of "public interests", reliability and legal evidence are required as qualitative characters, which is the origin of the traditional "historical cost accounting". From the perspective of "private interest", security investors and financial regulatory authoritieshope that financial statements reflect changes of market prices timely recording "objective" market conditions. This is the origin of "fair value accounting". Whether one set of financial statements can be compatible with these two different views and balance the public interest and private interest? To solve this problem, we design a new balance sheet and an income statement.From 1992 to 2006, a lot of new ideas and new perspectives are introduced into China's accounting practices from international accounting standards in a gradual manner during the accounting reform in China. These ideas and perspectives enriched the understanding of the financial statements in China. These achievements deserve our full assessment and should be fully affirmed. However, academia and standard-setters are also aware that International Standards are still in the process of developing .The purpose of proposing new formats of financial statements in this paper is to push forward the accounting reform into a deeper level on the basis of international convergence.III. THE PRACTICABILITY OF IMPROVING THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SYSTEMWhether the financial statements are able to maintain their stability? It is necessary to mobilize the initiatives of both supply-side and demand-side at the same time. We should consider whether financial statements could meet the demands of the macro-economic regulation and business administration, and whether they are popular with millions of accountants.Accountants are responsible for preparing financial statements and auditors are responsible for auditing. They will benefit from the implementation of the new financial statements.Firstly, for the accountants, under the isolated design of historical cost accounting and fair value accounting, their daily accounting practice is greatly simplified. Accounting process will not need assets impairment and fair value any longer. Accounting books will not record impairment and appreciation of assets any longer, for the historical cost accounting is comprehensively implemented. Fair value information will be recorded in accordance with assessment only at the balance sheet date and only in the annual financial statements. Historical cost accounting is more likely to be recognized by the tax authorities, which saves heavy workload of the tax adjustment. Accountants will not need to calculate the deferred income tax expense any longer, and the profit-after-tax in the solid line table is acknowledged by the Company Law, which solves the problem of determining the profit available for distribution.Accountants do not need to record the fair value information needed by security investors in the accounting books; instead, they only need to list the fair value information at the balance sheet date. In addition, because the data in the solid line table has legal credibility, so the legal risks of accountants can be well controlled. Secondly, the arbitrariness of the accounting process will be reduced, and the auditors’ review process will be greatly simplified. The independent auditors will not have to bear the considerable legal risk for the dotted-line table they audit, because the risk of fair value information has been prompted as "not supported by legalevidences". Accountants and auditors can quickly adapt to this financial statements system, without the need of training. In this way, they can save a lot of time to help companies to improve management efficiency. Surveys show that the above design of financial statements is popular with accountants and auditors. Since the workloads of accounting and auditing have been substantially reduced, therefore, the total expenses for auditing and evaluation will not exceed current level as well.In short, from the perspectives of both supply-side and demand-side, the improved financial statements are expected to enhance the usefulness of financial statements, without increase the burden of the supply-side.IV. CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONSThe current rule of mixed presentation of fair value data and historical cost data could be improved. The core concept of fair value is to make financial statements reflect the fair value of assets and liabilities, so that we can subtract the fair value of liabilities from assets to obtain the net fair value.However, the current International Standards do not implement this concept, but try to partly transform the historical cost accounting, which leads to mixed using of impairment accounting and fair value accounting. China's accounting academic research has followed up step by step since 1980s, and now has already introduced a mixed-attributes model into corporate financial statements.By distinguishing legal facts from financial expectations, we can balance public interests and private interests and can redesign the financial statements system with enhancing management efficiency and implementing higher-level laws as main objective. By presenting fair value and historical cost in one set of financial statements at the same time, the statements will not only meet the needs of keeping books according to domestic laws, but also meet the demand from financial regulatory authorities and security investorsWe hope that practitioners and theorists offer advices and suggestions on the problem of improving the financial statements to build a financial statements system which not only meets the domestic needs, but also converges with the International Standards.基于会计管理理论的财务报表的优化方法摘要本文提供了一个方法，以提高财务报表的可靠性和实用性。
外文翻译--国际会计准则第36号-资产减值
外文翻译--国际会计准则第36号-资产减值本科毕业论文（设计）外文翻译外文题目 International Accounting Standard 36外文出处 International Accounting Standard原文：International Accounting Standard 36 Impairment of AssetsObjective1. The objective of this Standard is to prescribe the procedures that an entity applies to ensure that its assets are carried at no more than their recoverable amount. An asset is carried at more than its recoverable amount if its carrying amount exceeds the amount to be recovered through use or sale of the asset. If this is the case, the asset is described as impaired and the Standard requires the entity to recognise an impairment loss. The Standard also specifies when an entity should reverse an impairment loss and prescribes disclosures.Scope2. This Standard shall be applied in accounting for the impairment of all assets, other than:a inventories see IAS 2 Inventories ;b assets arising from construction contracts see IAS 11 Construction Contracts ;c deferred tax assets see IAS 12 Income Taxes ;d assets arising from employee benefits see IAS 19 Employee Benefits ;e financial assets that are within the scope of IAS 32 Financial Instruments.f investment property that is measured at fair value see IAS 40 Investment Property ;g biological assets related to agricultural activity that are measured at fair value less costs to sell see IAS 41 Agriculture ;h deferred acquisition costs, and intangible assets, arising from an insurer’s contractual r ights under insurance contracts within the scope of IFRS 4 Insurance Contracts; andi non-current assets or disposal groups classified as held for sale in accordance with IFRS 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations.3. This Standard does not apply to inventories, assets arising from construction contracts, deferred tax assets, assets arising from employee benefits, or assets classified as held for sale or included in a disposal group that is classified as held for sale, because existing IFRSs applicable to these assets contain requirements for recognising andmeasuring these assets.4. This Standard applies to financial assets classified as:a subsidiaries, as defined in IAS 27 Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements;b associates, as defined in IAS 28 Investments in Associates; andc joint ventures, as defined in IAS 31 Interests in Joint Ventures.For impairment of other financial assets, refer to IAS 39.5. This Standard does not apply to financial assets within the scope of IFRS 9, investment property measured at fair value in accordance with IAS 40, or biological assets related to agricultural activity measured at fair value less costs to sell in accordance with IAS 41. However, this Standard applies to assets that are carried at revalued amount ie fair value in accordance with other IFRSs, such as the revaluation model in IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment. Identifying whether a revalued asset may be impaired depends on the basis used to determine fair value:a if the asset’s fair value is its market value, the only difference between the asset’s fair value and its fair value less costs to sell is the direct incremental costs to dispose of the asset:i if the disposal costs are negligible, the recoverable amount of the revalued asset is necessarily close to, or greater than, its revalued amount ie fair value . In this case, after the revaluation requirements have been applied, it is unlikely that the revalued asset is impaired andrecoverable amount need not be estimated.ii if the disposal costs are not negligible, the fair value less costs to sell of the revalued asset is necessarily less than its fair value. Therefore, the revalued asset will be impaired if its value in use is less than its revalued amount ie fair value . In this case, after the revaluation requirements have been applied, an entity applies this Standard to determine whether the asset may be impaired.b if the asset s fair value is determined on a basis other than its market value,its revalued amount ie fair value may be greater or lower than its recoverable amount. Hence, after the revaluation requirements have been applied, an entity applies this Standard to determine whether the asset may be impaired.Definitions6. The following terms are used in this Standard with the meanings specified:Carrying amount is the amount at which an asset is recognised after deducting any accumulated depreciation amortisation and accumulated impairment losses thereon.A cash-generating unit is the smallest identifiable group of assets that generates cash inflows that are largely independent of the cash inflows from other assets or groups of assets.Corporate assets are assets other than goodwill that contribute tothe future cash flows of both the cash-generating unit under review and other cash-generating units.Costs of disposal are incremental costs directly attributable to the disposal of an asset or cash-generating unit, excluding finance costs and income tax expense.Depreciable amount is the cost of an asset, or other amount substituted for cost in the financial statements, less its residual value.Depreciation Amortisation is the systematic allocation of the depreciable amount of an asset over its useful life.Fair value less costs to sell is the amount obtainable from the sale of an asset or cash-generating unit in an arm’s length transaction between knowledgeable, willing parties, less the costs of disposal.An impairment loss is the amount by which the carrying amount of an asset or a cash-generating unit exceeds its recoverable amount.The recoverable amount of an asset or a cash-generating unit is the higher of its fair value less costs to sell and its value in use.Useful life is either:a the period of time over which an asset is expected to be used by the entity; orb the number of production or similar units expected to be obtained from the asset by the entity.Value in use is the present value of the future cash flows expectedto be derived from an asset or cash-generating unit.Identifying an asset that may be impaired7. Paragraphs 8 17 specify when recoverable amount shall be determined. These requirements use the term ‘an asset’ but apply equally to an individual asset or a cash-generating unit. The remainder of this Standard is structured as follows:a paragraphs 18 57 set out the requirements for measuring recoverable amount. These requirements also use the term ‘an asset’ but apply equally to an individual asset and a cash-generating unit.b paragraphs 58 108 set out the requirements for recognising and measuring impairment losses. Recognition and measurement of impairment losses for individual assets other than goodwill are dealt with in paragraphs 58 64.Paragraphs 65 108 deal with the recognition and measurement of impairment losses for cash-generating units and goodwill.In the case of an intangible asset, the term ‘amortisation’ is generally used instead of ‘depreciation’. The two terms have the same meaning.c paragraphs 109 116 set out the requirements for reversing an impairment loss recognised in prior periods for an asset or a cash-generating unit. Again, these requirements use the term ‘an asset’ but apply equally to an individual asset or a cash-generating unit.Additional requirements for an individual asset are set out in paragraphs 117 121, for a cash-generating unit in paragraphs 122 and 123, and for goodwill in paragraphs 124 and 125.d paragraphs 126 133 specify the information to be disclosed about impairment losses and reversals of impairment losses for assets and cash-generating units. Paragraphs 134 137 specify additional disclosure requirements for cash-generating units to which goodwill or intangible assets with indefinite useful lives have been allocated for impairment testing purposes.8. An entity shall assess at the end of each reporting period whether there is any indication that an asset may be impaired. If any such indication exists, the entity shall estimate the recoverable amount of the asset.9. In assessing whether there is any indication that an asset may be impaired, an entity shall consider, as a minimum, the following indications:External sources of informationa during the period, an asset’s market value has declined significantly more than would be expected as a result of the passage of time or normal use;b significant changes with an adverse effect on the entity have taken place during the period, or will take place in the near future, inthe technological, market, economic or legal environment in which the entity operates or in the market to which an asset is dedicated;c market interest rates or other market rates of return on investments have increased during the period, and those increases are likely to affect the discount rate used in calculating an asset’s value in use and decrease the asset’s recoverable amount materially;d the carrying amount of the net assets of the entity is more than its market capitalisation.Internal sources of informatione evidence is available of obsolescence or physical damage of an asset.f significant changes with an adverse effect on the entity have taken place during the period, or are expected to take place in the near future, in the extent to which, or manner in which, an asset is used or is expected to be used. These changes include the asset becoming idle, plans to discontinue or restructure the operation to which an asset belongs, plans to dispose of an asset before the previously expected date, and reassessing the useful life of an asset as finite rather than indefinite.g evidence is available from internal reporting that indicates that the economic performance of an asset is, or will be, worse than expected.10. The list in paragraph 9 is not exhaustive. An entity may identifyother indications that an asset may be impaired and these would also require the entity to determine the asset’s recoverable amount.13 Evidence from internal reporting that indicates that an asset may be impaired includes the existence of:a cash flows for acquiring the asset, or subsequent cash needs for operating or maintaining it, that are significantly higher than those originally budgeted;b actual net cash flows or operating profit or loss flowing from the asset that are significantly worse than those budgeted;c a significant decline in budgeted net cash flows or operating profit, or a significant increase in budgeted loss, flowing from the asset;d operating losses or net cash outflows for the asset, when current period amounts are aggregated with budgeted amounts for the future.12. The concept of materiality applies in identifying whether the recoverable amount of an asset needs to be estimated. For example, if previous calculations show that an asset’ s recoverable amount is significantly greater than its carrying amount, the entity need not re-estimate the asset’ s recoverable amount if no events have occurred that would eliminate that difference. Similarly, previous analysis may show that an asset’s recoverable amount is not sensitive to one or more of the indications listed in paragraph 9.13 As an illustration of paragraph 12, if market interest rates or other market rates of return on investments have increased during the period, an entity is not required to make a formal estimate of an asset’ s recoverable amount in the following cases:a if the discount rate used in calculating the asset’ s value in use is unlikely to be affected by the increase in these market rates. For example, increases in short-term interest rates may not have a material effect on the discount rate used for an asset that has a long remaining useful life; orb if the discount rate used in calculating the asset’ s value in use is likely to be affected by the increase in these market rates but previous sensitivity analysis of recoverable amount shows that:i it is unlikely that there will be a material decrease in recoverable amount because future cash flows are also likely to increase eg in some cases, an entity may be able to demonstrate that it adjusts its revenues to compensate for any increase in market rates ; or ii the decrease in recoverable amount is unlikely to result in a material impairment loss.14. If there is an indication that an asset may be impaired, this may indicate that the remaining useful life, the depreciation amortisation method or the residual value for the asset needs to be reviewed and adjusted in accordance with the Standard applicable to the asset, evenif no impairment loss is recognised for the asset.From：IAS36，Impairment of Assets[S].译文：《国际会计准则第36号-资产减值》目的本准则的目的是，规定企业用以确保其资产以不超过可收回价值的金额进行计量的程序。
xx国际会计准则第37号准备、或有负债和或有资产
xx国际会计准则第37号准备、或有负债和或有资产目的本准则的目的是确保将适当的确认标准和计量基础运用于预备、或有负债和或有资产，并确保在财务报表的附注中披露充分的信息，以使使用者能够明白得它们的性质、时刻和金额。
范畴1．本准则适用于所有企业对以下各项之外的预备、或有负债和或有资产的会计核算：（1）以公允价值计量的金融工具形成的预备、或有负债和或有资产：（2）执行中的合同（除了亏损的执行中的合同）形成的预备、或有负债和或有资产；（3）保险公司与保单持有人之间签订的合同形成的预备、或有负债和或有资产；以及（4）由其他国际会计准则规范的预备、或有负债和或有资产。
2．本准则适用于不是以公允价值计量的金融工具（包括担保）。
3．执行中的合同是指双方均未履行任何义务或双方均同等程度地履行了部分义务的合同。
本准则不适用于执行中的合同，除非它是亏损的。
4．本准则适用于保险公司的预备、或有负债和或有资产，但不适用于其与保单持有人之间签订的合同形成的预备、或有负债和或有资产。
5．如果其他国际会计准则规范了特定的预备、或有负债和或有资产，企业应运用该准则而不是本准则，例如，关于以下项目的准则也规范了特定的预备：（1）建筑合同（参见《国际会计准则第11号建筑合同》）；（2）所得税（参见《国队会计准则第12号所得税》）；（3）租赁（参见《国际会计准则第17号租赁》），然而，《国际会计准则第17号》未对已变为亏损的经营租质的核算提出具体要求，因而本准则应适用于这些情形；（4）雇员福利（参见《国际会计准则第19号一雇员福利》）。
6．一些作为预备处理的金额可能与收入的确认有关，例如企业提供担保以收取费用，本准则不涉及收入确认，《国际会计准则第18号收入》明确了收入确认标准，并就确认标准的应用提供了实务指南，本准则不改变《国际会计准则第18号》的规定。
7．本准则将预备定义为时刻或金额不确定的负债，在某些国家，“预备”也与一些项目相联系使用，例如折旧，资产减值和坏账：这些是对资产账面金额的调整，本准则不涉及。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
会计学论文外文文献及翻译--国际会计准则第37号或有负债和或有资产LNTU---Acc附录A国际会计准则第 37 号或有负债和或有资产目的本准则的目的是确保将适当的确认标准和计量基础运用于准备、或有负债和或有资产,并确保在财务报表的附注中披露充分的信息,以使使用者能够理解它们的性质、时间和金额。
范围1.本准则适用于所有企业对以下各项之外的准备、或有负债和或有资产的会计核算:(1)以公允价值计量的金融工具形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产:(2)执行中的合同(除了亏损的执行中的合同)形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产;(3)保险公司与保单持有人之间签订的合同形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产;(4)由其他国际会计准则规范的准备、或有负债和或有资产。
2.本准则适用于不是以公允价值计量的金融工具(包括担保)。
3.执行中的合同是指双方均未履行任何义务或双方均同等程度地履行了部分义务的合同。
本准则不适用于执行中的合同,除非它是亏损的。
4.本准则适用于保险公司的准备、或有负债和或有资产,但不适用于其与保单持有人之间签订的合同形成的准备、或有负债和或有资产。
5.如果其他国际会计准则规范了特定的准备、或有负债和或有资产,企业应运用该准则而不是本准则,例如,关于以下项目的准则也规范了特定的准备:(1)建造合同(参见《国际会计准则第11号建造合同》);(2)所得税(参见《国队会计准则第12号所得税》);(3)租赁(参见《国际会计准则第17 号租赁》),但是,《国际会计准则第 17 号》未对已变为亏损的经营租质的核算提出具体要求,因而本准则应适用于这些情况;(4)雇员福利(参见《国际会计准则第19号一雇员福利》)。
6.一些作为准备处理的金额可能与收入的确认有关,例如企业提供担保以收取费用,本准则不涉及收入确认,《国际会计准则第 18 号收入》明确了收入确认标准,并就确认标准的应用提供了实务指南,本准则不改变《国际会计准则第 18 号》的规定。
7.本准则将准备定义为时间或金额不确定的负债,在某些国家,“准备”也与一些项目相联系使用,例如折旧,资产减值和坏账:这些是对资产账面金额的调整,本准则不涉及。
8.其他国际会计准则规定了支出是作为资产还是作为费用处理,本准则不涉及这些问题,相应地,本准则既不禁止也不要求对提取准备时所确认的费用予以资本化。
9.本准刚适用于重组(包括中止营业)准备,重组符合中止营业的定义时,《国际会计准则第 35 号中止营业》可能要求提供附加的披露。
定义10.本准则中使用的下列术语,其定义为:准备,指时间或金额不确定的负债。
负债,指因过去事项而发生的企业的现时义务,该义务的结算预期会导致含经济利益的资源流出企业。
义务事项,指形成法定或推定义务的事项,这些法定或推定义务使企业没有现实的选择, 只能结算该义务。
法定义务,指因以下任意项而发生的种义务:(1)合同(通过其明确的或隐含的条款);(2)法规;(3)法律的其他实施。
推定义务,福因企业的行为而产生的种义务,其中:(1)由于以往实务的成型做法、公开的政策或相当明确的当前声明,企业已向其他方面表明它将承担特定的责任;(2)结果,企业使其他方面建立了个有效预期,即它将解除那些责任。
或有负债,指以下二者之一:(1)因过去事项而产生的潜在义务,其存在仅通过不完全由企业控制的个或数个不确定未来事项的发生或不发生予以证实;(2)因过去事项而产生、但因下列原因而未予确认的现时义务:①结算该义务不是很可能要求含经济利益的资源流出企业;或②该义务的金额不可以足够可靠地计量。
或有资产,指因过去事项而形成的潜在资产,其存在仅通过不完全由企业控制的个或数个不确定未来事项的发生或不发生予以证实。
亏损合同,指种合同,根据该合同履行义务发生的不可避免费用超过了预期获得的经济利益。
重组,指项由管理部门计划和控制、并重大地改变了企业的经营范围或进行该经营的方式的方案。
或有负债11.企业不应确认或有负债。
12.除非含经济利益的资源流出的可能性极小,否则或有负债应按第 86 段要求的那样予以披露,13.企业联合和各自对某项义务负有责任时,义务中预期由其他方面结算的部分应作为或有负债处理,企业对很可能要求含经济利益的资源流出的那部分义务确认准备,除非极少的情况下不能对该义务作出可靠的估计。
14.或有负债可能不按最初预料的方式发展,因此,应对它们进行持续的评价,以确定含经济利益的资源流出的可能性是否已变为很可能,如果对应以前作为或有负债处理的事项的未来经济利益流出的可能性变为很可能了,则应在可能性发生变化当期的财务报表上确认一项准备(除非在极少的情况下不能作出可靠的估计)。
或有资产15.企业不应确认或有资产。
16.或有资产通常由导致经济利益可能流入企业的未计划的事项或其他未预料到的事项形成。
索赔是或有资产的一个例子。
企业通过法律程序提出索赔,其结果具有不确定性。
17.或有资产不应在财务报表中予以确认,因为确认或有资产可能会导致那些可能永远不会实现的收益得到确认。
但是,收益基本肯定会实现时,相关资产已不是或有资产,此时将其确认是恰当的,18.经济利益很可能流入时,应按第89 段的要求披露或有资产。
19.应对或有资产进行持续评价,以确保情况的发展在财务报表中得到适当的反映。
经济利益基本肯定会流入时,该资产和相关收益应在变化发生当期的财务报表上予以确认。
经济利益只是很可能会流入时,企业应披露该或有资产(见第89 段)。
计量20.确认为准备的金额应是资产负傻表日结算现时义务所要求支出的最好估计。
21.结算现时义务所要求支出的最好估计,应是企业在资产负债表日结算该义务,或在此时将该义务转让给第三方而合理支付的金额。
在资产负债表日结算或转让义务通常不可能发生或是异常昂贵,但是,企业为结算或转让该义务进行合理支付的金额的估计,提供了资产负债表日结算现时义务所要求支出的最好估计。
22.结果和财务影响的估计由企业管理部门根据判断,同时辅之以类似交易的经验和(某些情况下)独立专家出具的报告来确定。
应考虑的证据包括资产负债表日后事项提供的附加证据。
23.围绕予以确认为准备的金额的不确定性,可根据情况采用不同的方式处理,如果予以计量的准备涉及大量的项目,则应基于其相关的可能性,对各种可能结果进行加权来对义务进行估计,这种估计的统计方法称为“预期价值法”。
因此,给定金额的损失的可能性不同(比如说 60%或90%)时,准备的金额也是不同的,如果存在可能结果的连续范围,且该范围中每一点和其他各点的可能性一样,则范围内的各点均可采用。
24.计量一项单项义务时,单个最可能的结果可能是该负债的最好估计。
但是,即使在这种情况下,企业也应考虑其他可能的结果,如果其他可能的结果大部分均比最可能的结果的金额高或低,则最好估计将是一项较高或较低的金额,例如,如果企业不得不纠正其为客户建造的主要厂房中存在的严重失误,则单个最可能金额可能是一次补救成功须花费的费用1000 万元,但是,如果存在重大的可能性,有必要作进一步的补救,则应提取一项较大金额的准备。
25.准备在税前计量,因为准备的税后结果及变化,应按《国际会计准则第12号所得税》进行处理,风险和不确定性26.不可避免地围绕很多事项和情况的风险和不确定性,应在计算准备的最好估计时予以考虑。
27.风险描述结果的变化,风险调整可能增加负债计量的金额。
在不确定的情况下进行判断需要谨慎,以使收益或资产不会高估,费用或负债不会低估,但是,不确定性并不说明应提取过多准备和故意夸大负债,例如,如果一个特别相反结果的预计费用是在谨慎的基础上进行估计的,那么该结果不能人为地认为比实际的情况更可能。
需要谨慎以避免对风险和不确定性进行重复调整,高估准备。
28.应按第85 段(2)的要求披露与支出金额相关的不确定性。
现值29.如果货币时间价值的影响重大,准备的金额应是结算义务预期所要求支出的现值。
30.因货币时间价值的影响,与资产负债表日后不久发生的现金流出有关的准备,比与较后发生的同样金额的现金流出有关的准备更加负有义务。
因此,影响重大时,准备应予折现。
31.折现率应是反映货币时间价值的当前市场评价及该负债特有风险的税前折现率。
折现靠不应反映未来现金流量估计已为其调整的风险。
未来事项32.对于可能影响结算业务所须金额的未来事项,如果有足够的客观证据表明它们将发生,则应在准备金额中予以反映。
33.预期的未来事项可能对计量准备特别重要。
例如,企业可能认为,在项目结束时清理场地的费用将因未来技术的变化而降低。
确认的金额应反映技术上合格且公正的观察者所作出的合理预测。
这些预测是该观察者考虑了清理场地时可使用技术等因素的所有证据后作出的。
因此,恰当的做法是,将与应用现有技术过程中积累的经验有关的预计费用减少额,或现有技术应用于比以前进行过的更大或更复杂的清理项目的预期费用,在预测中考虑。
但是,除非得到相当客观的证据的支持,否则企业不应对全新的清理技术的发展进行预期。
34.如果存在相当客观的证据表明,新法规基本肯定会颁布,那么新法规的潜在影响应在计量现时义务时予以考虑。
实务中出现的情况的多样化使确定一个在每种情况下均能提供充足、客观证据的单独事项是不可能的。
所要求的证据包括,需要什么样的法规、是否在适当的时候基本肯定会颁布和实施,在很多情况下,直至新法规颁布,才存在相当客观的证据。
资产的预期处置35.资产预期处置形成的利得不应在计量准备时予以考虑。
36.资产预期处置形成的利得不应在计量准备时予以考虑,即使该预期处置与形成准备的事项密切联系也是如此。
企业应在涉及相关资产的国际会计准则规定的时点确认资产预期处置形成的利得。
补偿37.如果结算准备所要求支出的部分或全部预期会由另方补偿,那么当且仅当如果企业结算该义务,就基本评定会收到补偿时,确认该补偿。
该补偿应作为项单独的资产处理。
对补偿确认的金额不应超过准备的金额。
38.在收益表中,与准备有关的费用可以扣除对补偿确认的金额后的净额列报。
39.有时,企业能够让另一方支付结算准备所要求支出的一部分或全部(例如,通过保险合同、豁免条款或供应商的保证),另一方可能补偿企业已付的金额或直接支付这项金额。
40.在大多数情况下,企业仍对所讨论的全部金额负有责任,以至于第三方出于某种原因未能支付时,企业不得不结算全部金额。
在这种情况下,应对负债全额确认准备;而且,应在企业结算该负债时就基本肯定会收到补偿的情况下,对预期的补偿确认一项单独的资产。
41.在某些情况下,第三方未能支付时企业对所讨论的费用不负有责任,在这种情况下,企业对这些费用不承担义务,因而不应将其包括在准备中。
42.如第29 段指出的那样,企业联合和各自负责的某项义务中,预期由其他方面结算的部分应作为或有负债处理。