ABSTRACT

This paper analyses the value of the IPSASB’s approach in the consultation paper on the measurement of assets and liabilities in public sector financial reporting. It shows that reference to extant standards results in a patchwork of data that may be more confusing than guiding. The paper concludes that if the proposed Exposure Draft purports to consolidate accounting theory on measurement for the public sector, it should refer to public sector accounting practices rather than concepts that have evolved from private sector accounting practices. Such an approach would strengthen accountability and transparency of the public sector because financial reporting would be compliant with a relevant suite of standards.

IMPACT

This paper highlights the paradoxical strategy adopted by the IPSASB when referring to private sector concepts in the process of developing standards for the public sector. Instead of providing guidelines that promote better accounting practices, the result seems to be complicated proposals that confuse the user. The IPSASB should mitigate this confusion by first revising and updating the measurement chapter in its Conceptual Framework (CF). The IPSASB needs to examine the status quo and reconsider whether a separate standard on measurement is really necessary, or whether it would be sufficient to align existing standards with the updated CF. This paper needs to be read by public sector accounting standard setters; and it will also be of interest to practitioners and academics.

摘要

本文在有关公共部门财务报告中资产和负债计量的咨询文件中分析了IPSASB方法的价值。它表明，对现有标准的引用导致数据的拼凑，可能比指导更令人困惑。本文的结论是，如果拟定的征求意见稿旨在巩固公共部门计量会计理论，则应参考公共部门会计惯例，而不是从私营部门会计惯例演变而来的概念。这种方法将加强公共部门的问责制和透明度，因为财务报告将符合一套相关的标准。

影响

本文着重强调了IPSASB在制定公共部门标准过程中提及私有部门概念时所采取的自相矛盾的策略。结果并没有提供促进更好的会计惯例的准则，结果似乎是使用户感到困惑的复杂提案。IPSASB应该通过首先修改和更新其概念框架（CF）中的度量一章来减轻这种混乱。IPSASB需要检查现状，并重新考虑是否真的需要单独的测量标准，或者是否足以使现有标准与更新的CF保持一致。公共部门会计准则制定者需要阅读本白皮书。从业人员和学者也将对此感兴趣。