重新审视成分股对将首日损失纳入IFRS 9的看法

IF 4.6 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Selina Orthaus, Daniel Rugilo
{"title":"重新审视成分股对将首日损失纳入IFRS 9的看法","authors":"Selina Orthaus, Daniel Rugilo","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2022.2130703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT IFRS 9 requires the recognition of expected credit losses from the inception of a financial instrument, resulting in so-called day-one losses. The incorporation of day-one losses caused considerable controversy among the IASB members and its constituents. With a focus on the constituents’ positions and reasoning, this study portrays the discussions held in the comment letters received by the IASB during the drafting process. We find that most constituents initially rejected day-one losses as conceptually unsound and/or as inappropriately affecting investors’ and preparers’ decision-making. Despite these continuing concerns, the majority of constituents eventually accepted day-one losses as a pragmatic approximation of expected credit losses in the absence of superior alternatives. Considering the technical and political nature of standard setting, our analysis provides insights into the constituents’ assessment of departures from the Conceptual Framework and the constituents’ views on the standard setters’ responsibilities regarding financial stability after the financial crisis.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":"20 1","pages":"93 - 119"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revisiting Constituents’ Reflections on the Incorporation of Day-one Losses into IFRS 9\",\"authors\":\"Selina Orthaus, Daniel Rugilo\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17449480.2022.2130703\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT IFRS 9 requires the recognition of expected credit losses from the inception of a financial instrument, resulting in so-called day-one losses. The incorporation of day-one losses caused considerable controversy among the IASB members and its constituents. With a focus on the constituents’ positions and reasoning, this study portrays the discussions held in the comment letters received by the IASB during the drafting process. We find that most constituents initially rejected day-one losses as conceptually unsound and/or as inappropriately affecting investors’ and preparers’ decision-making. Despite these continuing concerns, the majority of constituents eventually accepted day-one losses as a pragmatic approximation of expected credit losses in the absence of superior alternatives. Considering the technical and political nature of standard setting, our analysis provides insights into the constituents’ assessment of departures from the Conceptual Framework and the constituents’ views on the standard setters’ responsibilities regarding financial stability after the financial crisis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45647,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounting in Europe\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"93 - 119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounting in Europe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2022.2130703\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting in Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2022.2130703","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要国际财务报告准则第9号要求从金融工具成立之日起确认预期信贷损失,即所谓的第一天损失。将第一天的损失计算在内,在国际会计准则理事会成员及其成员中引起了相当大的争议。本研究侧重于组成部分的立场和推理,描绘了国际会计准则理事会在起草过程中收到的评论信中进行的讨论。我们发现,大多数选民最初认为第一天的损失在概念上不健全和/或不适当地影响了投资者和准备者的决策。尽管存在这些持续的担忧,但大多数选民最终接受了第一天的损失,认为这是在没有更好的替代方案的情况下预期信贷损失的务实近似值。考虑到标准制定的技术和政治性质,我们的分析深入了解了选民对偏离概念框架的评估,以及选民对金融危机后标准制定者在金融稳定方面的责任的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Revisiting Constituents’ Reflections on the Incorporation of Day-one Losses into IFRS 9
ABSTRACT IFRS 9 requires the recognition of expected credit losses from the inception of a financial instrument, resulting in so-called day-one losses. The incorporation of day-one losses caused considerable controversy among the IASB members and its constituents. With a focus on the constituents’ positions and reasoning, this study portrays the discussions held in the comment letters received by the IASB during the drafting process. We find that most constituents initially rejected day-one losses as conceptually unsound and/or as inappropriately affecting investors’ and preparers’ decision-making. Despite these continuing concerns, the majority of constituents eventually accepted day-one losses as a pragmatic approximation of expected credit losses in the absence of superior alternatives. Considering the technical and political nature of standard setting, our analysis provides insights into the constituents’ assessment of departures from the Conceptual Framework and the constituents’ views on the standard setters’ responsibilities regarding financial stability after the financial crisis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounting in Europe
Accounting in Europe BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
14
×
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