A true and fair view of the principles/rules debate

David J. A. Alexander · Eva K. Jermakowicz

177 citations0/0 files storedAbacus

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Accounting Theory and Financial Reporting Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance Accounting and Financial Management

Abstract

The nature of ‘reality’ in the context of financial reporting is, at best, a generally agreed, inter‐subjective human construction. This article considers the nature, and alternative perceptions, of the notions of principles and rules, exploring the idea of true and fair view presentation as a meaningful requirement in its own right, and as an override. An overview of the standard setting process in the United States from the historical perspective identifies factors fostering the rules‐based accounting system. We then analyse recent developments in the United States regarding the adoption of a principles‐based accounting system, and in the U.K. arising from the introduction of IAS in Europe. Both support the conclusions that: The purpose of financial reporting is to give an understanding, which is not misleading, of the underlying economics of an enterprise; the ‘underlying economics’ represents an inherently subjective construct; rules, by themselves, are inadequate, whether or not they are based on principles; major and fundamental differences exist between various players on the world regulatory scene; much of the debate at the regulatory and policy level is at best vague and confused, more likely disingenuous, possibly intellectually dishonest; interested parties will interpret words, concepts and agreements differently; significant limitations for international standardization are implied by the above points. Further, no one player, construct or culture can impose its will at a global level. In 1942 the U.S. SEC aptly captured the appropriate sentiment: ‘The basic question [is] whether the financial statements performed the function of enlightenment, which is their only reason for existence’.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 177 citations exist upstream.

References

1981Reason, Truth and History 1995The construction of social reality 2003Principles-Based Accounting Standards 2005The introduction of International Accounting Standards in Europe: Implications for international convergence 2003Behavioral Evidence on the Effects of Principles- and Rules-Based Standards 2005The adoption of International Accounting Standards in the European Union

Cited by

2015Pragmatism and new directions in social and environmental accountability research 2014Non-governmental Organizational Accountability: Talking the Talk and Walking the Walk?2010Why Consistency of Accounting Standards Matters: A Contribution to the Rules‐Versus‐Principles Debate in Financial Reporting 2006Perceptions of the true and fair view concept: an empirical investigation 2010Islamic Financing and Business Framework: A Survey.2012Some Implications of IFRS Adoption for Accounting Education 2008A conceptual enquiry into the concept of a ‘principles-based’ accounting standard

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.