CHAPTER 18
Selected Readings:
Note:Several articles dealing with the conceptual aspects of FAS 52 are listed in Chapter 20’s selected readings.
1.Louise Nameth, “The IAS Express Gains Steam,” CFO (March 1996), pp. 68–71.
This article discusses the growing momentum of the development of international accounting standards by the year 2000.
2.Steve C. Wells, James H. Thompson, and Raymond A. Phelps, “Accounting Differences: U.S. Enterprises and International Competition for Capital,” Accounting Horizons (June 1995), pp. 29–39.
This study reports perceptions of accounting educators, chief financial officers, practicing accountants, and managers of international portfolios about the impact of differences in accounting concepts, reporting practices, and principles on the ability of U.S. enterprises to compete with foreign entities.
3.Billy S. Soo and Lisa Gilbert Soo, “Accounting for the Multinational Firm: Is the Translation Process Valued by the Stock Market?” The Accounting Review (October 1994), pp. 617–634.
This article examines whether the stock market considers foreign exchange transactions and translation gains and losses when pricing equity securities and whether the value assigned by the market is significantly different from that assigned to other components of accounting earnings.
4.Nancy Anderson, “The Globalization GAAP,” Management Accounting (August 1993), pp. 52–54.
This article discusses the uneven playing field aspects of existing international GAAP.
5.Curtis L. Corbridge, Walter W. Austin, and David J. Lemak, “Germany’s Accrual Accounting Practices,” Management Accounting (August 1993), pp. 45–47.
This article discusses Germany’s conservative accounting practices and whether the United States can learn from such practices.
6.Arthur R. Wyatt and Joseph F. Yospe, “Wake-Up Call to American Business: International Accounting Standards Are on the Way,” Journal of Accountancy (July 1993), pp. 80–85.
This article discusses the role of IASC and IOSCO in internationalizing accounting standards.
7.John Hegarty, “Accounting Integration in Europe—Still on Track,” Journal of Accountancy (May 1993), pp. 92–95.
This article discusses how the profession is making significant strides toward unity and a single market for European accounting services.
8.Peter D. Fleming, “The Growing Importance of International Accounting Standards,” Journal of Accountancy (September 1991), pp. 100–106.
This article discusses why the need for international accounting standards is becoming greater.
9.Loudell Ellis Robinson, “The Time Has Come to Report Comprehensive Income,” Accounting Horizons (June 1991), pp. 107–112.
This article makes a case for reporting comprehensive income.
10.S. E. C. Purvis, Helen Gernon, and Michael A. Diamond, “The IASC and Its Comparability Project: Prerequisites for Success,” Accounting Horizons (June 1991), pp. 25–44.
This article assesses the likely compliance with ISAC’s Exposure Draft 32 (ED32) and debates the prerequisites for the success of IASC’s proposal for international accounting comparability.
11.Dennis E. Peavey and Stuart K. Webster, “Is GAAP the Gap to International Markets,” Management Accounting (August 1990), pp. 31–35.
This article discusses the barriers to achieving international GAAP, the role of the regulators, and IASC’s Exposure Draft 32 (issued in 1989).
12.Louis Bisgay and Susan Jayson, “Ralph Walters on Harmonization,” Management Accounting (August 1989), pp. 22–24.
This article is an interview with Ralph Walters, a former member of the FASB and then chair of the IASC’s subcommittee responsible for the development of Exposure Draft 32, “Comparability of Financial Statements,” which was issued in 1989.
13.Carol Olson Houston and Gerhard G. Mueller, “Foreign Exchange Rate Hedging and SFAS No. 52—Relatives or Strangers,” Accounting Horizons (December 1988), pp. 50–57.
14.James J. Benjamin, Steven D. Grossman, and Casper E. Wiggins, “The Impact of Foreign Currency Translation on Reporting during the Phase-in of SFAS No. 52,” Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance (Summer 1986), pp. 177–184.
This article examines the impact of the adoption of FAS 52 for multinational companies during the optional three-year adoption period (1981–1983).