IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/accfor/v48y2024i2p331-355.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

UK public sector fiscal reporting: clear and contradictory

Author

Listed:
  • Elaine Stewart
  • Ciaran Connolly

Abstract

This paper explores the United Kingdom’s (UK) attempt to reconcile fiscal reporting logics through its Clear Line of Sight Alignment Project (CLOS). Drawing on archival data, together with semi-structured interviews with representatives involved in the implementation of CLOS, the findings indicate that what started as a means of resolving the tensions between logics, CLOS has exacerbated some existing ones and exposed others. This is largely due to the influence of the professional logic, primarily the UK’s adherence to International Financial Reporting Standards which prevents fiscal reporting being fully aligned. Furthermore, our research illustrates how the UK government has resisted elements of both the professional and national logics to create a system designed to rationalise the fiscal reporting maze. The findings also show that operationally CLOS has (to an extent) aligned the timing, coverage and classification of the fiscal reporting process to present the flow of expenditure from budgeted to approved, to outturn, thereby contributing to the wider agenda of improving the planning, management and control of public expenditure. Given continued calls to align global fiscal reporting practices, this paper informs public policy makers of the (potential) linkages between systems, the obstacles that can be encountered and the incentives for adopting it.

Suggested Citation

  • Elaine Stewart & Ciaran Connolly, 2024. "UK public sector fiscal reporting: clear and contradictory," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(2), pages 331-355, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:accfor:v:48:y:2024:i:2:p:331-355
    DOI: 10.1080/01559982.2022.2133339
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01559982.2022.2133339
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01559982.2022.2133339?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:taf:accfor:v:48:y:2024:i:2:p:331-355. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/racc .

    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.