No abstract

This study examines the motives for asset revaluations in a sample drawn from 35 countries that permit asset revaluations. Prior studies that examined this issue concentrated on one or two countries, the UK and Australia, and showed that revaluations are related to financing needs, the capital intensity of the firm as well as issues related to political costs. The previous literature also found that revaluations were indicators of improved future performance and that performance was related to the magnitude of the revaluations. This study shows that although the conclusions drawn from the previous studies are applicable to countries that are similar to the UK and Australia, they do not hold when applied to a much larger set of countries and that the motivations for and effects of revaluation are not uniform across various country classifications. Copyright 2007 The Authors Journal compilation (c) 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

In this paper, we focus on the relationships between international accounting harmonization (IAH) and the paradigm of Fair Value Accounting (FVA). Accountants rely on the accounting concept of comparability in defining IAH and are in agreement that a set of internationally implemented Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) is required for a "complete harmonization." We argue, however, that a second requirement4 common denominator for measuring, recording, and reporting business transactions, assets, liabilities, and equitieH's necessary to reach a state of a "complete IAH." We explain the logic behind the requirement of a common denominator and assert that I A H is feasible under the paradigm of FVA, but not under that of Historical Cost Accounting (HCA). This is true because the concept of fair value, but not historical cost, provides the common denominator necessary for a meaningful comparison of accounting data. We then argue that the paradigm of FVA acts as a catalyst in a harmonization cycle: FVA propels I A H and IAH provides more relevant information that may foster the eficiency of global markets, which improves the quality of the FVA figures. The authors acknowledge the helpful and constructive comments of an annonimous referee. Professor Barlev acknowledges financial support from the Krueger Center for Finance and the Accounting Center at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.

The aim of this article is to shed light on a Biblical statement of accountability, which was presented by Moses to the Israelites following the exodus from Egypt. This statement of accountability is at the level of leader towards his people, and as such differs from other forms of accountability in ancient civilizations – in particular Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt – which existed only at the levels of the individual towards the individual, the individual towards the state, and the state towards the individual. Since Moses had a unique status as a leader, this study looks towards this status to try to explain the reasons that compelled him to provide the statement. I suggest that Moses, who led his people from slavery to freedom, also fulfilled the role of educator towards freedom. I posit that he provided the account as part of his capacity as educator as well as from his desire to be above suspicion, and out of his personal humility. The article concludes with some reflections of this account from later Jewish literature, in which they are presented as moral lessons for public servants.

No abstract