Discussion of ‘Accounting for intangible assets: suggested solutions’

Abstract

Accounting researchers are sometimes criticised for focusing too much on empirical research of limited relevance to preparers, capital providers or standard setters; however, making conceptual progress is hard – both practitioners and academics will then question whether your contributions are genuinely new. I find the approach adopted by Barker, Lennard, Penman and Teixeira (Barker et al. 2021, referred to as BLPT in this commentary) commendable in that they address core accounting issues in a way that is directly relevant to standard setters. I agree with BLPT that normative accounting research is relatively underdeveloped, and that empirical research is constrained by accounting practice. In my discussion below, I focus on three areas: (1) single project vs. portfolios, (2) internally generated vs. purchased assets and (3) measurement after recognition.