Discuss about the Historical Cost Versus Fair Value Accounting.
The selection between the fair value and historical cost accounting turned out to be increasingly debated concern within the accounting literature. Additionally, the standard structure for “international financial reporting” (after IASB framework) along with AASB framework cannot decide a particular base of measurement to consider the major aspects considering IASB framework based financial reports (Christensen et al. 2013). Particular measurement techniques for several accounting aspects are offered in particular “international financial reporting standards (IFRS)”. Rather than most of the accounting standards, IFRS offers a free choice between the fair value and historical cost accounting non-financial asset groups including plant and equipment (PPE) and intangibles. This resulted in several changes in the PPE and valuation practice based variations (Missonier-Piera and Franck 2007). One consideration that increases the chances of debate is very forces of market despite of regulators determine less evidence on selection between the two accounting practices at the time selection. The paper will consider a quasi-experiment present in current necessary implementation of the “International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)”. The objective of the paper is to distinguish between the historical cost and fair value accounting for certain non-financial assets namely PPE (plat, property, and equipment) and intangibles.
Historical cost is understood as actual cost that is known to be the real amount or certain other equivalents at the time of acquiring along with making several resources and properties. Considering the historical cost, the cost of an asset mentioned in the balance sheet is relied on its original and nominal cost at the time any company is acquired. Moreover, the liability amount is deemed actual receipts or payments due to current obligations (IASB Framework, IAS 16, IAS 38, and IFRS 13. 2015). In certain circumstances, liabilities and assets are indicated at their historical cost due to the reason that no change is observed in the value from the date of company’s acquisition. In contrast, in some situations, the value of balance sheet for several items might be distinct in comparison to the actual value. Particularly, for the non-financial assets, GAAP just facilitates just the historical cost accounting and on the other hand, UK GAAP can facilitate PPE or necessitates fair value accounting for investment property (AASB Framework, AASB 116, AASB 138, and AASB 13. 2015). However, under IFRS historical cost is facilitated for investment property and PPE and in case, active market is present for intangibles. Reliability is also deemed major dimension based on which historical cost generally dominates fair value.
Fair value can be understood to be price that can be attained for selling an asset or paid in order to transmit a liability in an efficient and well maintained transaction among the market participants at measurement date (IFRS 13) (Australian Securities Exchange 2015). In addition to that, fair value is deemed as unbiased and reasoned anticipation of likely market price for any service, product or an asset. In contrast, it requires taking into account certain important factors such as:
An organization that chooses the fair value should revaluate assets all the time, the book value is distinct from market value (IAS 40 and IAS 16) (New York Stock Exchange, 2015). An organization that selects historical cost might not conduct upward revaluation in the upcoming years. Switch among the fair value and historical cost is deemed as change in accounting principles and requires being justified to the lenders, auditors, equity investors along with the regulators.
The initial measurement cost of a property aspect along with plant and equipment must be measured at expense that is the real amount from the acquisition date. From the measurement that is in accordance with the preliminary recognition there are two major accounting models namely revaluation and cost models (London Stock Exchange 2015). An organization must select between fair value model and cost model for IP capacity along with initial recognition. Considering the fair value model, losses or gains taking place from transformation in the fair value of IP can be encompassed within net loss or profit considering the time in which it takes place. Fair value accounting model indicates that fair value accounting offers important measures of assets, liabilities along with provided historical costs (Linsmeier 2013). This indicates the incapability of historical cost accounting model for addressing for dealing with impact of non-monetary assets of altering prices.
Several fair value accounting critics stated that estimates of fair value decrease dependibility. Considering the same historical cost has several benefits those are recognizable and has increased independence and it focuses on the dealings those are involved in the company other than hypothetical alternatives (Christensen and Nikolaev 2013). Certain disadvantages and advantages of fair value accounting for PPE and intangibles are mentioned under:
Tesco Company is positioned among one of the profitable retail companies in London. From analysis of the accounting policy section of the company’s yearly report it was gathered that the company follows fair value accounting based valuation techniques. Tesco Company is observed to follow fair value accounting based on IFRS standard and UK accounting standards (Demerjian, Donovan and Larson 2016). This explains that the intangibles and PPE valuation for Tesco Company is done through fair value accounting technique. At the time fair value is implemented, alterations in asset value are mentioned within revaluation reassure that includes fraction of shareholders equity. As per IFRS, selection of valuation technique needs to be reliable for every asset classes.
Wal-Mart Company is positioned among one of the profitable retail companies in USA. From analysis of the section of accounting policy of the company’s yearly report it was gathered that the company follows fair value accounting based valuation techniques. It was gathered that the financial statements of the company are prepared along with that PPE and intangibles in accordance with Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) (Ramanna 2013). Moreover, impairment losses are valued within the company’s financial statements in the financial asset or group of financial assets. Wal-Mart Company follows IFRS 9 “financial instruments” standard that considers new requirement for the segmentation of financial asset and liabilities valuation. At the time fair value is implemented, positive alterations in asset value are mentioned within revaluation reassure that includes fraction of shareholders equity (Durocher and Gendron 2014). Managers gain incentives for considering effective valuation choices that indicate the company stakeholders’ interest. It can be stated that GAAP and IFRS are identical in consideration to PPE valuation.
Woolworth Company is positioned among one of the profitable retail companies in Australia. From analysis of the accounting policy part of the company’s yearly report it was gathered that the company follows fair value accounting based valuation techniques. Woolworth Company’s valuation is conducted in consideration to “International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)” (Chen, Tan and Wang 2013). Several IFRS amendments were implemented during the recent year that has less impact on the company’s reported results. Accounting policy based on fair value accounting on the impairment of non-financial assets for such process. The carrying amount for the company’s assets rather than goodwill, associates, inventories and deferred tax assets is reviewed under all the statements of financial position for any impairment indication (Chircop and Novotny-Farkas 2016). The financial statements of the company are observed to be aligned with the accounting policies using sales losses or gains for decreasing or increasing net income as indicated at its desired period. Employing fair value accounting or gains from certain price changes for assets are presented over the time this occurs. Value increase for asset or liability decrease contributes to net income, asset value reduction or liability value increase can affect net income (Bowen and Khan 2014).
IFRS needs that companies must reveal their valuation practices within the accounting policy part of the yearly reports along with applying selected method with time. Despite conceptual fair value appeal, the expenses of maintaining reliable anticipations does not allow fair value from turning out to be valuation method for non-financial assets (Cantrell, McInnis and Yust 2013). Companies’ financial reporting selections within consolidated statements, encompassing their non-financial assets valuations have less tax complications. The valuation technique for PPE mentioned within GAAP is the historical cost. Considering IFRS and GAAP, PPE can be identified over expenses. Moreover, significant date of balance sheet is valued at both fair value along with historical cost. In both the scenarios, such assets are deemed depreciation subject. At the time fair value is implemented, alterations in asset value are mentioned within revaluation reassure that includes fraction of shareholders equity (Bratten, Causholli and Myers 2015). For this reason, revaluations can just affect net income by mean of future depreciation expenses. As per IFRS, selection of valuation needs to be same for the asset classes. For PPE, it is gathered that 3% of sample companies employ fair value accounting for just an asset class as per IFRS implementation (Oulasvirta 2014). As per guidelines of GAAP, historical cost is just the valuation technique allowed for the assets those are intangible. In the same company considers using historical cost, it can carry out future upward revaluations. Managers gain incentives to make effective valuation choices that indicate companies’ stakeholders’ interest. It can be stated that GAAP and IFRS are identical in consideration to PPE valuation.
Different from several accounting standards, IFRS serves as free choice among the fair value and historical cost accounting for the non-financial assets. The free choice declared by IFRS standards facilitates the managers signifying the external stakeholders to reveal choices in accordance with valuation activities (Palea 2014). Management’s selection must be exercised abiding by free exchange principles and in the lack of externalities, for instance, on auditors part or industry organizations. Considering the same, it can be stated that under IFRS both the historical cost and fair value are supported for PPE and investment property. However, an a market does not really exist for the intangibles and for this reason, the managerial selection of the valuation circumstances for the intangibles might not be considered as liberated for the investment property and PPE (Griffin 2014).
Selection between historical cost accounting and fair value serves as an aspect of long-term conflict among the accounting practitioners. Presence of the market-based illustrations on such free choice is very less. Selection of fair value other than historical cost accounting for the non-financial assets is conducted within a position of the market forces other than the considerations in order to describe the results (Demerjian, Donovan and Larson 2016). In general, it is revealed that decreased use of fair value accounting will be considered. Moreover, from several organizational observations is deemed to rely the market forces for determining the choice. Fair value accounting must be considered to use at the time reliable fair value anticipations are assessable at decreased cost and while they convey information regarding operating performance. For instance, along with few implications, the company’s managers are committed to historical cost accounting for plant and equipment (Demerjian, Donovan, and Larson 2016). It was gathered that findings of appropriate selection of fair value accounting and historical cost contributes to the debate that presents market solution to major concerns. Fair value is not likely to serve as valuation method for non-likely to be valuation techniques for non-liquid non-financial assets on regular basis.
Several predictions that is cross sectional centering on the tradeoffs of cost-benefit between two valuation conducts are identified (Durocher and Gendron 2014). Reliability serves as major dimension based historical cost that dominates the fair value, the expenses of build dependable fair value anticipations those are deemed as major cross-sectional determinant of selection between both the accounting practices. It is deemed that fair value accounting is extremely possible for being selected for property than several other non-financial assets, as property markets are liquid (Durocher and Gendron 2014). It is also observed that managers tend to implement fair value while it supports performance analysis. Changes in value in investment property are informative for operating performance at the time capital advantages are fraction of business model as it is deemed that utilization of fair value in real estate companies’ results in holding the investment property. Moreover, dependence on debt-financing impacts fair value selection.
Conclusion
The aim of the report was to distinguish between the historical cost and fair value accounting for certain non-financial assets namely PPE (plant, property and equipment) alog with intangibles. Historical cost is understood as actual cost that is known to be the real amount or certain other equivalents at the time of acquiring along with making several resources and properties. Considering the historical cost, the cost of an asset mentioned in the balance sheet is relied on its original and nominal cost at the time any company is acquired. An organization that selects historical cost might not conduct upward revaluation in the upcoming years. Switch among the fair value and historical cost is deemed as voluntary change in accounting principles and requires being justified to lenders, auditors, equity investors along with the regulators. Several critics of fair value accounting stated that estimates of fair value decrease reliability.
Considering the same historical cost has several benefits those are similar and has increased objectivity along with focussing on the transactions those are actually involved in the company other than hypothetical alternatives. IFRS serves as free choice between the fair value and historical cost accounting for the non-financial assets. IFRS standards consider free choice facilitates the managers signifying the external stakeholders to reveal choices in accordance with valuation activities. Management’s selection must be exercised abiding by free exchange principles and in the lack of externalities, for instance, on auditors part or industry organizations. Considering the same, it can be stated that within IFRS both the historical cost and fair value are supported for investment property and PPE.
Reference List
Aasb.gov.au., 2017. Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) – Home. [online] Available at: https://www.aasb.gov.au [Accessed 15 Jan. 2017].
Asx.com.au., 2017. Home – Australian Securities Exchange – ASX. [online] Available at: https://www.asx.com.au [Accessed 15 Jan. 2017].
Ball, R., Li, X. and Shivakumar, L., 2013. Mandatory IFRS adoption, fair value accounting and accounting information in debt contracts. Fair Value Accounting and Accounting Information in Debt Contracts (September 11, 2013).
Bowen, R.M. and Khan, U., 2014. Market reactions to policy deliberations on fair value accounting and impairment rules during the financial crisis of 2008–2009. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 33(3), pp.233-259.
Bratten, B., Causholli, M. and Myers, L.A., 2015. Fair value accounting, auditor specialization, and earnings management: Evidence from the banking industry. Auditor Specialization, and Earnings Management: Evidence from the Banking Industry (May 2015).
Cantrell, B.W., McInnis, J.M. and Yust, C.G., 2013. Predicting credit losses: Loan fair values versus historical costs. The Accounting Review, 89(1), pp.147-176.
Chen, W., TAN, H.T. and Wang, E.Y., 2013. Fair value accounting and managers’ hedging decisions. Journal of Accounting Research, 51(1), pp.67-103.
Chircop, J. and Novotny-Farkas, Z., 2016. The economic consequences of extending the use of fair value accounting in regulatory capital calculations. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 62(2), pp.183-203.
Christensen, H.B. and Nikolaev, V.V., 2013. Does fair value accounting for non-financial assets pass the market test?. Review of Accounting Studies, 18(3), pp.734-775.
Christensen, Hans B and Nikolaev, Valeri V., 2013. Does fair value accounting for non-financial assets pass the market test? Review of Accounting Studies, 18(3), pp. 734-775.
Demerjian, P.R., Donovan, J. and Larson, C.R., 2016. Fair value accounting and debt contracting: Evidence from adoption of SFAS 159. Journal of Accounting Research.
Durocher, S. and Gendron, Y., 2014. Epistemic commitment and cognitive disunity toward fair-value accounting. Accounting and Business Research, 44(6), pp.630-655.
Ellul, A., Jotikasthira, C., Lundblad, C.T. and Wang, Y., 2015. Is historical cost accounting a panacea? Market stress, incentive distortions, and gains trading. The Journal of Finance, 70(6), pp.2489-2538.
Griffin, J.B., 2014. The effects of uncertainty and disclosure on auditors’ fair value materiality decisions. Journal of Accounting Research, 52(5), pp.1165-1193.
Ifrs.org., 2017. IFRS – Home. [online] Available at: https://www.ifrs.org [Accessed 15 Jan. 2017].
Liang, L. and Riedl, E.J., 2013. The effect of fair value versus historical cost reporting model on analyst forecast accuracy. The Accounting Review, 89(3), pp.1151-1177.
Linsmeier, T.J., 2013. A Standard setter’s framework for selecting between fair value and historical cost measurement attributes: a basis for discussion of “Does fair value accounting for nonfinancial assets pass the market test?”. Review of Accounting Studies, 18(3), pp.776-782.
Londonstockexchange.com., 2017. Home – London Stock Exchange. [online] Available at: https://www.londonstockexchange.com [Accessed 15 Jan. 2017].
Missonier-Piera and Franck., 2007. Motives for fixed-asset revaluation: An empirical analysis with Swiss data, The International Journal of Accounting, 42(2), pp. 186–205.
Nyse.com., 2017. The New York Stock Exchange | NYSE. [online] Available at: https://www.nyse.com [Accessed 15 Jan. 2017].
Oulasvirta, L., 2014. The reluctance of a developed country to choose International Public Sector Accounting Standards of the IFAC. A critical case study. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(3), pp.272-285.
Palea, V., 2014. Fair value accounting and its usefulness to financial statement users. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 12(2), pp.102-116.
Ramanna, K., 2013. Why’Fair Value’is the Rule: How a Controversial Accounting Approach Gained Support. Harvard Business Review, 91(3).
Watts, R.L. and Zuo, L., 2016. Understanding practice and institutions: A historical perspective. Accounting Horizons, 30(3), pp.409-423.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download