Increased materiality judgments in financial accounting and external audit: a critical comparison between German and international standard setting

Cristina Müller-Burmeister, Patrick Velte
{"title":"Increased materiality judgments in financial accounting and external audit: a critical comparison between German and international standard setting","authors":"Cristina Müller-Burmeister, Patrick Velte","doi":"10.1504/IJCA.2016.080496","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The materiality principle supports the information function of accounting in order to enhance investors' decisions. Therefore, materiality guides the entity to present relevant information and to prevent information overload. This decision is mostly subjective and is based primarily on the individual's judgement in applying vague legal concepts. This could result in a greater expectation gap between management information and investors' understanding. The EU accounting directive 2013/34/EU standardises materiality to harmonise with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). However, the German legislator did not change the national accounting rules German Commercial Code (GCC). Moreover, the new EU audit regulation (EU) No 537/2014 requires the disclosure of the quantitative level of materiality thresholds in the audit report. Guidelines remain inadequate, although they are intended to provide clearly defined rules and to avoid boilerplate checklists. Our paper focuses on a conceptual comparison of materiality between the GCC and IFRS/ISA, and on the implications for eliminating the challenge involved in information overload.","PeriodicalId":343538,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Critical Accounting","volume":"91 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Critical Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCA.2016.080496","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The materiality principle supports the information function of accounting in order to enhance investors' decisions. Therefore, materiality guides the entity to present relevant information and to prevent information overload. This decision is mostly subjective and is based primarily on the individual's judgement in applying vague legal concepts. This could result in a greater expectation gap between management information and investors' understanding. The EU accounting directive 2013/34/EU standardises materiality to harmonise with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). However, the German legislator did not change the national accounting rules German Commercial Code (GCC). Moreover, the new EU audit regulation (EU) No 537/2014 requires the disclosure of the quantitative level of materiality thresholds in the audit report. Guidelines remain inadequate, although they are intended to provide clearly defined rules and to avoid boilerplate checklists. Our paper focuses on a conceptual comparison of materiality between the GCC and IFRS/ISA, and on the implications for eliminating the challenge involved in information overload.
财务会计与外部审计中重要性判断的增加:德国与国际标准制定的关键性比较
重要性原则支持会计的信息功能,以增强投资者的决策。因此,重要性引导主体呈现相关信息,防止信息过载。这种决定大多是主观的,主要基于个人在应用模糊法律概念时的判断。这可能导致管理层信息与投资者理解之间的预期差距更大。欧盟会计指令2013/34/EU对重要性进行了标准化,以与国际财务报告准则(IFRS)保持一致。但是,德国立法者没有改变《德国商法典》(GCC)的国家会计规则。此外,新的欧盟审计法规(EU) No 537/2014要求在审计报告中披露重要性阈值的定量水平。准则仍然不够充分,尽管它们的目的是提供明确定义的规则和避免样板检查清单。我们的论文侧重于GCC和IFRS/ISA之间重要性的概念比较,以及消除信息过载所带来的挑战的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信