Professor Buckley’s paper is an attempt to explain why the U.S. accounting profession has adopted the so-called “constitutional” approach for evaluating and selecting financial accounting and reporting policies. Today, according to the author, this approach is the one followed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board. It is embodied in the Board’s publications relating to the conceptual framework project (e.g. FASB Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 1, “Objectives of Financial Reporting by Business Enterprises”, November 1978). Buckley argues that the two major competitors to the constitutional view the “common law” or “legal” approach and the “scientific” or “empirical” approach may not adequately protect the interests of the public accounting profession. He concludes that the constitutional approach has been “a rational, reasonable, and probably necessary choice”, but that certain reforms are needed if the approach is to continue to be effective. Reforms are needed that will broaden the constituency and increase the responsiveness of standard setters to all those organizations and individuals to whom they are accountable and responsible. The paper refers to both standards for accounting and financial reporting and standards or rules to regulate auditing and other services provided by public accountants. While the policy-making processes of the FASB and the AICPA have much in common, and, sometimes may be the same thing (see, for example, FASB Exposure Draft, “Specialized Accounting and Reporting Principles and Practices in AICPA Industry Accounting Guides, Industry Audit Guides, and Statements of Position”, 1 June, 1979), I shall concentrate my remarks on the standard-setting process for financial accounting and reporting. There are several reasons for this. First, the bulk of the paper is devoted to that topic. Second, I have just recently returned from a one-year appointment with the FASB as academic fellow and research specialist. Third, one project on which I acted as consultant while at the FASB was the Board’s project on criteria for selecting and evaluating financial accounting and reporting policies. This project is intended to be the second major “block” in the Board’s conceptual framework. Certain material in this document ties in with Professor Buckley’s remarks. This leads me to my first point. Professor Buckley is to be congratulated for identifying the need to evaluate the present accounting policy model, and to develop a more rigorous understanding of that model as it relates to certain alternative approaches or views toward policy formation. Analysis of the kind embodied in this paper has an important role to play in the standard-setting process. I agree with the author that the FASB’s approach as reflected in the Statement on the objectives of financial reporting and the forthcoming proposed Statement on selecting and evaluating financial accounting and reporting policies is basically constitutional in its orientation. But it is well to note that Buckley’s “words of caution”, which emanate from his analysts, are addressed in these conceptual framework documents especially the Exposure Draft on selecting and evaluating financial accounting and reporting policies. The Exposure Draft should be published in August 1979 with a comment period of 3-4 months. I will explain more of this later. The remainder of my remarks are divided into two sections. One examines aspects of the methodology used to “test” the principal hypothesis.
PLACE YOUR ADVERT HERE
- ACCOUNTING PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS3553
- EDUCATION PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS3486
- ENGLISH AND LINGUISTIC PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS2939
- COMPUTER SCIENCE PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS FINAL YEAR1274
- BANKING AND FINANCE PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS1250
- BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS1236
- EDUCATION FOUNDATION GUIDANCE AND COUNSELLING TOPICS AND MATERIALS1045
- ZOOLOGY PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS1002
- MASS COMMUNICATION PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS1001
- ANIMAL SCIENCE PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS978
- LAW PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS896
- ARTS EDUCATION PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS844
- MARKETING PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS690
- AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS676
- PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PROJECT TOPICS AND MATERIALS654
LATEST PROJECTS
STUDIES ON SOME ASPECTS OF ANTHRACNOSE-BLIGHT-DIEBACK COMPLEX OF CULTIVARS OF GRAPEVINES (VITIS SPP.) IN...
GENETIC VARIABILITY STUDIES OF TWENTY POTATO GENOTYPES
RELATIONSHIP OF HAEMOGLOBIN AND POTASSIUM POLYMORPHISM WITH CONFORMATION, MILK PRODUCTION AND BLOOD BIOCHEMICAL PROFILES...
ADOPTION OF AGRICULTURAL INNOVATIONS AMONG MEMBERS AND NON-MEMBERS OF WOMEN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN OJU...
SMALL FARMER CREDIT WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO NIGERIA
DISCLAIMER
All undertaking works, records and reports posted on this website, modishproject.com are the property/copyright of their individual proprietors. They are for research reference/direction purposes and the works are publicly supported. Do not present another person’s work as your own to maintain a strategic distance from counterfeiting its results. Use it as a guide and not to duplicate the work in exactly the same words (verbatim). modishproject.com is a vault of exploration works simply like academia.edu, researchgate.net, scribd.com, docsity.com, coursehero and numerous different stages where clients transfer works. The paid membership on modishproject.com is a method by which the site is kept up to help Open Education. In the event that you see your work posted here, and you need it to be eliminated/credited, it would be ideal if you call us on +2348053692035 or send us a mail along with the web address linked to the work, to [email protected]. We will answer to and honor each solicitation. Kindly note notification it might take up to 24 - 48 hours to handle your solicitation.