Accounting Statement Analysis

Question: Discuss about the Accounting Statement Analysis. Answer: Introduction: The FASB and IASB, both regulatory bodies are followed the principle-based standards. However, the fundamental concepts on several issues highlight mere internal inconsistency in order to disclose matters in coherent accounting related to finance and framework for reporting (Hashim O'Hanlon and Li 2015.). Unfortunately, the individual conceptual frameworks of distinct standard setters can come to agreements on particular standard setting issues, which may be transitory in nature because different perceptions could be followed to resolve that particular issues (Lin 2015). As a result, both the above mentioned standard setting bodies may reach significantly different outcomes even though its identical. This fact reflects an inconsistency in standards. This is the major reason behind the development of the conceptual framework. To improve the substantial efforts, on the other hand, the IASB Framework is meant to assist both the standard setters and prepares while disclosing facts in the statement of financial under the conceptual framework (Rivera et al 2014). This is another reason which indulges the requirement of the conceptual framework. Thirdly, the planned approach in the joint project may help to converging both FASB and IASB standards. All these reasons are quite enough to justify the requirements to refine, update, complete and converging standards into a common conceptual framework. By following a conceptual framework, the principle-based standards can make understands to following facts: This will help to ensure the consistency between standards and between the previous and future decision makings to reach perfect conclusions. The framework will ensure that standards are not based on individual perceptions of the board members of the standard setters. It is required to bring consistency between the preparation of the statements, interpretation and reporting of the information contains in the reporting entitys financial statements. A conceptual framework makes action as a written constitution for accounting and reporting of the statements of financial. Though both IASB and FASB is followed principal-based standards, it is important to have a common conceptual framework for users and prepares of the statement of financial to make understand that standards and practices of accounting are based on common ideology (Gerber, Gerber and Van der Merwe 2014). As a result, the solution of particular issues would get the same results. More specifically, a common conceptual framework needs to enable for refinement, accomplishment, update and convergence between the present framework of IASB and the concept statements presented by the guidelines provided by the FASB. The revision, thus, is necessary because these frameworks were conceptualized in the year of 1970 and 1980 (Holder et al 2013). However, it is important that the conceptual frameworks need not revise the basic structure of the concepts. More importantly, the common conceptual framework needs to share similar quantitative characteristics of the accounting information, elements of ac counting statements, attributes, criteria for recognition in the reporting entitys statements along with display in statements and disclosure in notes and other aspects of the reporting. It is already recommended that various parties can get advantage from a conceptual framework. To prepare the statements of financial and reporting at the end of the financial period, conceptual framework can help the several bodies like the financial standard setters, auditors, prepares of accounts, and the users of statement of financial (customers, countrys regulatory agencies, investors, government, employees, lenders, suppliers and the analysts of finance). However, it is not true that conceptual framework is more significant for certain parties than others. The reason behind the equal requirements of conceptual framework to all parties is as follows: A conceptual framework generally discusses the system of interconnected objectives and fundamentals which needs to enforce for getting the consistent results at the end of the reporting period (Satin and Huffman 2015). Needless to say, the preparation of the statement of financial, reporting, analysis, and explanation are all interconnected with each other (Brouwer, Faramarzi and Hoogendoorn 2014). To make economic decisions, IASB Framework generally emphasized on the information related to finance which are needed by a wide range of users such as employees, investors, lenders, customers, suppliers, governments and the public. On the other hand, the FASB emphasizes usefulness regarding the credit decisions and investments by their concept statements (Barker et al 2014). Therefore, the common conceptual framework will be helpful for all these parties equally. For instance, the conceptual frameworks may cite general interest of external users of the statements while assessing potential new cash inflows to the organization. By disclosing the ability to generate net cash inflows may definitely important facts for employees, suppliers. On the other hand, the judgment of the external users about the capacity and ability impacts on the economic decisions of an enterprise (Pelger 2016). Therefore, all financial aspects are interrelated and consistent with each other. Dealing all these factors in the conceptual framework, therefore, is important for all parties for maintaining consistency throughout the financial stages. Though both FASB and IASB have followed common principle based standards, cross-cutting issues have been reflected in the areas that conflict between the several standards (Fisher and Nehmer 2016). Followed by the personal conceptual frameworks of individual standard setters, enterprises often find inconsistency in financial reporting and less-integration between the various standards as well (Murphy and OConnell 2013). For example, the prudence and the accrual under the Prudence and Going Concern have been represented in different manner under the following guidelines provided by the FASB and IASB. It is noted that according to IAS1, where the accruals concepts operation is inconsistent along with Prudence. Thus cross cutting issues is being considered as important because it creates an uncertainty into account in the assets and liabilities (Oliver 2014). In the broader perspectives, cross-cutting issues are important aspects for financial reporting which needs to be resolved under the conceptual framework for achieving the convergence on particular issues. Companies are seen to be recording the accrued liabilities and the for the environmental and reclamation matters. This also takes into consideration the demolition of the former operating facilities and the various obligations, which are stated under Asset retirement obligations (ARO). The accruals related to the environmental constraints are seen to be related to the estimates for the cost of the remediation of the previous estimates related to the legal costs for ongoing litigation and operated sites. The companies are seen to be recording a provision in relation to environmental costs of retiring an asset, which are in accordance with the Statement of Position 96-1, Environmental Remediation Liabilities. It has been further seen that the prescribed guidance for treatment is directly relevant to the different guidelines is shown in SFAS No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies, and Interpretation under FASB (FIN) No. 14, Reasonable Estimation in an incidence of a Loss. The companies nee d to assess further the possibility of the outcomes or loss. The determination related to the accruals is necessary. The contingencies related to the individuals matter are also scrutinized. In various cases, it can be discerned that the actual cost in the future may deviate from the estimates due to various types of the uncertainties, which is seen to arise from the environmental exposures (Fasb.org. 2017). The companies are further seen to reserve environmental liabilities and retirement of the long-term operating assets through the consultants who are known to follow the guidance given under SFAS No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations,. It has been also seen that the cost are inflated in accordance with the inflation factor and they are seen to be discounted by complying with the credit-adjusted risk-free rate. The deviations in the interest rates, inflation and the estimated costs are susceptible to the amounts, which are recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Hence, it must be assumed that the variations in the several considerations made would not have a drastic impact on the Consolidated Statement of Operations. It has been also observed that in case of the closed facilities the significant changes in the interest rates, inflation and the estimated costs can have considerable impact on the recorded amount, which are recognized under the Restructuring Charges. So me of the other considerations for the asset retirement by the companies can be clearly related under the note 17. The companies are also seen to be record the Environmental Liabilities and Asset Retirement Obligation based on the third party estimates for the cost of remediation, which are seen to be previously operated in the estimates for the legal costs. These are directly seen to be following the guidelines given by (SFAS) No. 5, which are seen to be in compliance with Accounting for Contingencies (Sec.gov. 2017). The recognition of the deferred tax liabilities is seen to be important for identifying the various types of the differences that will add to the in total taxable amounts in the years to come. The total amount, which is obtained for the return of that receivable, will be considered as taxable in nature. Hence, a deferred tax liability is perceived in the present year for the relevant taxes amount in the upcoming years as well. As per the guidelines given under the FASB Concepts Statement No. 6 Elements of Financial Statements, the liabilities of the company results from a past event-the installment sale at a profit (Chang et al. 2016). The requirement is also inclined with the needs of companies for paying taxed for the future period of time. The losses can be used to offset the different types of the total amount which is taxable and that result from temporary differences at the end of the fiscal year. Although the different types of the changes related to the level of the tax has b een further identified in event of taxes not been recognized in the statements of financial and matters which are not being considered in financial statements for the present year. In addition to this, the companies are seen to believe that the tax consequence shall not be recognized until the same has been considered for recognition in the financial statements (Young 2015). The liability recognition in relation to future activity for restoration affecting the net profit in the current year and in the future has been seen to be on the higher side with more amount of revenues recognized in form of the average receivables. The net profit is observed to be on the higher side due to lower amount to total liabilities and equities for the future restoration activities (Wang 2016). The liability recognition in relation to future activity for restoration affecting cash flows in the current year and current year and in the future has been seen in form of higher amount of Net income, which will be considerably high during the first years and lower in the last year. The net income is seen to be less volatile in the future years. It can be also discerned that the value of the total asset will be greater. The liabilities are observed to be lower due to the future restoration activities (Greg Rogers, C.P.A. and Atkins 2015). The importance of the recognition of the liabilities for the companies is seen in terms of the different types of the consideration, which are seen in form of outflow of resources embodying economic benefits. For instance, this is evident in form of the cash and the various types of the other probable entities. It has been further seen that the recognition of the liability of the company is directly related to the reliable measurement of the cost / value of the obligation (Hales et al. 2016). The disclosure of the liability is seen to be sufficient with the amendment, which is stated under the issuance of SAB 92 related to the environmental liability disclosures. The disclosures related to the particular sites for the individual material have seen to be vital for an understanding of a company's exposure to bear loss (Harrison and van der Laan Smith 2015). The disclosure should include total estimate to remediate and disclosures related to environmental exit costs. It is also necessary to disclose the following items: Nature of the costs involved with the company Amount of total anticipated cost The total costs accrued till date classification of the same The amount of possible sources of additional losses References: Barker, R., Lennard, A., Nobes, C., Trombetta, M. and Walton, P., 2014. Response of the EAA financial reporting standards committee to the IASB discussion paper A review of the conceptual framework for financial reporting.Accounting in Europe,11(2), pp.149-184. Brouwer, A., Faramarzi, A. and Hoogendoorn, M., 2014. Does the new conceptual framework provide adequate concepts for reporting relevant information about performance?.Accounting in Europe,11(2), pp.235-257. Chang, X., Fu, K., Li, T., Tam, L.H. and Wong, G., 2016. Corporate Environmental Liabilities and Capital Structure. Fasb.org. (2017).Summary of Statement No. 96. [online] Available at: https://www.fasb.org/summary/stsum96.shtml [Accessed 27 Jan. 2017]. Fisher, I. and Nehmer, R., 2016. Using Language Processing to Evaluate the Equivalency of the FASB and IASB Standards.Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting. Gerber, M.C., Gerber, A.J. and Van der Merwe, A., 2014. An analysis of fundamental concepts in the conceptual framework using ontology technologies.South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences,17(4), pp.396-411. Greg Rogers JD, C.P.A. and Atkins, C., 2015. Accounting for oil and gas environmental liabilities in bankruptcy.Petroleum Accounting and Financial Management Journal,34(2), p.26. Hales, J., Matsumura, E.M., Moser, D.V. and Payne, R., 2016. Becoming sustainable: A rational decision based on sound information and effective processes?.Journal of Management Accounting Research,28(2), pp.13-28. Harrison, J.S. and van der Laan Smith, J., 2015. Responsible accounting for stakeholders.Journal of Management Studies,52(7), pp.935-960. Hashim, N., O'Hanlon, J. and Li, W., 2015. Expected-loss-based accounting for the impairment of financial instruments:: the FASB and IASB IFRS 9 Approaches. Holder, A.D., Karim, K.E., Lin, K.J. and Woods, M., 2013. A content analysis of the comment letters to the FASB and IASB: Accounting for contingencies.Advances in Accounting,29(1), pp.134-153. Lin, H., 2015. Discussion about conceptual framework.International Business Research,8(6), p.191. Murphy, T. and OConnell, V., 2013. Discourses surrounding the evolution of the IASB/FASB Conceptual Framework: What they reveal about the living law of accounting.Accounting, Organizations and Society,38(1), pp.72-91. Oliver, K., 2014. Balance Sheet Presentation under IAS 1 and US GAAP. Pelger, C., 2016. Practices of standard-settingAn analysis of the IASB's and FASB's process of identifying the objective of financial reporting.Accounting, Organizations and Society,50, pp.51-73. Rivera, A.R.L., Arbelo, H.J.R., Ruiz, A.D.., Rodrguez, J.L.V., Garca, W.C., Clemente, K.A.B., Prez, C.J.C., Toledo, S.J.F., Martnez, J., Batista, D.C. and Aponte, A.N.R., 2014, January. IASB AND FASB CONVERGENCE PROJECT: WHERE ARE THEY NOW?. InGlobal Conference on Business Finance Proceedings(Vol. 9, No. 1, p. 665). Institute for Business Finance Research. Satin, D. and Huffman, T., 2015. FASB and IASB Convergence: Asymptotic Relationship or Transmogrification?.Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal,19(2), p.239. Sec.gov. (2017). [online] Available at: https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/speecharchive/1995/spch039.txt [Accessed 27 Jan. 2017]. Wang, M.C., 2016. The relationship between environmental information disclosure and firm valuation: the role of corporate governance.Quality Quantity,50(3), pp.1135-1151. Young, J.M., 2015. Navigating Pitfalls in Estimating Costs of Environmental Remediation Liabilities for Financial Reporting Purposes.