Judgement in the Singapore statements of accounting standard
Over the past 2 decades, several prestigious commissions such as the Treadway and Cohen Commissions and other bodies have referred to the relationship between accounting standards and judgement. Despite such references, the judgement and accounting standards relationship has apparently not attra...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Final Year Project |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/63645 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Nanyang Technological University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | Over the past 2 decades, several prestigious commissions such as the
Treadway and Cohen Commissions and other bodies have referred to the
relationship between accounting standards and judgement. Despite such
references, the judgement and accounting standards relationship has apparently not
attracted much attention from researchers and standard setters. In Singapore itself,
there is a lack of empirical studies done in this area. The purpose of this report,
therefore, is to draw attention to this relationship and document the extent of
judgement required by the Statements of Accounting Standards (SAS).
A content analysis was done on a sample of 18 Statements of Accounting
Standards whereby judgemental areas were recorded and classified according to a
predetermined taxonomy. Results revealed that judgements required by the
standards were very much prevalent, especially in those standards that dealt with
the accounting of specific items and events.
The implications of the results will be discussed along with
recommendations made in view of improving the quality of guidance provided by
the standards in exercising judgement. |
|---|