ssrn-id1740890 (1)
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
1/31
HISTORY-BASED ACCOUNTING REFORM:
USING MATHEMATICS PERSPECTIVE TO IDENTIFY AND SOLVE SOME MAIN
PROBLEMS IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION AND STANDARDS
Author:
SONY WARSONO, PhD
Email address:
[email protected]; [email protected]
Institution:
Department of Accounting
Faculty of Economics and Business
Universitas Gadjah Mada
Yogyakarta Indonesia
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
2/31
History-based Accounting Reform
1
HISTORY-BASED ACCOUNTING REFORM:
USING MATHEMATICS PERSPECTIVE TO IDENTIFY AND SOLVE SOME MAIN
PROBLEMS IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION AND STANDARDS
ABSTRACT
Manuscript Type: Perspective
Research Issue: Perceived as a pure social science, prominent accounting scholars agree that thecurrent accounting development overemphasizes on rules, and this has wide negative impacts on
accounting education and research. Thus, accounting reform is necessary even though it is still
unclear the direction of the reform.
Research Findings/Insights: The basic thesis of this study is that accounting is an application of
mathematics because accounting was documented in the mathematics book and written by Luca
Pacioli as a mathematics professor. Firstly, this study shows the inappropriateness of current
accounting teaching methods. Specifically, this study shows that the use of debits and credits is
purely the application of mathematics. Secondly, this study identifies the limitation of the
definition of financial statement elements, and proposes the alternative redefinition of the
elements. Thirdly, this study shows that the use of a mathematical perspective helps accountingprofession to solve current accounting issues. Finally, this study proposes the development of
three pillars, i.e. mathematics, rules, and art, in a balanced manner to do accounting reform.
Theoretical/Academic/Policy Implications: This study provides a new perspective that the
accounting development is based on the history of accounting itself, i.e. accounting as an
application of mathematics. Using the mathematical perspective, not only do accounting scholars
improve the accounting education but also we innovate accounting research agenda. In addition,
this study offers insights to accounting standard boards interested in developing a global uniform
of financial accounting standard that effectively work.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
3/31
History-based Accounting Reform
2
HISTORY-BASED ACCOUNTING REFORM:
USING MATHEMATICS PERSPECTIVE TO IDENTIFY AND SOLVE SOME MAIN
PROBLEMS IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION AND STANDARDS
INTRODUCTION
The 2001 and 2002 accounting scandals were considered the beginning of the wave of the global
financial crisis. The wave of the scandals spread widely and resulted in significant damages.
Many factors potentially contributed to the scandals (see Ball, 2009). The most recent wave of
global financial crisis was the 2007 and 2008 financial crisis sometimes described as the most
serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. The crisis was the result of frauds and
mistakes committed by managers who were accountable to no one (Zingales, 2009:391).
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA, 2009) as the global body for
professional accountants demands the accounting profession to learn from the year long financial
crisis because it is clearly unacceptable that poor quality loans can be sliced, diced and parceled
up with an AAA sticker and overvalued on banks balance sheets as a consequence.
The magnitude of this worldwide financial crisis calls for a fundamental reassessment of
all areas of business and economic scholarship, especially accounting because the main roles of
accounting is to provide financial information. The better the accounting as a financial reporting
system is, the higher the quality of financial information outcomes will be. It is expected that
accounting provides information on what really happens both in micro- and macro-economic
activities. In turn, accounting will detect and prevent the global financial crisis. Unfortunately,
the accounting development is still far from the expectation. Accounting today is under pressure
even from inside. Demski (2007) questions whether accounting is an academic discipline.
Fellingham (2007) argues that accounting academicians tend to think in terms of contributions to
the current generation of students, instead of to the academy or to future generations of students.
Hopwood (2007) argues that accounting researchers increasingly focus on accounting research
issues that are insufficiently innovative and increasingly detached from reality. Ball (2008)
argues that an understanding of the actual economic role of financial reporting is important from
both a positivist scientific perspective and a normative perspective. Recently Basu (2008:426)
demanded several scholars to present the topic "What is the most important accounting issue
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
4/31
History-based Accounting Reform
3
where we either think we understand it but in fact do not or have failed to consider the issue in
anywhere near the depth it deserves?"
Perceived as pure social science, rules are fundamental in accounting (Penno, 2008), like
in law and politics. However, in its development, prominent accounting scholars agree that the
current accounting development overemphasizes on rules. Over time accounting profession tends
to apply a rule-based approach which emphasizes compliance over substance to financial
reporting rather than a principle-based approach which emphasizes substance over compliance
(Ball, 2009:277). This development has wide and significant negative impacts on accounting
education and research (Hopwood, 2007; Demski, 2007; Fellingham, 2007; Ball, 2008, 2009;
Arnold, 2009).
The current case is the adoption of IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards).
The objective of the IFRS adoption is that a uniform set of accounting standards will achieve the
goals of comparability and consistency of financial reporting that applies throughout the world.
On the one side, prior research studies find that the adoption of IFRS provides benefits on certain
conditions (Daske, Hail, Leuz & Verdi, 2008; Li, 2010; Armstrong, Barth, & Riedl, 2010).
Furthermore, the Financial Reporting Policy Committee of the Financial Accounting and
Reporting Section of the American Accounting Association concludes that the adoption of IFRS
is a desirable goal (AAA FRPC, 2010:117). On the other side, Holthausen (2009) argues that
the objective of IFRS adoption would not be successful unless the underlying institutional and
economic factors among countries were similar. Another committee in the American Accounting
Association, the Financial Accounting Standards Committee favors allowing U.S. companies to
choose use of U.S. GAAP or IFRS rather than mandating one global monopoly set of standards.
(AAA FASC, 2010). In short, the effectiveness of the IFRS adoption is still debatable. This
dilemma is not unusual in accounting standard setting. As a matter of fact, it is unlikely to find
one industry, for example the telecommunication or computer industries, applies a single
industry standard around the world. Interestingly, even though these telecommunication and
computer industries use different standards but they still achieve the goals of comparability and
interconnectivity.
Accounting reform is necessary and starts running now. The reform is a main part of the
enforcement of corporate governance initiatives. Demski (2007:156) challenges accounting
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
5/31
History-based Accounting Reform
4
academicians to do good and redefine the game, and believes that the change will come from
young accounting scholars who learn accounting with fun. Recently the former Vice-Chairman
of the Financial Accounting Standards BoardDavid Mosso (2010) proposed a new accounting
model that measured wealth and provided information about entitys financial health. The model
was expected to discourage political tampering. This paper uses a mathematical perspective,
especially the double entry system, to propose the accounting reform. The use of a mathematical
perspective is appropriate and valid because accounting itself was academically documented in
the mathematics book by Luca Pacioli as a mathematics professor (discussed in the second
section). Moreover, using the mathematical perspective, this paper shows the inappropriateness
of the present accounting education and proposes the solutions (third section), identifies the
limitations of the current financial standards and proposes the solutions (fourth section), and
proposes the solutions to solve two current accounting issues (fifth section). The final section
concludes the discussion.
ACCOUNTING AND MATHEMATICS
As widely acknowledged, Luca Pacioli discussed accounting in his mathematics book
Summa de Arithmetica, Geometria, Proportioni et Proportionalita (hereafter, Summa). Summas
English title would be Collected Knowledge of Arithmetic, Geometry, Proportions and
Proportionality (Weis & Tinius, 1991). The first time Summa was published, Luca Pacioli had
been teaching mathematics courses in several universities for more than 20 years (Journal of
Accountancy, 1987). Sangster, Stoner, & McCarthy (2007) mention that there were 10 chapters
in the Summa: a) chapter 1 7 about Arithmetic, b) chapter 8 about Algebra, c) chapter 9 about
Business, including, Particularis de Computis et Scripturis translated intoDetails of Accounting
and Recording (Rabinowitz, 2009), and d) chapter 10 about Geometry and Trigonometry. The
section of Particularis de Computis et Scripturis appears to be included for the sake of
completeness to recognize the importance of arithmetic principles in the application of
bookkeeping (Rabinowitz, 2009).
Luca Pacioli was neither an accountant nor bookkeeper, but a university professor of
mathematics (Peters & Emery, 1978; Weis & Tinius, 1991; Hernandez-Esteve, 1994;
Rabinowitz, 2009), astrologer to Pope Leo X, and the author of a number of mathematics books
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
6/31
History-based Accounting Reform
5
(Sangster et al., 2007). Pacioli cleverly explained mathematics in a clear and interesting way
reflecting the state of mathematics during the early Renaissance (Weis & Tinius, 1991).
Most of accounting literature agrees that the double entry system is an application of
mathematics. It was possible that the double entry system had existed hundreds of years before it
was published in Summa (Yamey, 1994; Rabinowitz, 2009). Interestingly, the double entry
system is one of few principles that stay unchanged for more than 500 years (Hatfield, 1924;
Littleton, 1926; Rabinowitz, 2009). InMathematics Magazine, Ellerman (1985) confirms that the
double entry system is purely the application of mathematics.
The use of debits and credits in the double entry system is also an application of
mathematics. Most of modern accounting textbooks define debits meaning the left side, and
credits meaning the right side (e.g. Anthony, Hawkins, & Merchant, 2007; Williams, Haka, &
Bettner, 2007; Weygandt, Kieso, & Kimmel, 2008). The definition indicates that the use of
debits and credits is identical with algebra that has left and right sides.
Peters & Emery (1978) believe that mathematicians did not use negative numbers when
Pacioli published the Summa. In the contrary, Scorgie (1989) demonstrates that the negative
numbers were known before the publication of the Summa. This study argues that the use of
debits and credits in the double entry system is mainly because there is no negative numbers in
financial unit. As we all know, accounting uses a monetary unit principle to measure the
economic activities (Littleton, 1926). Mathematically, moving negative numbers (suppose minus
5) from the left side of algebra to the right side will change the numbers into positive ones (plus
5). Thus, the use of debits and credits in accounting that conveys financial information is purely
an application of mathematics. This argument is important to explain the rules of debits and
credits discussed in the next section.
REFORMING THE ACCOUNTING EDUCATION
Even though accounting has been taught for more than 500 years, discussions about
accounting teaching methods are always appealing. The traditional teaching of accounting has
been criticized in many countries (Duff & McKinstry, 2007). While business has experienced
dynamic changes, the study of accounting remains essentially the same (Albrecht & Sack, 2000),
passive (Bonner, 1999; Boyce, Williams, Kelly, & Yee, 2001), procedural (Dempsey &
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
7/31
History-based Accounting Reform
6
Stegmann, 2001), inadequate in equipping the student with the necessary competencies
(Mohamed & Lashine, 2003), and relying merely on a one-way direction of knowledge
distribution (Williams, 1993; Saunders & Christopher, 2003). This traditional learning of
accounting makes accounting textbooks look similar to one another (Sullivan & Benke, 1997)
which in turn makes accounting less attractive to students.
A great number of experts have been discussing the need of changes in the teaching
methods of accounting (Rankin, Silvester, Vallely, & Wyatt, 2003; Hartnett, Romcke, & Yap,
2004). Albrecht & Sack (2000) argue that the study of accounting needs to be transformed to
catch up with changes in technology and globalization. Saudagaran (1996) and Springer &
Borthick (2004) noted that the traditional curriculum of accounting, emphasizing memorizing
skills, may actually hinder the students efforts to develop the requisite competence in
accounting, such as critical thinking. Other researchers suggested the use of information
technology to improve the effectiveness of accounting study (Elliott, 1992; Pincus, 1997;
Mohamed & Lashine, 2003; David, Maccracken, & Reckers, 2003; Goldwater & Fogarty, 2007).
Fordham & Hayes (2009) found that paper color may have significant contribution to student
performance in the accounting principles courses.
Our accounting textbooks typically consist of little other than a recitation of the more
important standards (Ball, 2008:428); We teach the rules, and de-emphasize our
contribution to the academy (Fellingham, 2007:160); and We have ceded to regulators the
care, feeding, and deepening of our intellectual foundations. (Demski, 2007:156). Those three
statements confirm that the teaching of accounting today overemphasizes standards. Some
critical issues that might be questioned by students are answered based only on the rules. This
paper discusses the two following basic issues problematic in accounting education.
The Rules of Debits and Credits
The rules of debits and credits have been much debated by experts. On the one side,
experts argue that the mechanism of debits and credits does not make sense (debits and credits
are nothing more than pluses and minuses, Ingram, 1998:411), demands the student simply to
memorize (Saudagaran, 1996; Pincus, 1997), is too narrowly procedural (Patten & Williams,
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
8/31
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
9/31
History-based Accounting Reform
8
----------------------------------------------
Insert Figure 2 about here
------------------------------------------------
Case B. Supposed, Assets = 10, Liabilities = 4, and Equity = 6. The basic accounting
equation is 10 = 4 + 6. Next, the amount of liabilities is the difference between 18 and 14 (18
14), and accounting does not recognize the negative number. Based on the ordered pairs of the
group of differences construction (see Ellerman, 1985), the liabilities with the value of 4 can be
recorded either on one side, i.e. 18 is recorded to the debit and 14 to the credit (alternative A) or
14 to debit and 18 to the credit (alternative B). According to the mathematical formulation,
however, the alternative B should be applied because the liabilities have a positive value and
located on the right side of the accounting equation (see Figure 3). The interpretation is that
number 14 on the debit deducts number 18 on the credit. As a result, the increase of liabilities is
recorded on the credit while the decrease of liabilities is recorded on the debit (see Figure 4).
----------------------------------------------
Insert Figure 3 about here
------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Insert Figure 4 about here
------------------------------------------------
Case C. Supposed, Assets = 10, Liabilities = 4, and Equity = 6. The basic accounting
equation is 10 = 4 + 6. Next, the amount of equity is the difference between 36 and 30 (36 30),
and accounting does not recognize the negative number. Based on the ordered pairs of the group
of differences construction (see Ellerman, 1985), the equity with the value of 4 can be recorded
either on one side, i.e. 36 is recorded to the debit and 30 to the credit (alternative A) or 30 to
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
10/31
History-based Accounting Reform
9
debit and 36 to the credit (alternative B). According to the mathematical formulation, however,
the alternative B should be applied because the equity has a positive value and located on the
right side of the accounting equation (see Figure 5). The interpretation is that number 30 on the
debit deducts 36 on the credit. As a result, the increase of equity is recorded on the credit while
the decrease of equity is recorded on the debit (see Figure 6).
----------------------------------------------
Insert Figure 5 about here
------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Insert Figure 6 about here
------------------------------------------------
In summary, the rules of debits and credits are based on a mechanism which entirely
follows the mathematical logics. In our experience, students can understand and accept the rules
more easily than if they have to memorize it. In other words, the use of the mathematical
perspective has made irrelevant the assumption that the debit and credit rules are something that
should be memorized. With a good reasoning, students may find it easier to apply the debit and
credit rules to all kinds of algebraic equations, not just in relation to accounting equation.
It is true that the rules of debits and credits tend to be mechanical but the rules are always
relevant to be taught in accounting courses because of the following reasons. First, the debit and
credit rules convey a picture to students that accounting is based on established knowledge,
especially mathematics. Second, as computer science with its binary digits (0 and 1) and the
science of electricity with its on and off, accounting is endowed with debits and credits as a
unique knowledge, which is used only in accounting. Third, debits and credits can be used to
enhance the concreteness of knowledge of accounting; the study of debits and credits tangibilizes
the workings of accounting. Tangibilizing the accounting mechanism is important to help
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
11/31
History-based Accounting Reform
10
students understand accounting topics related to keeping journals, posting, which are indeed in
the heart of accounting as an academic discipline. Fourth, as accounting students are expected to
compile or construct information, not just to use information, they must have acquired basic
knowledge of data processing to present useful information (Vangermeersch, 1997). Fifth,
knowledge of debits and credits encourages students to think systematically and logically, and to
develop the knowledge about accounting dynamics as fast growing science through the
implementation of mathematical knowledge.
The Rationale of Accounting Equation
In Summa, Luca Pacioli codified the double entry systems which are based on the basic
accounting equation as: Assets = Liabilities + Equity (Equation 1). The rationale behind the
equation is that assets are resources under the firms control, whose funds come from liabilities
and equity (sources of funds). In other words, the rationale of the Equation 1 is that the resources
must be always equal to the sources of funds. Then, the equation was expanded to include
expense and revenue elements to represent firms economic activities. Expenses and revenues
are part of the equity; revenues increase equity, while expenses decrease equity. Thus, the
expanded accounting equation was written as: Assets = Liability + Equity + Revenues
Expenses (Equation 2a). The rationale of the Equation 2a is that resources must be equal to
sources of fund in which revenues and expenses are part of the equity. These rationales are
primarily based on the balance-sheet approach so that other accounting variables (i.e. revenues
and expenses) are considered secondary and derivative (Dichev, 2008:454). Many textbooks
employ Equation 1 to analyze transactions which result in changes in the element of revenues
and expenses (e.g., King, Lembke, & Smith, 2001; Porter and Norton, 2001; Warren, Reeve, &
Fess, 2002; Libby, Libby, & Short, 2004; Williams et al., 2005; Anthony et al., 2007). Several of
these textbooks write down the Equation 2a in their books (Horngren, Sundem, & Elliott, 2002;Weygandt et al., 2008).
This study argues that the rationale employed to explain the basic accounting equation
(Equation 1) is not consistent with those employed to explain the expanded accounting equation
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
12/31
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
13/31
History-based Accounting Reform
12
equity, may result in their being less than optimal. Analogizing the approaches of data
management in the computer system, the database approach provides information which is more
up-to-date, standardized, and easier to access than the application-oriented approach because the
database approach separate data from their application software (Romney & Steinhart, 2009).
More than just offering consistent rationale, the use of mathematical rationale (Equation
2b) will make it much simpler to explain why the elements of assets and expenses should receive
the same treatment in relation to debits and credits even though by definition assets and expenses
markedly differ from one another; assets represent sources which provide future benefits, while
expenses represent a sacrifice of assets (FASB, 1985). Actually, assets and expenses have the
same rules of debits and credits because both of them represent the uses of fund.
REFORMING THE ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
The International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) issued the conceptual
framework in 1989. It was based on FASB, which adopted the balance sheet model of financial
reporting (Camfferman & Zeff, 2007). More specifically, the definition of the elements of
financial statements was based on the perspective of assets (Alfredson, Leo, Picker, Pacter,
Radford & Wise, 2007). This happened because the standards considered economic resources or
assets as central to the existence and operations of an individual entity (FASB, 1985:Par. 11)
and the lifeblood of a business enterprise (FASB, 1985:Par. 15). Furthermore, the IASC was
replaced by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) in 2001.
Currently the Joint Project IASB/FASB is redefining the elements of financial statements.
The Joint Project IASB/FASB tentatively adopted the following working definitions of asset and
liability as follows:
An assetof an entity is a present economic resource to which the entity has a right
or other access that others do not have. (IASB FASB, 2008:Asset Definition)
A liability of an entity is a present economic obligation for which the entity is the
obligor. (IASB FASB, 2008:Liability Definition)
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
14/31
History-based Accounting Reform
13
Essentially the re-definition of the elements of assets and liabilities by the Joint Project
IASB/FASB was still based on the same perspective, namely the balance sheet orientation
(Dichev, 2008).
So far the work of the Joint Project IASB/FASB is still continuing. The tentative
definition of the elements of equity has not been issued. Taking a close look at the definition of
assets and liabilities made by the Joint Project IASB/FASB, it is predicted that the Joint Project
IASB/FASBs efforts to define equity and other elements, including revenues the IASB refers
to them as income and expenses, would still be based on the perspective of assets, unless the
Boards expand their effort to a more thorough reassessment of their conceptual framework
(Dichev, 2008:454). In this case, it is very likely that equity will be defined as net assets, and
revenues and expenses would be parts of the equity.
The accounting standards actually employ mathematics in defining the elements of
financial statements. Equity is defined as net assets, namely the arithmetic difference between
assets and liabilities (Alfredson et al., 2007:76). Furthermore, revenues are conventionally
defined as asset increases or liability decreases (or a combination of both). Such a definition of
revenues is based purely on the accounting equation; increases in revenues (recognition of the
occurrence of revenues) on the right side of the accounting equation should be followed by asset
increases on the left side of the equation or followed by liability decreases on the right side of the
equation (or a combination of both) so that a balance in the accounting equation would be
maintained. Unfortunately, the elements of financial statements, especially for revenues and
expenses, are not adequately defined to the effect that accounting runs the risk of providing
financial information which does not correctly represent the reality of business. The limitation of
accounting standards in defining the elements of financial statements and the alternative
redefinition of the financial statement elements are discussed below.
The Limitation of the Accounting Standards
The use of the asset perspective to define the other elements of financial statements may
result in an incomplete definition. In turn, accounting may provide financial information which
does not faithfully represent the firms real condition. Many experts have revealed the
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
15/31
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
16/31
History-based Accounting Reform
15
Illustrative Case. Business event A: Merchandising firm Q, which is in the business of
selling computers, and merchandising firm R, which is in the business of selling furniture, barter
their merchandise. According to the standards, both merchandising firms Q and R recognize this
business event as a revenue transaction, as in this event there is an increase of assets into each
firm.
Business event B: Service firm S, which is in the information technology consulting
business, and service firm T, which is in the accounting consulting business, barter their main
service. According to the standards, both firms S and T should not recognize this business event
as a revenue transaction because there is no increase of assets or decrease of liabilities in each of
these firms. Accordingly this business event cannot be classified as a revenue transaction by
either firm.
Business event C: Service firm S, which is in the accounting consulting business, is
conducting barter with merchandising firm Q, which is in the business of selling computers.
According to the standards, firm S should recognize this business event as a revenue transaction
because there is an increase in assets in the form of computers. Firm Q, however, should not
recognize this business event as a revenue transaction because there is neither an increase in
assets nor decrease in liabilities even though firm Q delivers its services. This business event,
therefore, is recognized as a transaction by firm S but cannot be recognized as such by firm Q.
Business event D: Service firm V, which is in the business of advertisement, purchases a
number of firm Ws shares (with the intention to own them). The payment is made directly and
fully in the form of advertising services delivered by firm V. Firm V should recognize this
business event as a revenue transaction because there is an increase in assets in the form of
shared investment. According to the standards, however, firm W should not recognize this
business event as an expense transaction because there is neither a decrease in assets nor an
increase in liabilities as a result of this business event; what results is an increase in equity.
Business event E: Service firm X, which is in the business of TV advertising, distributes
revenue dividends in the form of services to firm Y, which owns more than 20 percent of the
company shares. On the announcement date, firm Y immediately utilizes the revenue dividends.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
17/31
History-based Accounting Reform
16
According to the standards, firm X should not recognize this business event as a revenue
transaction because there is neither an increase in assets nor a decrease in liabilities; what results
is an increase in dividends distribution. On the other hand, firm Y should recognize this business
event as an expense transaction because the firm receives advertising services and there is a
decrease in assets in the form of shared investment (equity method). Therefore, this business
event should be recognized as an expense transaction by firm Y but should not be recognized as
a transaction by firm X.
The illustrative cases above are simulations of transactions that may happen in business
on the basis of the expanded accounting equation. In short, the recognition of revenues can be
balanced not only by increases in assets or decreases in liabilities, but also by increases in
expenses or decreases in equity. Likewise, the recognition of expenses can be balanced by
decreases in assets, increases in liabilities, increases in equity, or increases in revenues.
Therefore, the current definitions of the elements of revenues (income) and expenses are
incomplete. This occurs because the standards argue that revenues and expenses should make a
direct impact on the assets and/or liabilities. The inadequacy of the definitions of revenues and
expenses is also due to the placement of revenues and expenses under the category of equity.
The Redefinition of the Elements of Financial Statements
One of the topics currently discussed in earnest by accounting experts is the approach that
should be adopted in constructing financial statements (Haka, 2009). Current standards have
opted for the balance sheet approach, while some accounting scholars suggest the use of income
statement approach (see Dichev, 2008; AAA FASC, 2007). First and foremost, financial
accounting should provide financial information, not just the balance sheet and income
statement. Therefore, standards determined by the use of one perspective are likely to
underestimate the importance of other perspectives. As demonstrated above, the use of the
balance sheet perspective has rendered as un-coverable a large number of business events
significantly related to revenues and expenses. Likewise, the use of the income statement
approach is likely to underestimate the importance of business events related to assets, liabilities,
and equity.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
18/31
History-based Accounting Reform
17
To solve the problems related to the use of appropriate approaches in the definition of the
elements of financial statements, we can take a lesson from the approach employed in data
management. Early in the development of the computer, data management employed a file-
oriented approach, which tied the data to the application that produced them. As a consequence,
in order to access particular data with other applications the data must be converted first. The
conversion process may cause changes to the original data. This file-oriented system was
considered inefficient, highly susceptible to errors, redundant, etc (Wilkinson, Cerullo, Raval, &
Wong-on-Wing, 2000). Modern data management uses a database approach, which separates
data from the application that produced them. The database approach makes it possible to
produce data which are standardized, consistent, and integrated (Romney & Steinhart, 2009). An
analogy can be made between the use of the balance sheet or income statement approach and the
file-oriented approach.
Mathematically, the expanded accounting equations (Equation 2a and Equation 2b) show
that the elements of assets, expenses, liabilities, equity, and revenues are on the same level. The
placement of one element above another is inconsistent with the accounting equation. Therefore,
we argue that the approach employed in the definitions of the elements of financial statements
should be on the basis of an infobase (another word for database, which is already common
in the literature of information systems), instead of using either the balance sheet or the income
statement approach. With the infobase approach, the elements of financial statements are not
tied to the financial information which has been produced. It is only at the end of the accounting
period that these elements are designed to produce financial statements.
The current definition of the elements of financial statements is mechanistic rather than
substantive, especially for the definitions of the elements of equity, revenues (income) and
expenses. The mechanistic definition is not flexible enough for future development, and is
incapable of providing any information about the subject to be defined. The equation of Assets +
Expenses = Liabilities + Equity + Revenues indicates that the left side of the equation reflects the
uses of funds, while the right side of the equation reflects the sources of funds. That rationale
should, therefore, be employed in defining each element of financial statements.
Using the infobase approach, the alternative definitions of the elements of financial
statements are as follow. First, assets are uses of fund in the form of resources whose economic
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
19/31
History-based Accounting Reform
18
value can still be utilized in the future. Second, expenses are uses of fund in the form of
resources whose economic value has been utilized for the firms activities within a particular
period. Third, liabilities are sources of fund from third parties acting as creditors. Fourth, equity
is sources of fund from the companys owner, retained earnings (accumulated profits), and
sources other than creditors. Fifth, revenues are sources of fund from the firms activities within
a particular period. This infobase-based definition of elements of financial statements is more
abstract, and covers many more business events than the current mechanistic definition allows
for.
MATHEMATICAL PERSPECTIVE TO SOLVE THE CURRENT ISSUES
Written documents show that accounting was included in Luca Paciolis mathematic
book (Sangster et al., 2007). In its historical progress, however, accounting has developed a
focus on rules (Penno, 2008). A large number of rules have been issued to the effect that
accounting was well-known as a regulatory enterprise (AAA FASC, 2007). Nevertheless, the
development of rules cannot completely protect the users of accounting information (Scott,
2009). Besides focusing on the development of rules, accounting has also developed an emphasis
on vocational skills. The teaching of accounting, as a result, has focused largely on vocational
skills (Demski, 2007), with little contribution to the academic world (Fellingham, 2007).
Financial reporting is not an end in itself. It is a means of communicating to the users of
financial reports information that is useful in making choices among alternative uses of scarce
resources (FASB, 2006:OB6) and The objective of general purpose financial reporting is to
provide financial information . . . (FASB, 2008:OB2). Thus, financial accounting is a tool to be
used to provide financial information. As a tool, accounting should be of the same nature as
computing, aircraft technology, etc. All these technologies require established knowledge in
order to function effectively; to give the best possible contribution to humanity, and to allow for
continuous development. This study argues that three major pillars should be developed in a
balanced manner to enable accounting to become an academic discipline, namely mathematics,
rules, and art.
The Joint Project IASB/FASB has been developing the Conceptual Framework for
Financial Reporting that underlies financial reporting. Several topics are still debated up to the
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
20/31
History-based Accounting Reform
19
present. These debated topics usually become problematic when we have to choose between two
extreme points which appear utterly irreconcilable but which eventually must be accommodated
in order to serve the interests of all parties involved. For example, the Joint Project IASB/FASB
originally stated in the Preliminary Views of the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting
that the potential users of financial reports include equity investors, creditors, suppliers,
employees, customers, governments and their agencies and regulatory bodies, and the public
(FASB, 2006:OB6). Later, the Joint Project IASB/FASB revised the objective of external
financial reporting as to provide information that is useful for capital providers including equity
investors, lenders, and other creditors (FASB, 2008:OB6).
Below are two Joint Project IASB/FASBs objectives as mentioned in the Preliminary
Reviews of the Conceptual Framework (FASB, 2006) that can be achieved through the
development of the accounting equation.
Stakeholder vs. Stockholder Approaches
The objective of external financial reporting is directed to the needs of a wide range of
users (stakeholder approach). However, as long as all sources of funds other than liabilities are
contained in one element, namely the equity, it will be difficult for financial reporting to provide
information which is useful to users other than equity investors and creditors (stockholder
approach). As the equity contains various sources of funds the quality of information coming
from the element may decrease. For example, current financial reporting is unable to provide a
representative picture of the long-term contribution of the management to the company because
their performance is periodically moved into the equity. This study argues that this could be the
reason for the emergence of conflicts between principals and agents. Likewise, current financial
reporting is unable to provide information which is specific about governmental subsidies,
donations or facilities received by the firm, as the information about governmental support is
mixed up with information about other sources of funds in one big basket called equity.
In this information era firms need information that is more detailed and comprehensive in
order to make informed decisions. Had the accounting equation consisted of elements that
represented specific types of users, information that is useful to a wide range of users might have
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
21/31
History-based Accounting Reform
20
been produced. The accounting equation could be developed along the line of, for instance,
Asset + Expenses = Liabilities + Owners Capital + Revenues + Management Contribution
+ Governmental Fund + Residual Sources.
Relevance vs. Reliability
The qualitative characteristics of financial reporting information should be relevant,
faithful, comparable, and understandable. However, as long as the elements of accounting
equation consist of financial information employing various measurements, it will be difficult to
fulfill these qualitative requirements. For example, when assets cover several accounts that
employ some measures, the assets are unable to fully meet both the characteristics of relevance
and faithful representation. Likewise, the use of various measurements in one element may
weaken the comparability and understandability of the financial reporting. This also applies to
other elements in the accounting equation, both in the element of balance sheet and income
statements.
Had the accounting equation consisted of various elements containing information
measured with the same (homogenous) measuring tool, the accounting information produced
would have acquired the long-awaited characteristics of relevance, faithful representation,
comparability, and understandability. For instance, the elements of assets are divided into two,
namely value-based assets and historical-cost assets, and the elements of expenses are divided
into two, namely accrual-based expenses and cash-based expenses. Elements of the value-based
assets reflect the provision of information which is relevant for decision-making, while the
elements of historical-cost assets reflect information which is relevant for faithful representation.
THE TRIANGLE OF ACCOUNTING DEVELOPMENT
Accounting is a tool to attain a particular aim (Ingram 1998). In other words, accounting
should be treated like technology. As a technology, accounting can be made analogous to
aircrafts, computers, or any other technological products. Those technologies are developed
systematically, logically, and on the basis of sciences whose validity has been so well established
that they are capable of growing even further and giving a vast contribution to the humankind.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
22/31
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
23/31
History-based Accounting Reform
22
accounting knowledge, rather than to be content with understanding accounting simply as a rule
of play established by the business game. The use of the mathematical perspective can also be an
initial step toward the development of new models of determining monetary values in financial
statements, which up to now have been considered within the competence of other fields.
CONCLUSION
The development of financial accounting overemphasizing rules has limited accounting
simply to the rules of the game. The use of a mathematical perspective identifies the
inappropriateness of current accounting teaching methods and reveals the limitations of the
current standard boards in defining elements of financial statements. This study also briefly
discusses the use of the mathematical perspective to achieve the ideal objectives expected by the
Joint Project IASB/FASB.
Accounting should apply mathematical theorems widely. As a preliminary step, we
should identify and discuss several persistent questions and problems, including standards, by
using the mathematical perspective. Subsequently, developing accounting along the line of the
three main pillars, namely mathematics, rules, and arts, should be undertaken in a balanced
manner. Like in computer and telecommunication technologies, accounting should be able not
only to function as a supporting tool to portray the reality of business, but also to function as a
transformer in the future. The use of mathematical perspective in the development of accounting
will convey financial information that is useful to prevent, detect, and correct global financial
crisis.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
24/31
History-based Accounting Reform
23
REFERENCES
AAA FASC (American Accounting Associations Financial Accounting Standards Committee:
Benston, G.J., Carmichael, D.R., Demski, J.S., Dharan, B.G., Jamal, K. Laux, R.,
Rajgopal, S., & Vrana, G.). 2007. The FASBS conceptual framework for financial
reporting: A critical analysis.Accounting Horizons, 21: 229-238.
AAA FASC (American Accounting Associations Financial Accounting Standard Committee:
Jamal, K., Bloomfield, R., Christensen, T.E., Colson, R.H., Moehrle, S., Ohlson, J.,
Penman, S., Stober, S., Sunder, S., & Watts, R.L.). 2010. AResearch-based perspective
on the SECs proposed ruleRoadmap for the potential use of financial statements
prepared in accordance with international financial reporting standards (IFRS) by U.S.
issuer.Accounting Horizons, 24: 139-147.
AAA FRPC (American Accounting Associations Financial Reporting Policy Committee of the
Financial Accounting and Reporting Section: Bradshaw, M., Callahan, C., Ciesielski, J.,Gordon, E.A., Hodder, L., Hopkins, P.E., Kohlbeck, M., Laux, R. McVay, S., Stober, T.,
Stocken, P., & Yohn, T.L.). 2010. Response to the SECs proposed rule roadmap for the
potential use of financial statements prepared in accordance with international financial
reporting standards (IFRS) by U.S. issuer.Accounting Horizons, 24: 117-128.
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA). 2009. Climbing out of the credit
crunch. Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, http://www.accaglobal.com/
allnews/national/australia/2009/3150218; viewed 20 July, 2010.
Anthony, R.N., Hawkins, D.F., & Merchant, K.A. 2007. Accounting: Text and cases.
Singapore: McGraw-Hill/Irwin (International edition).
Albrecht, W.S. & Sack, R.J. 2000. Accounting education: Charting the course through a perilous
future.Accounting Education Series, Florida: American Accounting Association.
Alfredson, K., Leo, K., Picker, R., Pacter, P., Radford, J., & Wise. V. 2007. Applying
international financial reporting standards. Queensland Australia: John Wiley & Sons
Australia Ltd.
Armstrong, C.S., Barth, M.E., & Riedl, E.J. 2010. Market reaction to the adoption of IFRS in
Europe. The Accounting Review, 85: 31-61.
Arnold, P.J. 2009. Global financial crisis: The challenge to accounting research. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 34: 803-804.
Ball, R. 2008. What is the actual economic role of financial reporting?Accounting Horizons, 22:
427-432.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
25/31
History-based Accounting Reform
24
Ball, R. 2009. Market and political/regulatory perspectives on the recent accounting scandals.
Journal of Accounting Research. 47: 277-323.
Basu, S. 2008. Panel on big unanswered questions in accounting Genesis. Accounting
Horizons, 22: 425-426.
Bonner, S.E. 1999. Choosing teaching methods based on learning objectives: An integrative
framework,Issues in Accounting Education, 14: 11-40.
Boyce, G., Williams, S., Kelly, A., & Yee, H. 2001, Fostering deep and elaborative learning and
generic (soft) skill development: The strategic use of case studies in accounting
education,Accounting Education: An International Journal, 10: 37-60.
Camfferman. K. & Zeff, S.A. 2007. Financial reporting and global capital markets: A history
of the international accounting standards committee, 1973-2000. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford
University Press.
Cheney, G. 2009. How much should financial reports tell?Accounting Today, 23(4): 12.
Daske, H., Hail, L., Leuz, C., & Verdi, R. 2008. Mandatory IFRS reporting around the world:
Early evidence on the economic consequences. Journal of Accounting Research, 46:
1085-1142.
David, J.S., Maccracken, H., & Reckers, P.M. 2003. Integrating technology and business process
analysis into introductory accounting courses.Issues in Accounting Education, 18: 417-
425.
Demski, J.S. 2007. Is accounting an academic discipline?Accounting Horizons, 21: 153-157.
Dempsey, A. & Stegmann, N. 2001. Research on accounting I Attracting and retaining
learners. https://www.saica.co.za/documents/ Accounting%201.pdf.: viewed 31 March,
2009.
Dichev, I. D. 2008. On the balance sheet-based model of financial reporting. Accounting
Horizons, 22: 453-470.
Diller-Haas, A. 2004. Time to change introductory accounting. The CPA Journal. April: 6062.
Duff, A. & McKinstry, S. 2007. Students approaches to learning. Issues in AccountingEducation, 22: 183-214.
Ellerman, D.P. 1985. The mathematics of double-entry bookkeeping. Mathematics Magazine,
58: 226-233.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
26/31
History-based Accounting Reform
25
Elliott, R. K. 1992. The third wave breaks on the shores of accounting.Accounting Horizons, 6:
61-85.
FASB. 1985. Statement of financial accounting concepts no. 6: Elements of financial
statements. Financial Accounting Standards Board.
FASB. 2006. Preliminary views: Conceptual framework for financial reporting: Objective of
financial reporting and qualitative characteristics of decision-useful financial
reporting information. Financial Accounting Standards Board,
FASB. 2008. Exposure draft: Conceptual framework for financial reporting: the objective of
financial reporting and qualitative characteristics and constraints of decision-useful
financial reporting information. Financial Accounting Standards Board.
Fellingham, J.C. 2007. Is accounting an academic discipline? Accounting Horizons, 21: 159-
163.
Fordham, D.R. & Hayes, D.C. 2009. Worth repeating: Paper color may have an effect on student
performance.Issues in Accounting Education, 24: 187-194.
Goldwater, P.M. & Fogarty, T.J. 2007. Protecting the solution: A high-tech. method to
guarantee individual effort in accounting classes. Accounting Education: an
International Journal,16: 129-143.
Haka, S. 2009. Accounting tipping points and thought leadership. Accounting Education News,
37: 3-4.
Hartnett , N., Romcke, J., & Yap, C. 2004. Student performance in tertiary-level accounting: An
international student focus,Accounting & Finance, (44): 163-185.
Hatfield, H. R. 1924. An historical defense of bookkeeping.Journal of Accountancy, 241-253.
Hernandez-Esteve, E. 1994. Luca Pacioli's treatiseDe Computis et Scripturis: A composite or a
unified work?Accounting, Business, and Financial History, 4: 67-82.
Holthausen, R.W. 2009. Accounting standards, financial reporting outcomes, and enforcement.
Journal of Accounting Research. 47: 447-458.
Hopwood, A.G. 2007. Whither accounting research? The Accounting Review. 82: 1365-1374.
Horngren, C.T., Sundem, G.L., & Elliott, J.A. 2002. Introduction to financial accounting. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
IASB FASB (International Accounting Standards Board Financial Accounting Standards
Board). 2008. Project update: Conceptual frameworkPhase B: Elements and recognition.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
27/31
History-based Accounting Reform
26
International Accounting Standards Board and Financial Accounting Standards
Board, http://www.fasb.org/project/cf_phase-b.shtml: viewed 31 March, 2009.
Ingram, R.W. 1998. A note on teaching debits and credits in elementary accounting. Issues in
Accounting Education, 13: 411-415.
Journal of Accountancy. 1987. Pacioli Revisited. May: 195-197.
King, T.E., Lembke, V.C., & Smith, J.H. 2001. Financial accounting: A decision-making
approach. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Li, S. 2010. Does mandatory adoption of international financial reporting standards in the
european union reduce the cost of equity capital? The Accounting Review, 85: 607-636.
Libby, R., Libby, P.A., & Short, D.G. 2004. Financial accounting. Singapore: McGraw-Hill
(International edition).
Littleton, A.C. 1926. Evolution of the ledger account. The Accounting Review, 1: 12-23.
Mirza, A.A., Orrell, M. & Holt, G.J. 2008. IFRS: Practical implementation guide and
workbook.New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Mohamed, E.K.A. & Lashine, S.H. 2003. Accounting knowledge and skills and the challenges of
a global business environment.Managerial Finance, 29(7): 3-16.
Mosso, D. 2010. Transparency unveiled: Financial crisis prevention through accounting reform.
Accounting Horizons, 24: 95-107.
Nelson, I.T. 1995. Whats new about accounting education change? An historical perspective on
the change movement.Accounting Horizons, 9: 62-75.
Patten, R.J. & Williams, D.Z. 1990. Theres trouble right here in our accounting programs: The
challenge to accounting educators.Issues in Accounting Education, 5: 175-179.
Penno, M.C. 2008. Rules and accounting: Vagueness in conceptual frameworks. Accounting
Horizons, 22: 339-351.
Peters, R.M. & Emery, D.R. 1978. The role of negative numbers in the development of double
entry bookkeeping.Journal of Accounting Research, 16: 424-426.
Pincus, K.V. 1997. Is teaching debits and credits essential in elementary accounting? Issues in
Accounting Education, 12: 575-579.
Porter, G.A. & Norton, C.L. 2001. Financial accounting: The impact on decision makers.
Orlando: Harcourt College Publishers.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
28/31
History-based Accounting Reform
27
Rabinowitz, A.M. 2009. Who was Luca Pacioli? The CPA Journal, February: 12-14.
Rankin, M., Silvester, M., Vallely, M. & Wyatt, A. 2003. An analysis of the implications of
diversity for students first level accounting performance. Accounting and Finance, 43:
365-393.
Romney, M. B. and Steinbart, P.J. 2009. Accounting information systems. Singapore: Pearson
International Edition.
Sangster, A., Stoner, G.N., & McCarthy, P.A. 2007. Lessons for the classroom from Luca
Pacioli.Issues in Accounting Education, 22: 447-457.
Saudagaran, S.M. 1996. The first course in accounting: An innovative approach, Issues in
Accounting Education, 11: 83-94.
Saunders, G. & Christopher, J.E.R. 2003. Teaching outside the box: A look at the use of some
nontraditional teaching models in accounting principles courses. Journal of AmericanAcademy of Business,3: 162-165.
Scorgie, M.E. 1989. The role of negative numbers in the development of double entry
bookkeeping.Journal of Accounting Research, 27: 316-318.
Scott, W. R. 2009.Financial accounting theory. Canada: Pearson Education.
Springer, C.W. & Borthick, A.F. 2004. Business simulation to stage critical thinking in
introductory accounting: Rationale, design, and implementation. Issues in Accounting
Education, 19: 277-303.
Subramanyam, K. R. & Wild, J. J. 2009. Financial statement analysis. Singapore: McGraw-
Hill/Irwin (International edition).
Sullivan, M.C. & Benke, R.L. 1997. Comparing introductory financial accounting textbooks.
Journal of Accounting Education,15: 181-220.
Vangermeersch, R.G. 1997. Dropping debit and credits in elementary accounting: A huge
disservice to students.Issues in Accounting Education, 12: 581-583.
Wallace, W.A. 1997. Where are the debits and credits? Editors perspective. Issues in
Accounting Education,12: 229-230.
Walther, L. 2009.Principles of accounting. http://www.principlesofaccounting.com/:viewed 17
March 2009.
Warren, C.S., Reeve, J.M., & Fess, P.E. 2002. Financial & managerial accounting. Ohio: South-
Western, a division of Thomson Learning.
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
29/31
History-based Accounting Reform
28
Weis, W.L. and Tinius, D.E. 1991. Luca Pacioli: Renaissance accountant. Journal of
Accountancy, November: 91102.
Weygandt, J.J., Kieso, D.E., & Kimmel, P.D. 2008. Accounting principles. Singapore: John
Wiley & Sons (Asia) Ltd.
Wilkinson, J.W., Cerullo, M.J., Raval, V., & Wong-On-Wing, B. 2000.Accounting information
systems: Essential concepts and applications. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Williams, D.Z. 1993. Reforming accounting education.Journal of Accountancy, August: 76-82.
Williams, J.R., Haka, S.F., & Bettner, M.S. 2005. Financial & managerial accounting: The
basis for business decisions. Singapore: McGraw-Hill/Irwin (International edition).
Yamey, B.S. 1994. Notes on Pacioli's first chapter. Accounting, Business, and Financial
History, 4: 51-66.
Zingales, L. 2009. The Future of security regulation.Journal of Accounting Research, 47: 391-425.
APPENDIX
FIGURE 1
The Mathematics of Numbers Debit/Left Side
Debit/Left Side Credit/Right Side
10 = 4 + 6
25 15
FIGURE 2
The Rule of Debits and Credits Assets
Debit/Left Side Credit/Right Side
10 = 4 + 6
+ -
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
30/31
History-based Accounting Reform
29
FIGURE 3
The Mathematics of Number Credit/Right Side
Debit/Left Side Credit/Right Side
10 = 4 + 6
14 18
FIGURE 4
The Rule of Debits and Credits Liabilities
Debit/Left Side Credit/Right Side
10 = 4 + 6
- +
FIGURE 5
The Mathematics of Number Credit/Right Side
Debit/Left Side Credit/Right Side
10 = 4 + 6
30 36
-
8/2/2019 SSRN-id1740890 (1)
31/31
History-based Accounting Reform
30
FIGURE 6
The Rule of Debit and Credit Equity
Debit/Left Side Credit/Right Side
10 = 4 + 6
- +