In this article, we revisit the history of accounting for goodwill in the United Kingdom, the United States, France, and Japan following the conclusions and predictions of Ding, Richard and Stolowy (2008). We aim at verifying whether the four phases of development of the accounting for goodwill between 1880 and 2005 are actually determined by the global change from a stakeholder model of corporate governance to a shareholder model. An extended time frame of analysis (until 2016) is considered in this study, which includes Japan among the country-specific accounting systems investigated. Our findings do not support Ding et al.’s predictions for Japan and demonstrate a disagreement between those countries which consider goodwill as a depleting asset and those which consider goodwill as a permanent asset. This observation might explain better the current debate concerning international harmonization on goodwill.
SYNOPSIS
This paper illustrates that, despite their general agreement on the decision-usefulness objective of general purpose financial reporting, the Accounting Standard Board of Japan (ASBJ) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)'s conceptual frameworks are based on two different concepts of financial performance. By identifying and contrasting the two financial performance concepts and their impact on the rest of the frameworks and by explaining the thinking that underpins the ASBJ's chosen financial performance concept, it contributes to a debate about the role of financial performance concepts in fulfilling the decision-usefulness objective. Such a debate is pertinent to the revision of the IASB's Conceptual Framework, which is scheduled for completion in 2015.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.