资产减值会计的合理性辨析  

Debate over the Rationality of Asset Impairment Accounting

作　　者：周华[1] 戴德明[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学商学院/中国人民大学会计财务理论研究所,北京100872

出　　处：《经济管理》2016年第3期100-112,共13页Business and Management Journal ( BMJ )

基　　金：国家社会科学基金后期资助项目"会计规则的由来--对美国经验的辩证分析"(13FJY005);教育部社会科学基金青年项目"国际趋同背景下的争议性会计规则:规范分析;实证检验与改进策略"(13YJC790223);中国人民大学科学研究基金研究品牌计划(中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目)"我国会计法规体系的优化路径研究--兼论国际财务报告准则的困境及其改进"(16XNI006)

摘　　要：理论界往往以谨慎性原则(或稳健性原则)为名对资产减值会计大加颂扬,但从其实施效果来看,资产减值会计规则是一套默许企业管理当局操纵会计数据的失当规则。散见于现行企业会计准则体系的资产减值会计规则分别以"客观证据""确凿证据""减值迹象"为减值测试的触发条件,然而,这些触发条件就本质而言并不属于法律事实,相应的记账行为缺乏法律证据(原始凭证)的支持,这就导致资产减值会计所生成的信息缺乏公益性和公信力。根据《会计法》的规定,"任何单位不得以虚假的经济业务事项或者资料进行会计核算",记账行为必须具备原始凭证,因此,除结账和更正错账以外,缺乏原始凭证的记账行为,应当被认定为违法行为。为保证会计信息的公益性和公信力,资产的升值或减值信息只应在会计程序之外予以补充披露,而不应进入会计程序进行处理。We give a thorough analysis of the shortcomings of the principle of prudence and a detailed examine of the origin and transformation of asset impairment accounting rules in both China and the United States, and a possible solution to improve the quality of accounting regulation is developed. 1. The Economic Consequences of Asset Impairment Accounting Asset impairment accounting rules were introduced into Chinese accounting regulations in the late 1980s in the name of the principle of prudence or the principle of conservatism. Such kind of rules is extended to most of the assets items in balance sheet now. At the same time, income smoothing behavior using asset impairment accounting rules has also been more and more popular in the past two decades. “Cookie of the effect of asset impairment accounting. So the reasoning of impairment jar” and “big bath” are good examples accounting is doubtful. 2. Theoretical Analysis of Asset Impairment Accounting No matter in domestic or in foreign academic circles, principle of prudence has been controversial. The princi- ple of prudence is not compatible with the principle of neutrality, the principle of comparability and the principle of that corporate managers can justify their dirty manipulation just in the name of virtue. In May 1980, the Financial Accounting Standards Board（FASB） issued “Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 2 ： Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information”, which questioned the logic of the principle of prudence. In September 2010, the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board issued a joint framework “Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting--Chapter 1, The Objective of General Purpose Financial Reporting, and Chapter 3, Qualitative Characteristics of Useful Financial Information （ a replacement of FASB Concepts Statements No. 1 and No. 2）”. The principle of prudence （ or conservatism） is deleted from the concept framework. 3. The Transformation of Impairment Accounting Rules in China a

关 键 词：谨慎性原则 资产减值 法律事实 金融预期 会计法规 

分 类 号：F23[经济管理—会计学]