IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sjobre/v66y2014i5d10.1007_bf03372901.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ansätze und Ergebnisse einer ökonomischen Analyse des Rahmenkonzepts zur Rechnungslegung

Author

Listed:
  • Wolfgang Ballwieser

    (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität)

Abstract

Zusammenfassung Das Rahmenkonzept soll die Zielsetzungen und Eigenschaften der IFRS offenbaren und wichtige Definitionen enthalten. Es soll insbesondere dem Board als Leitlinie zur Entwicklung von widerspruchsfreien IFRS, den Rechnungslegungsadressaten als Information über Eigenschaften von IFRS-Abschlüssen und, ohne selbst IFRS zu sein, der Schließung von Regelungslücken dienen. Bisher ist das Rahmenkonzept von 1989 nur in Teilen überarbeitet worden, hat aber bereits Perspektivenwechsel erkennen lassen. Insbesondere wurden bei der Entscheidungsnützlichkeit der Information die Verlässlichkeit zugunsten der glaubwürdigen Darstellung aufgegeben, die Funktion der Rechenschaft nicht mehr explizit genannt und Vorsicht mit Verweis auf Widerspruch zu Neutralität getilgt. Der Beitrag analysiert diese Vorgänge hinsichtlich ihrer Auswirkungen für den Standardsetzer und die Ersteller und Nutzer von IFRS-Abschlüssen. Er zeigt, dass nach jetzigem Stand die Funktion des Rahmenkonzepts, den IASB bei der Standardentwicklung konkret leiten zu können sowie dem Ersteller und Nutzer der Rechnungslegung das hinter IFRS stehende System verständlich werden zu lassen, nicht erfüllt wird und sich damit auch die Frage nach seiner Notwendigkeit stellt.

Suggested Citation

  • Wolfgang Ballwieser, 2014. "Ansätze und Ergebnisse einer ökonomischen Analyse des Rahmenkonzepts zur Rechnungslegung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 66(5), pages 451-476, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sjobre:v:66:y:2014:i:5:d:10.1007_bf03372901
    DOI: 10.1007/BF03372901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF03372901
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF03372901?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kirschenheiter, M, 1997. "Information quality and correlated signals," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 43-59.
    2. Rolf Uwe Fülbier & Joerg‐Markus Hitz & Thorsten Sellhorn, 2009. "Relevance of Academic Research and Researchers' Role in the IASB's Financial Reporting Standard Setting," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 45(4), pages 455-492, December.
    3. Sebastian Brauer & Carl-Friedrich Leuschner & Frank Westermann, 2011. "Does the Introduction of IFRS Change the Timeliness of Loss Recognition? Evidence from German Firms," IEER Working Papers 87, Institute of Empirical Economic Research, Osnabrueck University.
    4. Gjesdal, F, 1981. "Accounting For Stewardship," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 208-231.
    5. Hanno Merkt, 2014. "Das IFRS Conceptual Framework aus regelungsmethodischer Sicht," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 66(5), pages 477-504, August.
    6. John Christensen, 2010. "Conceptual frameworks of accounting from an information perspective," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 287-299.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hanno Merkt, 2014. "Das IFRS Conceptual Framework aus regelungsmethodischer Sicht," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 66(5), pages 477-504, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christoph Kuhner & Christoph Pelger, 2015. "On the Relationship of Stewardship and Valuation—An Analytical Viewpoint," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 51(3), pages 379-411, September.
    2. Carien van Mourik & Yuko Katsuo Asami, 2018. "Articulation, Profit or Loss and OCI in the IASB Conceptual Framework: Different Shades of Clean (or Dirty) Surplus," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 167-192, May.
    3. Winter, Peter, 2007. "Managerial Risk Accounting and Control – A German perspective," MPRA Paper 8185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Rolf Uwe Fülbier & Thorsten Sellhorn, 2023. "Understanding and improving the language of business: How accounting and corporate reporting research can better serve business and society," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(6), pages 1089-1124, August.
    5. Dirk E. Black & Ervin L. Black & Theodore E. Christensen & Kurt H. Gee, 2022. "Comparing Non-GAAP EPS in Earnings Announcements and Proxy Statements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1353-1377, February.
    6. Ole‐Kristian Hope & Wayne B. Thomas, 2008. "Managerial Empire Building and Firm Disclosure," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 591-626, June.
    7. Armstrong, Christopher S. & Kepler, John D., 2018. "Theory, research design assumptions, and causal inferences," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 366-373.
    8. Anthony D. Miller & David Oldroyd, 2018. "An Economics Perspective on Financial Reporting Objectives," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 28(1), pages 104-108, March.
    9. Bui, Dien Giau & Chen, Yehning & Chen, Yan-Shing & Lin, Chih-Yung, 2023. "Managerial ability and financial statement disaggregation decisions," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    10. Neu, D. & Warsame, H. & Pedwell, K., 1998. "Managing public impressions: environmental disclosures in annual reports," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 265-282, April.
    11. Christian Blecher, 2009. "Die Bilanzierung von Aktienoptionsprogrammen aus Sicht der Messperspektive," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 61(6), pages 603-627, September.
    12. Nahum D. Melumad, 1989. "Asymmetric information and the termination of contracts in agencies," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 733-753, March.
    13. Faris Soud Alqadi, 2017. "The Role of Internal Auditing in Controlling the Performance for Jordanian Industrial Companies: Empirical Evidence," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(9), pages 186-186, August.
    14. Bushman, Robert M. & Smith, Abbie J., 2001. "Financial accounting information and corporate governance," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-3), pages 237-333, December.
    15. Pierre Jinghong Liang, 2000. "Accounting Recognition, Moral Hazard, and Communication," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 458-490, September.
    16. Wu, Yan Wendy, 2011. "Optimal executive compensation: Stock options or restricted stocks," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 633-644, October.
    17. Alexis H. Kunz & Thomas Pfeiffer, 2001. "Kapitalmarktorientierte Unternehmenspublizität und der Informationsverbund zwischen in- und externem Rechnungswesen," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 53(5), pages 500-530, August.
    18. Franzen, Nina & Weißenberger, Barbara E., 2018. "Capital market effects of mandatory IFRS 8 adoption: An empirical analysis of German firms," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 1-19.
    19. Ittner, Christopher D. & Larcker, David F., 2001. "Assessing empirical research in managerial accounting: a value-based management perspective," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-3), pages 349-410, December.
    20. Anderson, Spencer B. & Brown, Jason L. & Hodder, Leslie & Hopkins, Patrick E., 2015. "The effect of alternative accounting measurement bases on investors’ assessments of managers’ stewardship," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-114.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    K22; M41;

    JEL classification:

    • K22 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Business and Securities Law
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sjobre:v:66:y:2014:i:5:d:10.1007_bf03372901. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.