School of Accountancy Discussion Papers

Permanent URI for this collection

https://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/2540

Browse

Browsing School of Accountancy Discussion Papers by Subject "Accounting standards"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Potentially dysfunctional impacts of harmonising accounting standards: the case of intangible assets
    (2000) Mathews, M. R.; Higson, A. W.
    Intangible Assets as a category within accounting and reporting disclosures have become far more noticeable in recent years, including large amounts associated with brands, mastheads, franchises, and patents. Many of these items are not purchased but internally generated within the organisation, and may account for much of the difference in magnitude between book value and market capitalisation. The International Accounting Standards Committee has recently issued IAS 38 to regulate the reporting of intangible assets, and includes therein the prohibition of those intangible assets, which have been internally generated. This prohibition would cut across recently developed practices in Australia and New Zealand. The problem is compounded by an increasingly close relationship between IASs and the national standards of both Australia and New Zealand, making it very likely that the problem areas within IAS 38 will be transferred to the national standards. This paper examines the areas within IAS 38, which are likely to lead to undesirable consequences, both for internally generated intangible assets but also in terms of the reinforcement of somewhat conservative aspects of financial accounting including historical cost and the inhibiting effects on new developments generally. The possible compounding effects of an expectations gap between the traditional and expected role of financial statements is briefly examined as a possible explanation of the divergence of opinion between different groups involved in the development of accounting standards and reports.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Resource consents - intangible fixed assets? Yes, but, too difficult by far!
    (2000) Hawkes, L. C.; Tozer, L.
    Recent international attempts to draft an accounting standard (IAS38) which establishes the most widely acceptable treatment for intangible assets have sparked debate among standard setters, practising accountants and media analysts. Contentious issues include differing treatment for internally and externally generated intangible fixed assets, and the requirement for the existence of a ready market for the exchange of intangible assets. A further question has been identified, that of whether the ‘right to do something’, as in permission to act, is in itself an intangible asset and if so how should it be treated. An example of this is resource consents issued under the Resource Management Act 1991. The aim of this research was to investigate the nature of resource consents as intangible assets according to ICANZ disclosure and recognition standards and to determine the level of disclosure practised by companies listed on the New Zealand Stock Exchange. Disclosure of resource consent details as non-financial information would provide a significant proportion of the benefits involved in disclosing this class of asset while limiting the costs involved in the production of the information. We conclude that the details of resource consents held should be disclosed in the annual report as additional non-financial information, or as a separate schedule of resource consents held in the notes to the financial statements as per FRS1. This view is not addressed by the requirements of IAS38 or ED87 as this 'class of intangible assets' is not discussed at all. However, it can be argued that the omission of resource consents and other similar intangibles is contrary to the spirit of the true and fair view requirement of the Financial Reporting Act and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).