Accounting standards
会计准则
Closing the GAAP
结束公认会计准则
Aug 28th 2008 | NEW YORK
From Economist.com
American securities regulators vote to ditch their own accounting standards
美国证券监管者表决放弃其自己的会计准则
SCORE a point for globalisation. In a landmark vote on Wednesday August 27th America’s financial-markets watchdog, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), paved the way for its companies to switch from America’s Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to international accounting standards. In a field that is, by reputation, notoriously dull, this looks like something to get genuinely excited about.
这为美国的全球化进程又得了一分。本周三（8月27日），在一项有着里程碑意义的投票中，美国金融市场监管者–证券交易委员会为美国公司由美国的公认会计准（GAAP）则转换到国际会计准则铺平了道路。在这个异常枯燥呆板的领域，这看起来确实值得高兴。
GAAP was the beancounter’s gold standard for decades, but it is now widely seen as cumbersome. Most other countries have embraced the international rules, known as International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The regulators’ plan envisages American-based multinationals switching to the standards voluntarily in 2010. The SEC would then vote on whether to require all other companies to do the same, starting in 2014. The commission has already cleared the way for overseas firms to use IFRS when doing business or listing securities in America.
公认会计准则（GAAP）是会计领域数十年来的黄金准则，但是现在却被普遍地认为笨重异常，运转不灵。许多其它的国家都采用了国际标准–国际财务报告准则（IFRS）。美国监管者的计划是使总部位于美国的跨国公司在2010年自愿转换成国际财务报表准则。证券交易委员会到那时投票决定是否要求其它公司也从2014年开始采用国际财务报表准则。证券委员会已经为海外公司在美国做生意或者上市时候使用国际财务报表准则扫清了道路。
Christopher Cox, the SEC’s chairman, hailed the move to an “international language of disclosure, transparency and comparability.” Big companies have long been preparing for it with enthusiasm. It will bring each of them one-off costs in the tens of millions, but the savings over time will dwarf the initial outlay. It could also mean greater profits: one study found that the majority of American firms made more under the foreign rules. Investors, too, have reason to rejoice. It will make it easier to compare, say, a French drug company with an American rival. And the compliance costs of duplicate accounting, the bulk of which investors ultimately bear, will disappear.
证券交易委员会主席Christopher Cox为这个举动使得财务报表更加接近”披露，透明和可比性的国际语言”而大加赞扬。大公司对此期待已久。这可能会使他们一次性消耗数千万美元，但是随着时间的流逝，对于整个成本的节省使得初始的投入不值一提。而且还有更大的收益：一项研究发现大多数美国公司在外国准则下会赚的更多。投资者同样值得高兴。因为国际会计准则更有利于比较，比如说，比较一家法国药品公司与其美国的竞争对手。而且主要由投资者最终来承担的重复做帐的税务执行成本也会消失。
Accountants point to other benefits. IFRS is less complex than GAAP, with fewer exceptions; America’s accounting rules, like its tax code, are creaking under bolted-on guidance. It is also more principles-based, granting auditors greater room to use judgment. This can be good or bad, of course, but most experts say more leeway is needed.
会计师也有其它的好处。国际财务报表准则比公认会计准则要简单些，而且特例也比较少。美国的会计准则，例如其免税代码，于紧锢的GAAP准则下孱弱多疾。国际财务报表准则通常是基于原理的，准许审计员有更多的空间来做判断。当然，这样有好处也有坏处，但是多数熟练高手认为更多的灵活空间是必要的。
For several years, the SEC and the London-based International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), which oversees the international rules, focused on steadily bringing the two sets of standards together. But it has been a struggle, largely thanks to the Byzantine nature of the American system. Mr Cox embraced the more radical approach approved this week in the belief that it would boost the competitiveness of American firms by removing barriers to investment. The “roadmap” is the latest in a string of proposals under his leadership designed to bring American and foreign markets closer together.
多年来，证券交易委员会和总部位于伦敦，负责制定国际会计准则的国际会计准则委员会（IASB）努力使两套标准融为一体。但这难于调和，很大程度上归咎于美国会计系统拜占庭式的本性。Cox先生这周采纳了较为激进的方案，因为他相信移除投资的障碍会提升美国公司的竞争力。最近在其领导下一连串的提议所构成的”发展蓝图”就是为了使得美国和国外市场更紧密地在一起。
Not everyone is happy. Some politicians, including the head of the congressional committee that oversees the SEC, worry about ceding standard-setting power to the IASB. Even though America has seats on its board, there is concern that it will be under-represented. Some want it to have influence commensurate with the size of America’s equity markets, which account for almost half of global market capitalisation. Others worry about the IASB’s finances and its susceptibility to outside influence. One of the SEC’s commissioners said the plan should only be waved through once it is clear that secure, independent funding is in place.
并不是每个人都高兴。包括监督SEC的国会委员会首领在内的一些政客担心这是将标准制定的权力让与国际会计准则委员会。尽管美国在国际会计准则委员会中也有委员席位，但是他们仍担心其代表名额不足。有人想要使得其影响力与占全球市场资本总额半壁江山的美国股票市场的地位相称。其它人担心国际会计准则委员会的财务状况并且怕其易受外界影响。一个证券交易委员的委员说，这个计划除非其稳定独立的资金筹备到位，才能获得通过。
There are worries overseas too, for instance that the SEC will try to interfere with IFRS and interpret it in a narrow, prescriptive way. Standards issued by the IASB are supposed to be endorsed without modification. It remains to be seen whether America will be able to accept this. Its relations with international rulemakers can be thorny: think of the World Trade Organisation.
海外同样也有些担心，例如证券交易委员会是否会干涉国际财务报表准则或者从狭义，惯例的角度来理解它呢。国际会计准则委员会发布的标准应该被无改动的状况下认可。美国是否能够接受尚待分晓。美国与国际规则制定者之间的关系常常很棘手：例如和世界贸易组织。
Plenty of other issues still have to be resolved. Some are technical: IFRS allows fewer securitised assets to be kept off the books than GAAP does, for instance-a matter of import for banks. Others are broader and altogether more difficult. For an accounting framework that rests largely on judgment to flourish in rules-based America, the legal and regulatory environment there will need to “evolve”, says PricewaterhouseCoopers, a big accounting firm. That is putting it gently. Still, this week’s vote was a momentous step-and in the right direction.
还有许多其它的问题有待解决。有些是技术性的：国际财务报表准则要求在账簿之外的证券性资产比公认会计准则的要求要少，例如：对于银行来说就会增加一些证券性资产。其它的问题就比较宽泛而且总的来说更难处理。一家大型的会计事务所普华永道表示，要使一个在其它地方基于判断的财务框架，在（财务框架）大部分基于法规的美国繁荣（起来），需要美国的法律和制度环境的”演进”。这样说已经是比较客气了。当然，本周的表决是朝着正确方向迈进了一大步。
译者：rushor http://www.ecocn.org/forum/viewthread.php?tid=13638&extra=page%3D1