The Decline of Substance over Form in Accounting: A Problematic Dichotomy

Pub Date : 2022-05-27 DOI:10.1515/ael-2021-0119
Paul F. Williams
{"title":"The Decline of Substance over Form in Accounting: A Problematic Dichotomy","authors":"Paul F. Williams","doi":"10.1515/ael-2021-0119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This essay is a comment on the paper authored by Fischer, Ellman and Schocet (2021, The decline of substance over form in accounting. Accounting, economics, and law: A convivium. (forthcoming)) who argue that the trend in financial reporting regulation involves de-emphasizing the important of economic substance relative to form in how auditors are to perceive their role. The danger foreseen by the authors is the further shrinking of the leeway for professional judgment, which is an important hallmark of a true professional. Agreeing the authors have raised a crucial issue for any group claiming professional status, I try to add to the discussion by pointing out that form and substance in the realm of financial reporting regulation are not antipodes but complementary parts of a process of continuous redefining of what economic substance is. Social reality is socially constructed and as such choices of form made by humans effectively shape substance. Given the capture of accounting by economics during the 1960s, accountants have lost an appreciation for the tentativeness of economic substance and now serve not as participants in shaping economic substance but as enforcers of an imaginary economic substance that derives from the assumptions and values in the ideology of neoclassical economics.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ael-2021-0119","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

Abstract This essay is a comment on the paper authored by Fischer, Ellman and Schocet (2021, The decline of substance over form in accounting. Accounting, economics, and law: A convivium. (forthcoming)) who argue that the trend in financial reporting regulation involves de-emphasizing the important of economic substance relative to form in how auditors are to perceive their role. The danger foreseen by the authors is the further shrinking of the leeway for professional judgment, which is an important hallmark of a true professional. Agreeing the authors have raised a crucial issue for any group claiming professional status, I try to add to the discussion by pointing out that form and substance in the realm of financial reporting regulation are not antipodes but complementary parts of a process of continuous redefining of what economic substance is. Social reality is socially constructed and as such choices of form made by humans effectively shape substance. Given the capture of accounting by economics during the 1960s, accountants have lost an appreciation for the tentativeness of economic substance and now serve not as participants in shaping economic substance but as enforcers of an imaginary economic substance that derives from the assumptions and values in the ideology of neoclassical economics.
分享
查看原文
会计中实质重于形式:一个有问题的二分法
本文是对Fischer, Ellman和Schocet(2021)撰写的论文的评论,该论文的主题是会计中物质的下降。会计、经济和法律:一种融合。(即将出版)),他们认为财务报告监管的趋势涉及在审计师如何看待其角色时,相对于形式而言,不再强调经济实质的重要性。作者预见到的危险是专业判断的余地进一步缩小,而这是真正的专业人士的重要标志。同意作者对任何声称具有专业地位的团体提出的一个关键问题,我试图通过指出财务报告监管领域的形式和实质不是对立的,而是不断重新定义经济实质的过程中的互补部分来补充讨论。社会现实是社会建构的,因此人类对形式的选择有效地塑造了物质。鉴于会计在20世纪60年代被经济学所捕获,会计师已经失去了对经济实体的尝试性的欣赏,现在不是作为塑造经济实体的参与者,而是作为一种虚构的经济实体的执行者,这种经济实体源于新古典经济学意识形态中的假设和价值观。
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
×
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