IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aad/iseicj/v5y2017i0p343-360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Debate On Prudence In Accounting

Author

Listed:
  • Hristina Oreshkova

    (Faculty of Finance and Accounting, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria)

Abstract

In support of the critical analysis targeted at substantiating the necessity of reintroducing “prudence” in the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting (CF), that is the primary author’s goal, the article provides further results as well as views and arguments, based on research, provoked by the International Accounting Standards Board’s decision to revise the CF (in September 2010) and remove “prudence” in favour of “neutrality” regarded as a qualitative characteristic. The author’s aim is not to discuss the role of the CF as a whole, or its objectives, but to contribute to the current debate on a complicated and highly controversial issue, raised in the Discussion Paper (DP), followed (in January 2014 and May 2015) by the Exposure Draft (ED) containing proposals for a revised CF.The thesis held by the author, both before and now, is that for a considerable number of reasons it is imperative to restore “prudence” in the CF, subjected to revision at the moment (and yet expected) as an introduction to thnternational Accounting Standards (IAS)/International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), with a clearly defined content of its definition in order to avoid misinterpretation or misunderstanding, which, in my view, will not impair “neutrality”, but will support it.On the basis of my long-lasting research alongside the thorough observation of the regulatory process, I would argue that as a supranational body, developing the accounting norms for many business entities operating in the EU and elsewhere, the EU accounting standards setter, who is responsible for the ambiguities or at least misconception, due to its prerogatives, has not been consistent in its policy with regard to prudence over the years. Probably one major reason is the influence of political, institutional and other factors in the global process of convergence. The development and deliberations as of December 2016 and January and February 2017 as to the revision of the CF have convincingly confirmed that once more.

Suggested Citation

  • Hristina Oreshkova, 2017. "The Debate On Prudence In Accounting," CBU International Conference Proceedings, ISE Research Institute, vol. 5(0), pages 343-360, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:aad:iseicj:v:5:y:2017:i:0:p:343-360
    DOI: 10.12955/cbup.v5.949
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ojs.journals.cz/index.php/CBUIC/article/view/949/1335
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.12955/cbup.v5.949?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Financial reportingprudence; conservatism; neutrality; hidden reserves; deliberate bias; transparency;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aad:iseicj:v:5:y:2017:i:0:p:343-360. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Petr Hájek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ojs.journals.cz/index.php/CBUIC .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.