Accrual Versus Cash Basis of Accounting in the Canadian COVID-19 Subsidy Programs*

IF 0.9 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Amin Mawani, Salim Hajee
{"title":"Accrual Versus Cash Basis of Accounting in the Canadian COVID-19 Subsidy Programs*","authors":"Amin Mawani,&nbsp;Salim Hajee","doi":"10.1111/1911-3838.12398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The principal eligibility criterion for the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) during the COVID-19 pandemic was a reduction of at least a prespecified percentage in monthly revenues compared to the same months in the prior year, or compared to January and February 2020 (just prior to the launch of CEWS in March 2020). The revenues could be measured using accrual or the cash basis of accounting. Since subsidy applicants could choose the cash method of accounting and use January and February 2020 as reference periods, seasonal businesses that generated most of their revenues in January and February could claim subsidies without experiencing any reductions in revenue. We illustrate how a seasonal business with higher monthly accrued revenues compared to the pre-pandemic year could be eligible for CEWS by using the cash basis of accounting in the subsidy application even though it would not qualify using the accrual accounting method. It seems inequitable for business or wage subsidies to be based on the choice of accounting methods. There is no sound public policy reason to subsidize (or tax) one firm more than another just because they use a different method of accounting. Evaluating accounting methods embedded within government subsidy programs is an important endeavor to ensure neutrality and effectiveness of public spending programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":43435,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Perspectives","volume":"24 2","pages":"423-440"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1911-3838.12398","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1911-3838.12398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The principal eligibility criterion for the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) during the COVID-19 pandemic was a reduction of at least a prespecified percentage in monthly revenues compared to the same months in the prior year, or compared to January and February 2020 (just prior to the launch of CEWS in March 2020). The revenues could be measured using accrual or the cash basis of accounting. Since subsidy applicants could choose the cash method of accounting and use January and February 2020 as reference periods, seasonal businesses that generated most of their revenues in January and February could claim subsidies without experiencing any reductions in revenue. We illustrate how a seasonal business with higher monthly accrued revenues compared to the pre-pandemic year could be eligible for CEWS by using the cash basis of accounting in the subsidy application even though it would not qualify using the accrual accounting method. It seems inequitable for business or wage subsidies to be based on the choice of accounting methods. There is no sound public policy reason to subsidize (or tax) one firm more than another just because they use a different method of accounting. Evaluating accounting methods embedded within government subsidy programs is an important endeavor to ensure neutrality and effectiveness of public spending programs.

权责发生制与现金收付制在加拿大COVID-19补贴计划中的对比*
在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,加拿大紧急工资补贴(CEWS)的主要资格标准是,与前一年同期相比,或与2020年1月和2月(2020年3月启动CEWS之前)相比,每月收入至少减少了预先规定的百分比。收入可以采用权责发生制或收付实现制会计来计量。由于补贴申请人可以选择现金结算法,并以2020年1月和2月为参照期,因此在1月和2月产生大部分收入的季节性企业可以在不减少收入的情况下申请补贴。我们举例说明,与大流行前一年相比,每月应计收入较高的季节性企业如何在补贴申请中使用收付实现制会计方法,从而有资格获得CEWS,即使它不符合使用权责发生制会计方法的资格。企业或工资补贴以会计方法的选择为基础似乎是不公平的。没有合理的公共政策理由仅仅因为一家公司使用不同的会计方法就对其给予比另一家公司更多的补贴(或征税)。评估政府补贴计划中包含的会计方法是确保公共支出计划中立性和有效性的重要努力。
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
Accounting Perspectives
Accounting Perspectives BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Accounting Perspectives provides a forum for peer-reviewed applied research, analysis, synthesis and commentary on issues of interest to academics, practitioners, financial analysts, financial executives, regulators, accounting policy makers and accounting students. Articles are sought from academics and practitioners that address relevant issues in any and all areas of accounting and related fields, including financial accounting and reporting, auditing and other assurance services, management accounting and performance measurement, information systems and related technologies, tax policy and practice, professional ethics, accounting education, and related topics. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信