- 相關(guān)推薦
會(huì)計(jì)畢業(yè)論文范文附錄
畢業(yè)論文附錄是論文的組成部分，一般放在全文最后，主要起到補(bǔ)充的作用，根據(jù)情況是可以省略的，當(dāng)然，一篇完整的論文，附錄也是比較重要的，有需要就不要省掉。以下是小編整理的會(huì)計(jì)畢業(yè)論文范文附錄，快看看要怎么寫吧。
會(huì)計(jì)畢業(yè)論文范文附錄1
Fair Value Measurements
In February 2006 the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)and the US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) published a Memorandum of Understanding reaffirming their commitment to the convergence of US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) and to their shared objective of developing high quality, common accounting standards for use in the world’s capital markets. The convergence work programme set out in the Memorandum reflects the standard-setting context of the ‘roadmap’ developed by the US Securities and Exchange Commission in consultation with the IASB, FASB and European Commission for the removal of the reconciliation requirement for non-US companies that use IFRSs and are registered in the US. The work programe includes a project on measuring fair value.
The FASB has recently issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157 Fair Value Measurements (SFAS 157), on which work was well advanced before the Memorandum of Understanding was published. SFAS 157 establishes a single definition of fair value together with a framework for measuring fair value for US GAAP. The IASB recognised the need for guidance on measuring fair value in IFRSs and for increased convergence with US GAAP. Consequently, the IASB decided to use the FASB’s standard as the starting point for its deliberations. As the first stage of its project, the IASB is publishing in this discussion paper its preliminary views on the principal issues contained in SFAS 157.
The IASB plans to hold round-table meetings on this discussion paper in conjunction with the development of an exposure draft. Please indicate in your response to this Invitation to Comment if you are interested in taking part in a round-table meeting. Please note that, because of timing and space constraints, not all of those indicating an interest may be able to take part.
The IASB will consider responses to this Invitation to Comment and the related round-table discussions in developing an exposure draft of an IFRS on fair value measurement. The exposure draft will be prepared specifically for application to IFRSs. Although provisions of SFAS 157 may be used in the preparation of an exposure draft, they may be reworded or altered to be consistent with other IFRSs and to reflect the decisions of the IASB. The IASB plans to publish an exposure draft by early 2008.
In November 2005 the IASB published for comment a discussion paper, Measurement Bases for Financial Accounting – Measurement on Initial Recognition, written by the staff of the Canadian Accounting Standards Board. Although that paper contained a discussion of fair value, its primary purpose was to discuss which measurement attributes were appropriate for initial recognition. That paper is part of the ongoing Conceptual Framework project that seeks to establish, among other things, a framework for measurement in financial reporting. Because of the different scope and intent of that paper, it is not discussed in this discussion paper. However, comments on that discussion paper relating to the measurement of fair value will be considered in the development of the exposure draft of an IFRS on fair value measurement as well as in the Conceptual Framework project. Issue 1. SFAS 157 and fair value measurement guidance in current IFRSs
IFRSs require some assets, liabilities and equity instruments to be measured at fair value in some circumstances. However, guidance on measuring fair value is dispersed throughout IFRSs and is not always consistent. The IASB believes that establishing a single source of guidance for all fair value measurements required by IFRSs will both simplify IFRSs and improve the quality of fair value information included in financial reports. A concise definition of fair value combined with consistent guidance that applies to all fair value measurements would more clearly communicate the objective of fair value measurement and eliminate the need for constituents to consider guidance dispersed throughout IFRSs.
The IASB emphasises that the Fair Value Measurements project is not a means of expanding the use of fair value in financial reporting. Rather, the objective of the project is to codify, clarify and simplify existing guidance that is dispersed widely in IFRSs. However, in order to establish a single standard that provides uniform guidance for all fair value measurements required by IFRSs, amendments will need to be made to the existing guidance. As discussed further in Issue 2, the amendments might change how fair value is measured in some standards and how the requirements are interpreted and applied.
In some IFRSs the IASB (or its predecessor body) consciously included measurement guidance that results in a measurement that is treated as if it were fair value even though the guidance is not consistent with the fair value measurement objective. For example, paragraph B16 of IFRS 3 Business Combinations provides guidance that is inconsistent with the fair value measurement objective for items acquired in a business combination such as tax assets, tax liabilities and net employee benefit assets or liabilities for defined benefit plans. Furthermore, some IFRSs contain measurement reliability criteria. For example, IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment permits the revaluation model to be used only if fair value can be measured reliably This project will not change any of that guidance. Rather, that guidance will be considered project by project. However, the IASB plans to use the Fair Value Measurements project to establish guidance where there currently is none, such as in IAS 17 Leases, as well as to eliminate inconsistent guidance that does not clearly articulate a single measurement objective.
Because SFAS 157 establishes a single source of guidance and a single objective that can be applied to all fair value measurements, the IASB has reached the preliminary view that SFAS 157 is an improvement on the disparate guidance in IFRSs. However, as discussed in more detail below, the IASB has not reached preliminary views on all provisions of SFAS 157.Issue 2. Differences between the definitions of fair value in SFAS 157 and in IFRSs
Paragraph 5 of SFAS 157 defines fair value as ‘the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.’ Bycomparison, fair value is generally defined in IFRSs as ‘the amount for which an asset could be exchanged, or a liability settled, between knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm’s length transaction’ (withsome slight variations in wording in different standards). Thedefinition in SFAS 157 differs from the definition in IFRSs in three important ways:
(a)The definition in SFAS 157 is explicitly an exit (selling)price. Thedefinition in IFRSs is neither explicitly an exit price nor an entry (buying) price.
(b)The definition in SFAS 157 explicitly refers to market participants. The definition in IFRSs refers to knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm’s length transaction.
(c)For liabilities, the definition of fair value in SFAS 157 rests on the notion that the liability is transferred(the liability to the counterparty continues; it is not settled with the counterparty). The definition in IFRSs refers to the amount at which a liability
could be settled between knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm’s length transaction.
These differences are discussed in more detail below.Issue 2A. Exit price measurement objective
The Basis for Conclusions of SFAS 157 includes the following discussion:
C26The transaction to sell the asset or transfer the liability is a hypothetical transaction at the measurement date, considered from the perspective of a market participant that holds the asset or owes the liability. Therefore, the objective of a fair value measurement is to determine the price that would be received for the asset or paid to transfer the liability at the measurement date, that is, an exit price. The Board [FASB] concluded that an exit price objective is appropriate because it embodies current expectations about the future inflows associated with the asset and the future outflows associated with the liability from the perspective of market participants. The emphasis on inflows and outflows is consistent with the definitions of assets and liabilities in FASB Concepts Statement No. 6, Elements of Financial INVITATION TO COMMENT Statements. Paragraph25 of Concepts Statement 6 defines assets in terms of future economic benefits (future inflows). Paragraph 35 of Concepts Statement 6 defines liabilities in terms of future sacrifices of economic benefits(future outflows).
Paragraph 49 of the IASB’s Framework for the Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements similarly defines assets and liabilities in terms of inflows and outflows of economic benefits. The majority of IASB members believe that a fair value measurement with an exit price objective is consistent with these definitions and is appropriate because it reflects current market-based expectations of flows of economic benefit into or out of the entity.
Other IASB members agree with this view, but in their view an entry price also reflects current market-based expectations of flows of economic benefit into or out of the entity. Therefore, they suggest replacing the term ‘fair value’ with terms that are more descriptive of the measurement attribute, such as ‘current entry price’ or ‘current exit price’.
An entry price measurement objective would differ from the exit price objective in SFAS 157 in that it would be defined as the price that would be paid to acquire an asset or received to assume a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Some members of the IASB are of the view that an entry price and an exit price would be the same amount in the same market, assuming that transaction costs are excluded. However, an entity might buy an asset or assume a liability in one market and sell that same asset or transfer that same liability (without modification or repackaging)in another market. In such circumstances, the exit price in SFAS 157 would be likely to differ from the entry price.
Some fair value measurements required by IFRSs might not be consistent with an exit price measurement objective. In particular, the IASB observes that this might be the case when fair value is required on initial recognition, such as in:
(a)IFRS 3, (b)IAS 17 for the initial recognition of assets and liabilities by a lessee under a finance lease, and(c)IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement for the initial recognition of some financial assets and financial liabilities.
In developing an exposure draft, the IASB may propose a revised definition of fair value. If so, it will complete a standard-by-standard review of fair value measurements required in IFRSs to assess whether each standard’s intended measurement objective is consistent with the proposed definition. If the IASB concludes that the intended measurement objective in a particular standard is inconsistent with the proposed definition of fair value, either that standard will be excluded from the scope of the exposure draft or the intended measurement objective will be restated using a term other than fair value (such as ‘current entry value’ ). To assist in its review, the IASB would like to understand how the fair value measurement guidance in IFRSs is currently applied in practice. It therefore requests respondents to identify those fair value measurements in IFRSs for which practice differs from the fair value measurement objective in SFAS 157.
Issue 2B. Market participant view
SFAS 157 emphasises that a fair value measurement is a market-basedmeasurement, not an entity-specific measurement. Therefore, a fairvalue measurement should be based on the assumptions that marketparticipants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Furthermore, evenwhen there is limited or no observable market activity, the objective ofthe fair value measurement remains the same: to determine the price
that would be received to sell an asset or be paid to transfer a liability inan orderly transaction between market participants at the measurementdate, regardless of the entity’s intention or ability to sell the asset ortransfer the liability at that date.
Paragraph 10 of SFAS 157 defines market participants as buyers andsellers in the principal (or most advantageous) market for the asset orliability who are:
(a）Independent of the reporting entity; that is, they are not related parties
(b）Knowledgeable, having a reasonable understanding about the asset or liability and the transaction based on all available information, including information that might be obtained through due diligence efforts that are usual and customary
(c）Able to transact for the asset or liability
(d）Willing to transact for the asset or liability; that is, they are motivated but not forced or otherwise compelled to do so.
In comparison, the definition of fair value in IFRSs refers to‘knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm’s length transaction’.Paragraphs 42-44 of IAS 40 Investment Property provide a description of this concept:
The definition of fair value refers to ‘knowledgeable, willing parties’.In this context, ‘knowledgeable’ means that both the willing buyer and the willing seller are reasonably informed about the nature and characteristics of the investment property, its actual and potential uses, and market conditions at the balance sheet date. A willing buyer is motivated, but not compelled, to buy. This buyer is neither over-eager nor determined to buy at any price. The assumed buyer would not pay a higher price than a market comprising knowledgeable, willing buyers and sellers would require.
A willing seller is neither an over-eager nor a forced seller, prepared to sell at any price, nor one prepared to hold out for a price not considered reasonable in current market conditions. The willing seller is motivated to sell the investment property at market terms for the best price obtainable. The factual circumstances of the actual investment property owner are not a part of this consideration because the willing seller is a hypothetical owner (ega willing seller would not take into account the particular tax circumstances of the actual investment property owner).
The definition of fair value refers to an arm’s length transaction. Anarm’s length transaction is one between parties that do not have a particular or special relationship that makes prices of transactions uncharacteristic of market conditions. The transaction is presumed to be between unrelated parties, each acting independently.
21The IASB’s preliminary view is that the market participant view is generally consistent with the concepts of a knowledgeable, willing party in an arm’s length transaction that are currently contained in IFRSs. However, in the IASB’s view, the proposed definition more clearly articulates the market-based fair value measurement objective in IFRSs.
會(huì)計(jì)畢業(yè)論文范文附錄2
公允價(jià)值計(jì)量
在 2006 年二月，國(guó)際會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)（IASB） 和美國(guó)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)委員會(huì)（FASB）公布了再斷言他們對(duì)美國(guó)公認(rèn)會(huì)計(jì)原則（GAAP） 和國(guó)際的金融報(bào)告標(biāo)準(zhǔn)（IFRSs） 的集中承諾的一個(gè)備忘錄和對(duì)他們的發(fā)展中高級(jí)質(zhì)量的被分享的目的, 公共的為全球的使用資本市場(chǎng)的會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則。集中工作在備忘錄中被宣布的節(jié)目反映為使用 IFRSs ，而且在美國(guó)被登記的非美國(guó)公司為調(diào)節(jié)需要的拆遷以 IASB 、 FASB 和歐盟委員會(huì)在請(qǐng)教被美國(guó)證券交易管理委員會(huì)發(fā)展的 '路線圖' 的設(shè)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)上下文。工作節(jié)目關(guān)于測(cè)量公允價(jià)值包括一個(gè)計(jì)劃。
FASB 最近已經(jīng)發(fā)行『財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則匯編』 157 號(hào)公允價(jià)值測(cè)量 （SFAS 157），在那里在備忘錄被公布了之前，工作前進(jìn)得好。SFAS 157 連同為美國(guó) GAAP 測(cè)量公允價(jià)值的架構(gòu)一起建立一種公允價(jià)值的定義。IASB 關(guān)于在 IFRSs 測(cè)量公允價(jià)值辨認(rèn)出對(duì)指導(dǎo)的需要了和為增加的集中用美國(guó) GAAP。結(jié)果， IASB 決定為它的熟慮以 FASB 的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)作為出發(fā)點(diǎn)。作為它的計(jì)劃的第一個(gè)階段,IASB 在被包含在 SFAS 157 的主要的發(fā)行上正在這討論證券中出版它的初步視野。
IASB 計(jì)劃連同討論稿的發(fā)展在這討論證券上舉行回合-表格的會(huì)議。如果你對(duì)參加一個(gè)回合-表格的會(huì)議感興趣，請(qǐng)?jiān)趯?duì)這邀請(qǐng)的你的回應(yīng)指出發(fā)表評(píng)論。請(qǐng)注意, 因?yàn)闀r(shí)間安排和場(chǎng)地拘束,正在指出一個(gè)利息可能能夠參加的不是所有的人。
IASB 將會(huì)考慮反應(yīng)至這邀請(qǐng)發(fā)表評(píng)論和在公允價(jià)值測(cè)量上發(fā)展 IFRS 的一個(gè)討論稿方面相關(guān)的回合-表格的討論。討論稿將會(huì)被明確地為 IFRSs 的申請(qǐng)準(zhǔn)備.雖然SFAS 157 的食品可能被用于討論稿的預(yù)備, 但是，他們可能被重述或者改變對(duì)其他的 IFRSs 感到一致而且反映 IASB 的決定。IASB 計(jì)劃在 2008 年初之前公布一個(gè)討論稿。
在 2005 年十一月，IASB 為評(píng)論一個(gè)討論證券公布, 測(cè)量基礎(chǔ)為財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì) - 在被加拿大會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)的全體職員寫的原始承認(rèn)上的測(cè)量。雖然那證券包含了公允價(jià)值的討論, 但是，它的主要目的將討論哪些測(cè)量歸屬適合原始承認(rèn)。那證券是在其他的事物之中尋求建立在金融報(bào)告中的測(cè)量架構(gòu)的繼續(xù)基本概念計(jì)劃的一部份。因?yàn)椴煌秶湍亲C券的意圖，它不在這討論證券中被討論。然而，在那討論上發(fā)表評(píng)論與公允價(jià)值的測(cè)量有關(guān)的證券在公允價(jià)值測(cè)量上和在基本概念計(jì)劃將會(huì)在 IFRS 的討論稿的發(fā)展被考慮。發(fā)行在現(xiàn)在的 IFRSs 中的 SFAS 157 和公允價(jià)值測(cè)量指導(dǎo)。
IFRSs 需要一些資產(chǎn)、負(fù)債和權(quán)益證券在一些環(huán)境中的公允價(jià)值被測(cè)量。然而，指導(dǎo)關(guān)于在 IFRSs 各處測(cè)量公允價(jià)值被驅(qū)散而且不總是一致。IASB 相信為是必需的所有的公允價(jià)值測(cè)量建立一個(gè)指導(dǎo)的根源由 IFRSs 將會(huì)兩者都單一化 IFRSs 而且改善被包含在財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告之中的公允價(jià)值數(shù)據(jù)的質(zhì)量。一種公允價(jià)值的簡(jiǎn)潔定義和適用于所有的公允價(jià)值測(cè)量的'一致的指導(dǎo)結(jié)合了會(huì)更清楚溝通公允價(jià)值測(cè)量的目的而且除去對(duì)成份的需要考慮指導(dǎo)在 IFRSs 各處傳播。
IASB 強(qiáng)調(diào)公允價(jià)值測(cè)量計(jì)劃不是在金融報(bào)告中擴(kuò)張公允價(jià)值的使用的方法。然而，計(jì)劃的目的將編成法典, 澄清而且單一化存在 IFRSs 廣泛地被驅(qū)散的指導(dǎo)。然而, 為了要建立由 IFRSs 提供統(tǒng)一的指導(dǎo)給是必需的所有的公允價(jià)值測(cè)量的一個(gè)單本位, 修正將會(huì)需要被制造現(xiàn)有的指導(dǎo)。依照在發(fā)行更進(jìn)一步地討論，修正可能改變公允價(jià)值如何在一些標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和需要如何被解釋而且應(yīng)用中被測(cè)量。
即使指導(dǎo)不是一致具有公允價(jià)值測(cè)量目的，在一些 IFRSs 中，IASB（或它的前任身體）有意識(shí)地包含了測(cè)量造成被對(duì)待好像它是公允價(jià)值的一個(gè)測(cè)量的指導(dǎo)。舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，段落 IFRS 3 企業(yè)聯(lián)合的 B16 提供對(duì)公允價(jià)值測(cè)量目的感到不一致的指導(dǎo)，因?yàn)轫?xiàng)目在一個(gè)企業(yè)聯(lián)合，像是稅資產(chǎn)中獲得,為定義利益計(jì)劃征負(fù)債稅而且用網(wǎng)捕雇員利益資產(chǎn)或負(fù)債。此外，一些 IFRSs 包含測(cè)量可靠性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。只有當(dāng)如果公允價(jià)值能靠地被測(cè)量，舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，信息家電 16 特性、工廠和設(shè)備允許要用的再估價(jià)模型。 這一個(gè)計(jì)劃將不改變?nèi)魏蔚哪侵笇?dǎo)。然而, 指導(dǎo)將會(huì)是計(jì)劃的考慮過(guò)計(jì)劃。然而， IASB 計(jì)劃使用公允價(jià)值測(cè)量計(jì)畫建立指導(dǎo)哪里現(xiàn)在有沒(méi)有人, 像是在信息家電 17 租賃, 連同除去不清楚地以關(guān)節(jié)連接一個(gè)測(cè)量目的不一致的指導(dǎo)。
因?yàn)?SFAS 157 建立一個(gè)指導(dǎo)的根源和能被適用于所有的公允價(jià)值測(cè)量的一個(gè)目的， IASB 已經(jīng)到達(dá) SFAS 157 是在 IFRSs 的不同指導(dǎo)方面的一個(gè)改良的初步的視野。然而，當(dāng)做在下面更詳細(xì)地討論， IASB 在 SFAS 157 的所有食品上還沒(méi)有到達(dá)預(yù)備的視野。差額在 SFAS 157 的公允價(jià)值的定義之間和在 IFRSs
SFAS 157 的第 5 段定義公允價(jià)值當(dāng)做 '會(huì)被收到銷售一個(gè)財(cái)產(chǎn)的價(jià)格或者支付在測(cè)量日期在市場(chǎng)叁加者之間的一個(gè)有秩序的交易事項(xiàng)中轉(zhuǎn)移一個(gè)責(zé)任。公允價(jià)值通常在 IFRSs 被定義當(dāng)做 '合計(jì)為哪一個(gè)財(cái)產(chǎn)可能被交換, 或一個(gè)責(zé)任付清, 在一個(gè)正常交易的聰明又樂(lè)意的政黨之間'.在 SFAS 157 的定義在三個(gè)重要的方法中IFRSs 上不同于定義:
�。╝）在 SFAS 157 的定義明確地是出口 （賣盤） 價(jià)格。在 IFRSs 的 Thedefinition 是既不明確地出口價(jià)格也不記錄 （買盤） 價(jià)格。
（b）在 SFAS 157 的定義明確地提到銷售參加者。在 IFRSs 的定義在一個(gè)正常交易中提及聰明又樂(lè)意的政黨。
�。╟）對(duì)于負(fù)債,責(zé)任被轉(zhuǎn)移的在概念上的 SFAS 157 決算期的公允價(jià)值的定義 （對(duì) counterparty 責(zé)任繼續(xù)；它不與 counterparty 一起付清）。在 IFRSs 的定義提及合計(jì)在哪一個(gè)責(zé)任可能在一個(gè)正常交易中被付清。這些差額更詳細(xì)地被討論。
對(duì)于 SFAS 157 的結(jié)論的基價(jià)包括下列的討論:
C26 交易事項(xiàng)銷售財(cái)產(chǎn)或者轉(zhuǎn)移責(zé)任在測(cè)量日期是一個(gè)假設(shè)的交易事項(xiàng), 從持平財(cái)產(chǎn)，或者虧欠責(zé)任的市場(chǎng)參加者的觀點(diǎn)考慮。因此，公允價(jià)值測(cè)量的目的將決定會(huì)為財(cái)產(chǎn)被收到的價(jià)格或者支付也就是說(shuō)在測(cè)量日期轉(zhuǎn)移責(zé)任出口價(jià)格。 委員會(huì) [FASB] 總結(jié)因?yàn)樗唧w表達(dá)與從市場(chǎng)叁加者的觀點(diǎn)與責(zé)任有關(guān)的財(cái)產(chǎn)和將來(lái)的流出有關(guān)的關(guān)于將來(lái)的流入現(xiàn)在的期待，一個(gè)出口價(jià)格目的是適當(dāng)?shù)�。在流入和流出上的�?qiáng)調(diào)是一致的具有 FASB 概念聲明 6 號(hào)的資產(chǎn)與負(fù)債的定義, 金融邀請(qǐng)的元素發(fā)表評(píng)論聲明。概念聲明 6 的第 25 段根據(jù)將來(lái)的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益 （未來(lái)流入） 定義資產(chǎn)。 概念聲明 6 的第 35 段根據(jù)經(jīng)濟(jì)效益（未來(lái)流出） 的將來(lái)犧牲定義負(fù)債。
IASB 預(yù)備和財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表的提示的架構(gòu)的第 49 段同樣地根據(jù)經(jīng)濟(jì)效益的流入和流出定義資產(chǎn)與負(fù)債。因?yàn)樗从辰?jīng)濟(jì)效益的流轉(zhuǎn)的現(xiàn)在位于市場(chǎng)期待進(jìn)入，所以大多數(shù)的 IASB 成員相信一個(gè)公允價(jià)值測(cè)量用一個(gè)出口價(jià)格目的是一致的具有這些定義而且是適當(dāng)?shù)幕驈膫�(gè)體。
其他的 IASB 成員同意這視野，但是在他們的視野中一個(gè)入帳價(jià)格也反映經(jīng)濟(jì)效益的流轉(zhuǎn)的現(xiàn)在位于市場(chǎng)期待進(jìn)入或從個(gè)體。因此, 他們建議用測(cè)量歸屬更描述的條件更換期‘公允價(jià)值'，像是日常記錄定價(jià)格或現(xiàn)在的出口價(jià)格。
一個(gè)入帳價(jià)格測(cè)量目的會(huì)在它會(huì)被定義為會(huì)被支付獲得一個(gè)財(cái)產(chǎn)或者收到在測(cè)量日期在市場(chǎng)叁加者之間的一個(gè)有秩序的交易事項(xiàng)中承擔(dān)一個(gè)責(zé)任的價(jià)格中在 SFAS 157 上不同于出口價(jià)格目的。IASB 的一些成員是有視野的一個(gè)入帳價(jià)格和出口價(jià)格會(huì)在相同的市場(chǎng)中是相同的合計(jì), 傲慢的那交易事項(xiàng)費(fèi)用被排除。然而，一個(gè)個(gè)體可能在一個(gè)市場(chǎng)中購(gòu)買一個(gè)財(cái)產(chǎn)或者承擔(dān)一個(gè)責(zé)任而且銷售那個(gè)相同的財(cái)產(chǎn)或者在另外的一個(gè)市場(chǎng)中轉(zhuǎn)移那個(gè)相同的責(zé)任 （沒(méi)有修改的或再包裝）。在如此的環(huán)境中，在 SFAS 157 的出口價(jià)格會(huì)可能不同于入帳價(jià)格。
一些公允價(jià)值測(cè)量必需的由 IFRSs 可能不對(duì)一個(gè)出口價(jià)格測(cè)量目的感到一致。 尤其，IASB 觀察當(dāng)公允價(jià)值在原始承認(rèn)上被需要的時(shí)候，這可能是情形，像是在:
（a）IFRS 3
�。╞）信息家電 17 為在一個(gè)融資租賃下面的一個(gè)承租人的資產(chǎn)與負(fù)債的原始承認(rèn), 和
（c）信息家電 39 金融證券: 為一些財(cái)務(wù)資產(chǎn)和金融負(fù)債的原始承認(rèn)的承認(rèn)和測(cè)量。
在發(fā)展一個(gè)討論稿方面，IASB 可能提出一種公允價(jià)值的修正后定義。如果如此，它將會(huì)完成一個(gè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)-在-之前公允價(jià)值測(cè)量的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)評(píng)論必需的在 IFRSs 估定每個(gè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的有意測(cè)量目的是否是一致的具有被提議的定義。如果 IASB 總結(jié)一個(gè)特別的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的有意的測(cè)量目的是不一致的具有公允價(jià)值的被提議定義，或標(biāo)準(zhǔn)將會(huì)被排除在討論稿的范圍之外或者有意的測(cè)量目的將會(huì)使用公允價(jià)值之外的一個(gè)期被重新敘述.（像是“日常記錄價(jià)值”） 為了要協(xié)助它的評(píng)論，IASB 想要了解在 IFRSs 的公允價(jià)值測(cè)量指導(dǎo)如何現(xiàn)在在實(shí)務(wù)中被應(yīng)用。它因此請(qǐng)求被告在 IFRSs 識(shí)別那些公允價(jià)值測(cè)量為哪一個(gè)實(shí)務(wù)在 SFAS 157 上不同于公允價(jià)值測(cè)量目的。
問(wèn)題2B：市場(chǎng)參加者視野
SFAS 157 強(qiáng)調(diào)一個(gè)公允價(jià)值測(cè)量是市場(chǎng)基礎(chǔ)測(cè)量而不是一個(gè)個(gè)體-特有的測(cè)量。 因此,公允價(jià)值測(cè)量應(yīng)該基于市場(chǎng)參與者會(huì)在訂定財(cái)產(chǎn)或責(zé)任的價(jià)格方面使用的假設(shè)被建立。此外，那里的任何時(shí)候是有限公司或者沒(méi)有觀察得出的市場(chǎng)活動(dòng)，客觀的公允價(jià)值測(cè)量保持相同: 決定價(jià)格。那會(huì)被收到銷售一個(gè)財(cái)產(chǎn)或者被支付在測(cè)量日轉(zhuǎn)移責(zé)任在市場(chǎng)參加者之間的有秩序的交易事項(xiàng),不管個(gè)體的意圖或者能力在那日期銷售財(cái)產(chǎn)或轉(zhuǎn)移責(zé)任。
SFAS 157 的第 10 段為財(cái)產(chǎn)在主要的 （或者大部分有利的） 市場(chǎng)中定義市場(chǎng)參加者作為買主誰(shuí)是:
�。╝）不依賴報(bào)告?zhèn)�體；
�。╞）聰明的, 有關(guān)于財(cái)產(chǎn)的合理理解或責(zé)任和交易事項(xiàng)基于所有的可得數(shù)據(jù), 包括可能被獲得過(guò)平常和習(xí)慣的適當(dāng)?shù)那趭^努力的數(shù)據(jù)。
�。╟）能夠?yàn)樨?cái)產(chǎn)或責(zé)任辦理。
�。╠）樂(lè)意的為財(cái)產(chǎn)或責(zé)任辦理; 那是, 他們被給與動(dòng)機(jī)但是不強(qiáng)迫或者強(qiáng)迫這么做。
在比較中，在 IFRSs 的公允價(jià)值的定義提到樂(lè)意的政黨在一個(gè)正常交易中。信息家電 40 投資特性的第 42 段 44 提供這一個(gè)概念的描述：
種公允價(jià)值的定義提及 '聰明又樂(lè)意的政黨'。在這上下文，‘聰明的'意謂樂(lè)意的買主和樂(lè)意的賣主是被適度告知的自然，而且投資特性，它的真實(shí)又潛在使用和市場(chǎng)的特性在結(jié)帳日為條件。一個(gè)樂(lè)意的買主被給與動(dòng)機(jī)，但是不強(qiáng)迫，購(gòu)買。這一個(gè)買主是既非在-之上熱心的也不決定以任何的價(jià)格購(gòu)買。假裝的買主不超過(guò)組成聰明又樂(lè)意的買主的一個(gè)市場(chǎng)支付較高的價(jià)格，而且賣主會(huì)需要。
一個(gè)樂(lè)意的賣主是既非一在-之上熱心的也不一個(gè)被迫的賣主,準(zhǔn)備以任何的價(jià)格銷售, 也不一準(zhǔn)備為不在現(xiàn)在的市場(chǎng)情況被視為合理的價(jià)格維持。樂(lè)意的賣主被給與動(dòng)機(jī)以最佳價(jià)格在市場(chǎng)用語(yǔ)銷售投資特性可獲得的。因?yàn)闃?lè)意的賣主是一個(gè)假設(shè)的所有者，所以真實(shí)投資業(yè)主的事實(shí)環(huán)境不是一個(gè)這考量的部份。
公允價(jià)值的定義提及一個(gè)正常交易。交易事項(xiàng)在沒(méi)有一個(gè)特別的政黨或者特別的市場(chǎng)使價(jià)格交易事項(xiàng)不特性情況的關(guān)系之間是一。交易事項(xiàng)被假定在無(wú)關(guān)的政黨之間, 每個(gè)獨(dú)立地行動(dòng)。
IASB 的初步視野是市場(chǎng)參加者視野對(duì)一個(gè)現(xiàn)在被包含在 IFRSs 的正常交易的聰明又樂(lè)意政黨的概念感到通常一致。然而，在 IASB 的視野中，被提議的定義更清楚在 IFRSs 以關(guān)節(jié)連接位于市場(chǎng)的公允價(jià)值測(cè)量目的。
【會(huì)計(jì)畢業(yè)論文附錄】相關(guān)文章：
論文附錄，致謝后04-15
論文致謝附錄后面（精選20篇）04-29
會(huì)計(jì)畢業(yè)論文02-08
稅務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)畢業(yè)論文范文05-02
會(huì)計(jì)專業(yè)畢業(yè)論文例文07-20