Purpose -Accounting practices vary not only across firms, but also across countries, reflecting the respective legal and cultural background. Attempts at harmonization therefore continue to be rebuffed. The purpose of this paper is to argue that different wordings in national laws, and different interpretations of similar wordings in national laws, can be explained by taking recourse to the philosophy of language, referring particularly to Searle and Wittgenstein. Design/methodology/approach -The example of the substance over form principle, investigated in seven countries, is particularly suitable for this analysis. It is known in all accounting jurisdictions, but still has very different roots in different European countries, with European and international influences conflicting, which is reflected in the different wording of the principle from one country to the next, and the different socially constructed realities associated with those wordings. Findings -This paper shows that, beyond accounting practices, the legal and cultural background of a country affects the wording of national law itself. The broad conclusion is that different socially constructed realities might tend to resist any attempt at harmonized socially constructed words. Originality/value -The paper contributes to the debate surrounding the possible homogenization of accounting regulations, illustrating the theory of the social construction of both "reality" and "language" on the specific application of one common principle to various Member State environments.

No abstract

Les IFRS ont été adoptées à travers le monde selon des politiques variées d’application optionnelle, obligatoire, restreinte ou générale : nous proposons une typologie des politiques d’adoption des normes internationales. Nous modélisons le choix de ces politiques en fonction des caractéristiques économiques et institutionnelles des pays à l’aide d’un logit multinomial non ordonné. Les résultats suggèrent des choix durables, déterminés notamment par des caractéristiques stables des pays. Cette situation réglementaire diversifiée peut expliquer l’hétérogénéité des pratiques des IFRS.

Dans un contexte d'harmonisation européenne des règles comptables relancé par l'adoption de la Directive 2013/34, le traitement comptable réservé en France au crédit-bail peine à se justifier. L'article fait le point sur le traitement comptable, financier, fiscal et légal de ces contrats pour mettre en évidence l'anomalie que représente l'article 212-5 du PCG, dernier texte à comprendre le crédit-bail comme un contrat de location. Cette étude vise à contribuer à l'amélioration et à la mise en cohérence du cadre réglementaire français sur ce sujet. Abstract:In the context of European harmonization of accounting rules which was restarted with the adoption of Directive 2013/34, the French accounting treatment of finance leases is hardly justified. This paper reviews accounting, financial, fiscal and legal rules over leases to underline the anomaly represented by article 212-5 in French Chart of Account (PCG), which is the latest text to understand leases as a rental contract. This study aims at contributing to improving French normative environment coherence on this specific issue.