Asymmetric verifiability in the recognition of incomes and expenses in the light of positive accounting theory

Authors

  • Heiberg Andrés Castellanos Sánchez Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida-Venezuela

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21501/2500-669X.1915

Keywords:

Conservatism, International Financial Reporting Standards, recognition, verifiability.

Abstract

The elimination of the qualitative characteristic of prudence (conservatism) from the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting (2014) has generated significant discussion among the members of the accounting community. In this regard, this study examines the asymmetric verifiability in the IFRS’ recognition of incomes and expenses, from the Watts & Zimmerman’s positive theory of accounting. This research takes a qualitative approach, limited to documents. It concludes that the income and expenses arising from the use of fair value, and the multiplicity of alternative measurement treatments are factors present in IFRS (2014), that undermine conservatism, and probably causing a decrease in the value of each entity due to lower cash flows in the future.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Heiberg Andrés Castellanos Sánchez, Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida-Venezuela

Mérida-Venezuela

References

Guay, W. & Verrechia, R. (2007). Conservative Disclosure [Documento en línea]. Recuperado de http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=995562.

International Accounting Standards Board – IASB. (2010). Marco Conceptual para la Preparación y Presentación de Estados Financieros. En Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS (Traducción oficial). Londres, Inglaterra.

International Accounting Standards Board - IASB. (2014). Norma Internacional de Información Financiera NIIF 13 Medición del Valor Razonable. Londres, Inglaterra: International Accounting Standards Board, IASB. Traducción oficial del Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS.

International Accounting Standards Board – IASB. (2014a). Fundamentos de las Conclusiones del Marco Conceptual para la Información Financiera. En Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS (Traducción oficial). Londres, Inglaterra.

International Accounting Standards Board, IASB (2014a).Marco conceptual para la información financiera. Traducción oficial del Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS. (Traducción oficial). Londres, Inglaterra.

International Accounting Standards Board – IASB. (2014b). Marco Conceptual para la Información Financiera. En Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS (Traducción oficial). Londres, Inglaterra.

International Accounting Standards Board – IASB. (2014c). Norma Internacional de Información Financiera Nº 12 Impuesto a las Ganancias. En Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS (Traducción oficial). Londres, Inglaterra.

International Accounting Standards Board – IASB. (2014d). Norma Internacional de Información Financiera Nº 16 Propiedades, Planta y Equipo. En Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS (Traducción oficial). Londres, Inglaterra.

International Accounting Standards Board – IASB. (2014e). Norma Internacional de Información Financiera Nº 36 Deterioro del Valor de los Activos. En Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS (Traducción oficial). Londres, Inglaterra.

International Accounting Standards Board – IASB. (2014f). Norma Internacional de Información Financiera Nº 40 Propiedades de Inversión. En Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS (Traducción oficial). Londres, Inglaterra.

International Accounting Standards Board, IASB (2014).Marco conceptual para la información financiera. Traducción oficial del Comité de Revisión de la Fundación IFRS.

Jensen, M. & Meckling, W. (1994). Teoría de la empresa: la gerencia; costes de agencia y estructura de la propiedad. En Louis putterman (ed.lit.). La naturaleza económica de la empresa. España: Alianza Editorial.

Moonitz, M. (1974). Obtaining Agreement on Standards. Revista Studies

in Accounting Research, (8), 188-196.

Muñoz, J. (2008). Contabilidad financiera. España: Prentice Hall.

Muñoz, Á. (2009). El valor razonable: cautelas y desafíos. Revista Intervención General de la Administración del Estado, (22), 48-51.

Valle, C. (2009). Hacia el reino de la subjetividad: una crítica al modelo contable del valor razonable. Revista Legis de Contabilidad y Auditoría, (39), 133-153.

Watts, R. (2003a). Conservatism in Accounting, Part I: Explanations and Implications. Revista Accounting Horizons, 17 (3), 207-221.

Watts, Rp (2003b). Conservatism in Accounting Part II: Evidence and Research Opportunities. Revista Accounting Horizons, 17(4), 287-301.

Watts, R. & Zimmerman, J. (1978). Towards a Positive Theory of the Determination of Accounting Standards. The Accounting Review, 3 (1), 112-134.

Zeff, S. (1972). Forging Accounting Principles in Five Countries: A

History and Analysis of Trends, (2) 318 -320.

Downloads

Published

2016-04-15

How to Cite

Castellanos Sánchez, H. A. (2016). Asymmetric verifiability in the recognition of incomes and expenses in the light of positive accounting theory. Science of Human Action, 1(1), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.21501/2500-669X.1915

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2016)

Section

Contabilidad

License

PUBLICATIONS POLICY

 

• The author must send completed the declaration of transfer of economic rights and declaration of conflicts of interest, which will be provided by the management of the magazine. This document indicates the originality of the article, which is not published in another medium and that is not simultaneously postulated in another journal.

 

• The author will transfer all rights to the article to the journal Science Of Human Action.

 

• Once the evaluation of the article has begun, the authors agree not to withdraw it until the end of the process.

 

• The Science Of Human Action journal will submit the articles received for initial evaluation by the Editorial Committee, in case the Committee finds the material pertinent, it will be evaluated by two anonymous referees who will determine if it is publishable. If one referee approves and the other rejects it, a third party will be appointed.

 

• The address of Science Of Human Action will answer within a maximum of three (3) days about the receipt of the contribution received from the author.

 

• Printed items will not be received. All the proponents will have to send their writings through the e-mail of the magazine.

 

• Partial versions of the text will not be received, that is, those that are not structurally adjusted to the type of article.

 

• Once the article is sent, it is understood that the author authorizes the publication of these data.

 

• The reception of articles does not imply an obligation to publish them. The authors are directly responsible for the ideas, judgments and opinions expressed in the articles; in such a way that the content does not compromise the thinking of the Editorial Committee or the Institution.

• Once the article is submitted, it is understood that the author authorizes the publication of the data corresponding to the author's note.

 

• This is an open access journal that does not charge authors for either the editorial process or the publication. All costs of editorial production are assumed by the Luis Amigó Catholic University.

 

ETHICS OF PUBLICATION

 

• The Editorial Committee, by virtue of transparency in the processes, will ensure the academic quality of the journal.

 

• Causes of rejection are considered: plagiarism, adulteration, invention or falsification of content and author data, which are not original and unpublished.

 

• In no case, the journal's management will require the author to cite it or publish articles with conflicts of interest.

• If once the article is published: 1) the author discovers substantive errors that threaten the quality or scientificity, may request its removal or correction. 2) If a third party detects the error, it is the obligation of the author to retract immediately and proceed to the public removal or correction.