Assets in Accounting: Reality Lost

The aim of this paper is to trace changes in the definitional concept of assets in an attempt to discover why professional accounting bodies in the major English speaking countries have adopted the problematic abstract 'future benefit' notion, which is so far removed from the simple concept of assets as exchangeable things or rights. It is suggested that in the future financial reporting requirements for business entities include a statement of 'separably exchangeable property' and legal obligations at the reporting date.

Empirical evidence from the corporate collapse literature suggesting re-examination of accounting standards in relation to valuation of assets

This paper examines the recent spectacular corporate collapses of Parmalat in Europe, Enron and WorldCom in the USA and HIH in Australia and argues for a re-examination of corporate governance regulations, particularly in relation to accounting standards regarding the valuation of assets. The recommendation that is put forward in this regard is based upon empirical evidence arising from further examination of the empirical results in (Hossari and Rahman, 2004). Specifically, the recommendation is based upon the realization that, among the 48 financial ratios across the 50-plus refereed studies, five financial ratios, all of which contained assets as one of the variables, were a relatively robust indicator of corporate collapse. The five ratios are: Net Income/Total Assets, Current Assets/Current Liabilities, Total Liabilities/Total Assets, Working Capital/Total Assets, and Earnings Before Interest and Taxes/Total Assets. This paper suggests that it's not the failure of the corporate collapse prediction models, rather it's the erosion of the reliability of some key input data, namely assets and the valuation thereof, that is largely responsible for the apparent failure of these models in capturing impending collapses, such as those that we witnessed in the recent past. Such empirical findings support the argument that assets are soft targets for misrepresentation, because of the leeway granted in accounting standards with regards to their valuation.

The importance of intangible assets in initial public offerings

This paper follows Beatty and Ritter (1986), who argue that lower uncertainty about the value of an initial public offering (IPO) reduces the 'need' for the underpricing of an IPo. Australian IPOs often identify the existence of intangible assets such as goodwill, licenses, brand names, trademarks, patents and capitalized research and development costs in the prospectus. This paper analyses if IPOs identifying the existence of such intangible assets in the prospectus might reduce uncertainty about their valuation and hence allow a lower underpricing return. While the reporting of intangible assets such as goodwill and license costs in the prospectus are not significant ingredients in the level of underpricing, the identification and valuation of intangible assets such as brand names, trademarks, patents and capitalized research and development costs is significant in reducing the level of underpricing return. Our findings are also consistent with previous studies concluding that both the size of the new issue and the use of an underwriter are important in the level of underpricing return.

Intangible assets and the underpricing of industrial company initial public offerings

This study analyses 262 industrial company initial public offerings (IPOs) in Australia from 1994 to 1999. It finds that the identification and valuation of brand name, trademark, patent and capitalized research and development cost intangible assets in the prospectus significantly reduces underpricing. The identification of goodwill and license cost intangibles does not appear to be significant to underpricing. This paper supports the Beatty and Ritter (1986) argument that IPOs may display financial and nonfinancial characteristics that lower the uncertainty about the value of the lPO and hence lower the underpricing of that IPO. Our findings suggest implications for the issuer who wants to maximize the value of the firm at the time of the lPO, the underwriter who is required to guarantee the success of the capital raising and for the initial investors who are looking to reduce their uncertainty about the valuation of the lPO.

Council amalgamations and restructuring in Victoria: how did we value the assets and liabilities?

This study aimed to identify and critically analyse the methodologies and accounting treatments adopted in the transfer of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses resultingfrom municipal boundary changes associated with municipal restructuring (amalgamations) in Victoria during the early 1990s. In involved the collection and use of oral evidence obtained from officers of a sample of entities engaged in the process and focused on identifying and examining the methodologies used by municipalities. It has also been shown that local government is different from the commercial domain and the accounting profession has not adequately addressed some of these differences.

Accounting for local government boundary changes in South Australia : valuing assets and liabilities or valuing revenue streams

This paper examines the methodologies adopted in the transfer of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses resulting from boundary changes associated with municipal amalgamations in South Australia during the late 1990s. It investigates the methods employed for apportioning these financial elements, valuations used and financial settlements required. Significant transfers occurred in only three cases. In two cases, councils used simple, pragmatic methods to apportion assets and liabilities, similar to those used previously in Victoria. In the third case a transfer price was calculated based on the net present value of revenues. This method is quite different from previous methods examined and is appropriate where one council will make significant future gains at another council's loss because of net revenue transfers.

Book review : Managing government property assets by Olga Kaganova and James McKellar (eds)

Managing Government Property Assets, edited by Olga Kaganova and James McKellar, is reviewed.

Managing knowledge and intangible assets

This comprehensive handbook is very popular with HR practitioners, line managers, and anyone else who needs an overview of the legal and managerial aspects of managing people in organisations.

In this edition, over 50 chapters have been updated to reflect current workplace relations law, including the new Forward with Fairness Transition Act changes. There is also a new chapter on "Government Funded Traineeships - A guide for HR Professionals".

Definition and quantification of assets

The word ‘asset’ was originally taken into the English language, from the Latin ‘ad satis’ and French ‘asez’, as a term used at law meaning sufficient estate or effects to discharge debts. It later came to be used in the sense of property available for the payment of debts. Assets were understood to be property (objects owned and rights of ownership) that could be exchanged for cash. The importance of factual knowledge of the money equivalents of property and debts, in managing mercantile affairs, was emphasised in accounting manuals during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The rights of investors and creditors to factual up-to-date information about the financial state of affairs of companies, given the advent of limited liability, underscored the early company legislation that required the preparation and auditing of statements of property and debts. During the latter part of the nineteenth century the emphasis in accounting moved away from assets as exchangeable property to assets as deferred costs. Expectations took the place of observables. The abstract (expectational) notion of assets as ‘future economic benefits’ was embraced by accountants in the absence of rigorous definitions of the elements and functions of dated statements of financial position and performance. Assets are quantified financially by a heterogeneous mass of potentially inconsistent rules that, by and large, have no regard for the empirical nature of measurement. Consequently, accountants have failed to provide the community with up-to-date factual information about the financial state of affairs and performance of business entities - and, hence, with an informative basis for financial action.