【作者】 陈秧秧；

【导师】 葛家澍；

【作者基本信息】 厦门大学 ， 会计学， 2007， 博士

【副题名】兼论公允价值属性的应用

【摘要】 本文对国际会计准则委员会制定并改进金融工具会计准则的历程进行全面回顾。金融工具作为财务会计领域最为复杂的问题之一,其准则制定也经历一个从披露与列报到确认与计量、由简入难、逐步深入的过程。但是,经过二十年的发展,金融工具会计准则远未实现完善与完美,关键的公允价值计量仍是准则制定机构久攻不克的难关。金融工具准则制定分拆为披露与计量两阶段是IASC应对现实困境而有悖初衷之举。披露与列报规范从早期的综合性征求意见稿(ED 48)中抽取出来而先行发布。在理论上,当复杂的交易或事项未能经过严格“过滤”进入账簿与报表中确认时,表外先行披露重要内容是可行且必要的。但是,IAS 32(1995)却出现有违财务会计基本程序严密性的逻辑问题:金融工具在表内确认与计量之前,先对表上的列报方式与会计政策披露(主要为确认标准与计量基础)作出规范!对IAS 32的修订始终与IAS 39的任何变动紧密相关。IASB似乎已然意识到,金融工具的表内列报应紧随确认与计量程序,而非与披露同时规范。这一思想加之金融市场监管力量的推动,最终促使一份纯粹且全面的金融工具披露准则(IFRS 7)出台。IAS 32虽继续规范已确认金融工具的表内列报原则,但作为一份单独准则存在的命运堪忧。金融工具(尤其衍生金融工具)由表外“请入”表内是会计准则制定极富意义的“艰难”一跃。但是,IAS 39似乎始终在与时间赛跑:1998年准则发布是应对IOSCO“核心准则”项目的最后评估;2003年准则修订则旨在为欧盟上市公司2005年报编制简化准则应用并预留充分时间。因此,现行IAS 39虽“历经数变”,却仍是一份过渡性准则,距离以公允价值计量所有金融资产与金融负债的目标还十分遥远。公允价值是金融工具最相关的计量属性,来自资本市场的经验研究已提供充分证据,但信息的可靠性仍值得商榷。公允价值概念的清晰界定与计量框架的合理设计是金融工具会计准则制定与改进的关键。中国的经济与金融环境日益与世界为一体,会计准则与国际趋同是现实的必然选择。但是,中国金融工具会计准则的出台是一个从无到有的“突变”,准则的发布并不意味着准则制定与改进工作的终结。中航油在发达资本市场上从事衍生品交易以及应用金融工具会计准则的失败更为我们敲响警钟。更多还原

【Abstract】 The accounting for financial instruments is one of the toughest difficulties in the field of financial accounting. And the standard-setting has experienced a long way: from the disclosure and presentation (the easy procedures) to the recognition and measurement (the much harder ones). However, this job is still far from perfect and the standard setters are confused with many questions, both in technique and politics, including how to measure all the financial assets and liabilities in fair value—the key to develop the accounting standards, which remains a barrier. This means a fascination for me.This paper reviews the history of standard-setting and improving for financial instruments by IASC (now IASB) during the past two decades in an all-around way. The project to establish accounting standard was forced to split into two stages, disclosure and measurement, due to many practical difficulties in the end of 1994. And then IAS 32 was first released to regulate the information disclosure and presentation both on the face and in the notes of financial statements. It might be right and necessary in theory to disclose the important contents when some items can not be recognized in the financial statements for those rigorous criteria. IASC, however, appeared to have made a mistake logically, which acted against the basic procedure of traditional financial accounting. Why should an entity present any financial instruments in balance sheet and how to disclose the accounting policies of recognition and measurement before they are recorded in books and displayed in financial statements?In the following days, any modification in IAS 32 always came after those in IAS 39, the recognition and measurement standard. The IASC/IASB might be conscious of the logical inconsistency that the presentation procedure has been operated before those of recognition and measurement and it appears confusing when it was regulated with the disclosure simultaneously. This finally results in a single while comprehensive disclosure standard IFRS 7’s coming into being, with the driving of market force.It is a meaningful but difficult jump for financial instruments, especially those derivatives, to be invited into the balance sheet since the release of IAS 39. But IAS 39 is still tentative and each amendment seems to be running with time. For instance, the final appraisal of core standards project cooperated with IOSCO, or the simplified application by the European listed companies before 2005. Some essential questions remain in the scale and the objective for standard-setting to realize the full fair value measurement keeps far away.Fair value is the most relevant measurement attribute to all financial instruments and related studies on capital market have already provided plentiful evidences. The reliability of fair value information is still questioned, however, which is of the same importance to the users of financial statements. So to define the concept of fair value clearly and design a framework for fair value estimation properly is the key to improve the standard-setting for financial instruments.Chinese entities have been involved into the global economic and financial activities more and more frequently and it becomes necessary for China’s accounting standards to converge with the IFRSs, including the financial instruments accounting standards. Since the reference model is still imperfect and changing continuously, it is sensible for us to keep an eye on both the past and the current international developments so as to improve the CASs.更多还原