国际会计准则IAS与国内会计准则的主要区别,速看!

发布时间:2019-12-28


你知道国际会计准则IAS与国内会计准则的主要区别,不知道的也没关系,下面就跟着51题库考试学习网一起来了解一下吧!

国际会计准则是由国际会计准则委员会制定并公布的会计一般规范,其目的是促成国际范围内的会计行为的规范化。而我国也有适用于国内的国内会计准则,它直接约束国内的各类会计活动。那么,两者都有哪些区别呢?

现已公布的国际会计准则有“会计政策的披露”、“存货估价”、“折旧会计”、“财务报表”、“合并财务报表”、“财务状况变动表”、“会计对价格变动的反映”、“非常事项与前期事项的处理和会计政策的改变”、“研究和开发活动的会计”、“或有事项和资产负债表日以后发生事项的处理”、“建筑合同会计”、“所得税会计”及“流动资产 流动负债的列示,等等。根据目前国际会计准则和我国会计准则的有关规定,现将两者在会计处理方面上的10项主要差异,包括:固定资产采购计价、借款费用资本化、非货币性交易、短期投资、长期投资商誉、研究与开发费用、开办费、资产类政府补助、债务重组、所得税等给大家做一分类。

固定资产采购计价

中国准则规定,固定资产一般以其历史成本或净值计价。对改变折旧方法作为会计政策变更。

国际准则规定,固定资产计价应当考虑公允价值的影响,包括资产重估和折现的影响。对改变折旧方法作为会计估计变更。

假设某企业200311日购房,价款1亿元,分10年等额还款,其未来现金流量现值为9千万元。

借款费用资本化

中国准则规定,为购建固定资产的专门借款所发生的借款费用,在符合资本化条件时应予资本化,直至资产达到预定可使用状态。资本化金额=借款利息+辅助费用和汇兑差额。

国际准则规定,用于构建资产的一般性借款符合条件可以资本化。资本化金额=所有专门借款费用-暂时投资收入。

假设某企业200311日借入1000万元专门借款用于建造厂房,03年平均支出为800万,企业将借入款项余额放入专项银行户口,利息收入为5万。根据中国准则计算的资本化金额=80万,根据国际准则计算的资本化金额=95万。这样,IASPRC多计入资本化金额15万,同时少确认利息费用15万。

以上就是51题库考试学习网带给大家的内容,如果还有其他不清楚的问题,请及时反馈给51题库考试学习网,我们会尽快帮您解答。


下面小编为大家准备了 ACCA考试 的相关考题,供大家学习参考。

3 (a) Leigh, a public limited company, purchased the whole of the share capital of Hash, a limited company, on 1 June

2006. The whole of the share capital of Hash was formerly owned by the five directors of Hash and under the

terms of the purchase agreement, the five directors were to receive a total of three million ordinary shares of $1

of Leigh on 1 June 2006 (market value $6 million) and a further 5,000 shares per director on 31 May 2007,

if they were still employed by Leigh on that date. All of the directors were still employed by Leigh at 31 May

2007.

Leigh granted and issued fully paid shares to its own employees on 31 May 2007. Normally share options issued

to employees would vest over a three year period, but these shares were given as a bonus because of the

company’s exceptional performance over the period. The shares in Leigh had a market value of $3 million

(one million ordinary shares of $1 at $3 per share) on 31 May 2007 and an average fair value of

$2·5 million (one million ordinary shares of $1 at $2·50 per share) for the year ended 31 May 2007. It is

expected that Leigh’s share price will rise to $6 per share over the next three years. (10 marks)

Required:

Discuss with suitable computations how the above share based transactions should be accounted for in the

financial statements of Leigh for the year ended 31 May 2007.

正确答案:
(a) The shares issued to the management of Hash by Leigh (three million ordinary shares of $1) for the purchase of the company
would not be accounted for under IFRS2 ‘Share-based payment’ but would be dealt with under IFRS3 ‘Business
Combinations’.
The cost of the business combination will be the total of the fair values of the consideration given by the acquirer plus any
attributable cost. In this case the shares of Leigh will be fair valued at $6 million with $3 million being shown as share capital
and $3million as share premium. However, the shares issued as contingent consideration may be accounted for under IFRS2.
The terms of the issuance of shares will need to be examined. Where part of the consideration may be reliant on uncertain
future events, and it is probable that the additional consideration is payable and can be measured reliably, then it is included
in the cost of the business consideration at the acquisition date. However, the question to be answered in the case of the
additional 5,000 shares per director is whether the shares are compensation or part of the purchase price. There is a need
to understand why the acquisition agreement includes a provision for a contingent payment. It is possible that the price paid
initially by Leigh was quite low and, therefore, this then represents a further purchase consideration. However, in this instance
the additional payment is linked to continuing employment and, therefore, it would be argued that because of the link between
the contingent consideration and continuing employment that it represents a compensation arrangement which should be
included within the scope of IFRS2.
Thus as there is a performance condition, (the performance condition will apply as it is not a market condition) the substance
of the agreement is that the shares are compensation, then they will be fair valued at the grant date and not when the shares
vest. Therefore, the share price of $2 per share will be used to give compensation of $50,000 (5 x 5,000 x $2). (Under
IFRS3, fair value is measured at the date the consideration is provided and discounted to presented value. No guidance is
provided on what the appropriate discount rate might be. Thus the fair value used would have been $3 per share at 31 May
2007.) The compensation will be charged to the income statement and included in equity.
The shares issued to the employees of Leigh will be accounted for under IFRS2. The issuance of fully paid shares will be
presumed to relate to past service. The normal vesting period for share options is irrelevant, as is the average fair value of the
shares during the period. The shares would be expensed at a value of $3 million with a corresponding increase in equity.
Goods or services acquired in a share based payment transaction should be recognised when they are received. In the case
of goods then this will be when this occurs. However, it is somewhat more difficult sometimes to determine when services
are received. In a case of goods the vesting date is not really relevant, however, it is highly relevant for employee services. If
shares are issued that vest immediately then there is a presumption that these are a consideration for past employee services.

(c) In November 2006 Seymour announced the recall and discontinuation of a range of petcare products. The

product recall was prompted by the high level of customer returns due to claims of poor quality. For the year to

30 September 2006, the product range represented $8·9 million of consolidated revenue (2005 – $9·6 million)

and $1·3 million loss before tax (2005 – $0·4 million profit before tax). The results of the ‘petcare’ operations

are disclosed separately on the face of the income statement. (6 marks)

Required:

For each of the above issues:

(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and

(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,

in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Seymour Co for the year ended

30 September 2006.

NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.

正确答案:

 

■ The discontinuation of the product line after the balance sheet date provides additional evidence that, as at the
balance sheet date, it was of poor quality. Therefore, as at the balance sheet date:
– an allowance (‘provision’) may be required for credit notes for returns of products after the year end that were
sold before the year end;
– goods returned to inventory should be written down to net realisable value (may be nil);
– any plant and equipment used exclusively in the production of the petcare range of products should be tested
for impairment;
– any material contingent liabilities arising from legal claims should be disclosed.
(ii) Audit evidence
■ A copy of Seymour’s announcement (external ‘press release’ and any internal memorandum).
■ Credit notes raised/refunds paid after the year end for faulty products returned.
■ Condition of products returned as inspected during physical attendance of inventory count.
■ Correspondence from customers claiming reimbursement/compensation for poor quality.
■ Direct confirmation from legal adviser (solicitor) regarding any claims for customers including estimates of possible
payouts.


(b) Ratio analysis in general can be useful in comparing the performance of two companies, but it has its limitations.

Required:

State and briefly explain three factors which can cause accounting ratios to be misleading when used for

such comparison. (6 marks)

正确答案:
(b) (i) One company may have revalued its assets while the other has not.
(ii) Accounting policies and estimation techniques may differ. For example, one company may use higher depreciation rates
than the other.
(iii) The use of historical cost accounting may distort the capital and profit of the two companies in different ways.
Other answers considered on their merits.

(ii) Determine whether your decision in (b)(i) would change if you were to use the Maximin and Minimax

regret decision criteria. Your answer should be supported by relevant workings. (6 marks)

正确答案:

声明:本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献自行上传,本网站不拥有所有权,未作人工编辑处理,也不承担相关法律责任。如果您发现有涉嫌版权的内容,欢迎发送邮件至:contact@51tk.com 进行举报,并提供相关证据,工作人员会在5个工作日内联系你,一经查实,本站将立刻删除涉嫌侵权内容。