趋同背景下的中国企业会计制度变迁研究
|
摘要
由于不同国家和地区间企业会计制度的趋同最终体现为财务报告的趋同,本文中所提“企业会计制度”包含受国际趋同影响最大并与编制披露企业财务报告有直接关系的会计准则和会计核算制度,总体上与美国通用会计原则(GAAP)和国际财务报告准则(IFRS)相对应。会计理论界通常对会计制度的属性有三种不同的观点,即技术规范属性、经济后果属性和政治程序属性,后两种可以看作是会计制度的社会属性。三种属性相互依存并有机融合。根据新制度经济学理论,制度环境改变、知识进步和潜在利益是导致会计制度变迁的主要原因,并可以将其看作是一个多次不断博弈的过程。一旦出现新的变迁需求而现有会计制度未能涵盖,如果具有足够的潜在收益就可能产生新的博弈,进而努力达到博弈均衡状态。会计制度经过多次博弈不断得以完善。在会计制度国际趋同的大背景下,国家、国际组织和地区组织已成为会计制度变迁的主要博弈方。2007年以来,国际会计准则理事会(IASB)针对全球金融危机中出现的问题,抓紧对IFRS等进行了修订完善,会计制度国际趋同的目标已经发展到了新的阶段,而我国企业会计准则近年发展步伐则相对较为缓慢。有必要结合对我国和国际会计制度的演变过程、实际效果和经验启示,把握国际会计制度变迁的实质,进而对我国未来会计制度变迁提出有针对性的政策建议,以期使财务会计更好地服务我国经济社会发展和对外开放的需要。
本文采用规范研究和案例对比研究相结合的方法,以理论规范研究为基础,案例对比研究为支撑,建立了趋同背景下中国会计制度变迁的研究框架。首先对国际会计制度演变情况尤其是趋同情况进行了规范分析。在20世纪以来的会计发展史上,世界各国会计总体呈现出美国模式、欧洲大陆模式和共产主义模式共同存在的格局。20世纪90年代以后,随着社会主义和资本主义两大阵营对抗的减弱以及前苏联的解体,服务于计划经济的共产主义模式已经日渐势微。同时,随着经济全球化和贸易国际化的迅速发展,各种会计模式相互借鉴融合,表现出欧洲大陆会计模式向美国会计模式靠拢、会计核算制度逐渐向会计准则转化的趋势。世界各国逐渐认同会计准则是较为适合市场经济发展的会计制度形式,加快转向和采用会计准则。但由于相互之间存在较大差异,从而使包含各国会计准则在内的会计制度国际协调显得非常必要。曾有许多国际性组织为会计制度的国际协调作出努力,国际会计准则委员会(IASC)是其中取得最显著成绩的一个。2000年,证券委员会国际组织(IOSCO)通过了IASC的全部核心准则项目,批准跨国证券发行和上市的公司使用国际会计准则(IAS)。2001年,IASC改组为IASB,后者提出了会计准则国际趋同的目标,并推动其制定的IFRS成为各国会计准则趋同的对象。笔者认为,会计制度国际趋同仍属会计协调阶段,是一个求同存异并双向互动的前进过程。2007年爆发于美国的次贷危机已转变为一场影响全球的金融危机,各国及相关国际组织纷纷采取积极措施,针对财务报告体系在金融危机环境下暴露出的缺陷和不足,要求加快会计制度国际趋同的步伐,IASB与FASB关于公允价值计量的要求已基本一致。与此同时,部分国家或地区出于自身利益的考量,对趋同IFRS勺态度转为不明确。
不同国家和地区参与会计制度国际趋同具有不同的动机和利益考量。美国是世界上较早制定会计准则的国家,在20世纪长期处于确定会计管制规范领先的地位。它原本不认可IASC的IAS,然而安然、世界通信等财务丑闻事件极大地动摇了人们对美国GAAP的信心。美国意识到以往的做法损害了自身的利益,因此借IASC改组之机迈上了会计制度国际趋同之路,并通过人事安排的亲美化、机构设置的仿美化等方式掌握了国际会计制度的主导权。欧盟自20世纪70年代起就一直致力于会计协调工作,协调的主要形式是制定各种欧盟会计指令(EU Directives),鉴于自身内部会计协调的复杂性,它较早就对与IASC开展合作抱有积极态度,并要求从2005年起所有在欧盟上市的公司按IFRS编制合并财务报表。欧盟坚持通过技术和立法双层认可机制,牢牢掌握了应用IFRS的最终决定权。欧盟提出“等效”(Equivalence)的理念,对已与IFRS趋同的其他国家会计准则开展等效认定,积极探索存在合理差异情况下国际趋同的新路径。澳大利亚会计准则国际趋同由政府主导,它积极参与了IASB各项工作,取得了较多的发言权,于2004年6月发布了与IFRS基本一致的澳大利亚会计准则(EIASB准则),要求本国营利性主体从2005年起全面采用。澳大利亚也考虑了本国法律环境和国情特点,保留了部分特有的原澳大利亚会计准则,并自行解释IFRS的有关内容,以保证本国执行工作需要。
国际会计制度具有公共物品的特征,经济全球化要求有相应的国际会计制度来协调国际利益关系。但由于目前并不存在法定的权威性国际治理机构,因此国际会计制度不得不由某些强势主权国家或由强势主权国家所主导的多边机构来提供。这一方面导致国际会计制度供给不足,另一方面造成国际治理中权利与义务脱节。国际会计制度外部性的存在,意味着利益相关者可能因会计制度供求而产生冲突,会计信息供求过程中就会存在着强权逻辑(strong power logic),导致国际会计制度具有明显的非公平性。以IFRS为代表的国际会计制度提供了一种可能的博弈机制,是不同国家和地区进行不断博弈的结果。这些制度主要是在西方发达国家的主导下形成的,在内容和运作上暗含着对他们利益的倾斜。IASB为扩大自身影响,也需要得到西方主要发达国家的合作,在很多情况下不得不委曲求全。发展中国家受国家实力和制定主导权安排的限制,总体处于相对不利地位,被迫进行国际化且需要付出较高的变迁成本。同时,要看到现行国际会计制度包含着谈判制约机制,IASB为了争取IFRS在更大范围内被采纳,也将会对发展中国家会计情况和问题给予更多的关注。
我国最近三十年会计制度变迁的发生,在时间上正好配合了我国对外开放、经济体制改革和证券资本市场的建立。我国坚持以政府作为会计制度的供给主体,国家在会计制度变迁的路径选择、制度变迁推进的次序确定与时机权衡中起着决定性作用。一般认为,新中国成立以来,真正具有分水岭意义的应是1992年以“两则、两制”为特征的会计改革。此次改革的相关准备工作,实际上从改革开放初期就已经开始,改革之前的会计制度主要是与我国当时的计划经济体制相适应。中国会计制度变迁是在旧的会计制度因阻力较大还改不动的时候,先在其旁边或周围发展起新的会计制度,随着新的会计制度逐步发展壮大,导致会计制度体系的不断变化和环境的不断改善,达到逐步对旧的制度进行改革。它是在整个存量改不动的时侯,先通过增量改革来发展新体制,随着增量改革的积累,逐步改革整个会计的体制结构,为存量的最终制度变迁创造条件。我国会计制度变迁中路径依赖性非常强,出现了一系列过渡性制度安排,往往具有新旧两种制度安排的某些相互矛盾的特性。中国会计制度变迁的前进方向,总体反映了中国会计立足国情不断国际趋同的趋势。目前,我国的企业会计准则在会计确认原则、计量方法、信息披露和提高财务信息质量等方面,已经实现了与IFRS的趋同,得到了国际社会的广泛认可,但也存在着忽视制度经济后果、变迁源发性不强、前进步伐相对缓慢等问题。
中国会计制度变迁的国际化趋势已经不可逆转。会计制度已成为世界经济政治之间寻求平衡的调节器,构建中国会计制度变迁战略的基础是寻求国家利益的最大化。中国是一个开放的经济体,正在以前所未有的深度和广度融入国际社会,这就决定了中国会计制度与国际会计制度不是对立的关系,其发展不是撇开国际会计制度另起炉灶,而是在参与、合作的过程中推动双方的共同改革和发展。应保持国际趋同中的发展理性,立足现实努力化被动为主动,分类采取不同制度变迁策略,强化理论准备实现基础创新的基本原则,积极借鉴国际先进经验,构建和完善我国财务会计概念框架体系,明确准则制订基础导向模式,尝试在会计制度创新中引入市场机制,摆脱单纯的权力中心供给主导模式。努力推动会计准则制定机构及程序更加民主化、科学化和完善化,建立一整套与国际惯例协调、具有不同规范层次的会计制度体系,全面提升我国会计信息质量,满足新形势下国内外财务信息使用者的需求。同时,我国要加强对自身会计理论和问题的研究,更加积极主动地参与国际协调,通过增进双向沟通与交流,重视地区间相互合作和影响,努力获得国际社会对发展中国家和转型国家特殊国情及会计理论和问题的关注,努力争取在IASB中拥有与我国经济地位相适应的话语权。
According to the North's opinion, the institution is the rules of the society. The "accounting institution" in this research, which includes all laws and regulations pertaining to all the accounting and financial reporting, is the formulation of national governments or relevant departments for management accounting affairs relevant laws, regulations, rules, standards, procedures and other normative documents. Accounting theory circle usually understand the property of accounting institution there are three different points of view, namely properties of technical specification, economic consequences and the political process. Three properties is interdependent, and the last two can be regarded as social property of accounting institution. The accounting institution has the property of technical specification, it's should be logically consistent with the conceptual framework and the specific institution, reflect the objective reality of the economic business. At the same time, with property of economic consequences of accounting institution, different institution produce different accounting information, affect the interests of the various stakeholders, leading to the accounting institution become the product of the coordination of stakeholders. Further extension of the economic consequences will give the accounting institution to develop the political color of process."Economic consequence view" and "political process view", is from the impact of the implementation of the accounting institution and the making easier to consider the issue, the effect of accounting institution has determined by the institution development process. Therefore, the political behavior and consequences of accounting institution in the making process, is directly reflected the extension of the economy the consequences. Three properties are not in opposition to each other, but organic combination, constitute the essential attribute of accounting institution. Moreover, with the economic and social development and progress, the social property of accounting institution performs more and more directly and increasingly strengthened. It is necessary for the whole society and the national macroeconomic management, to further understand the important role of the accounting institution. From the perspective of new institutional economics, the change of accounting institution as a continuous process of game. Game equilibrium of accounting institution can't be kept long, once the new interests and needs and the existing accounting institution does not cover. It will lead to a new round of the game, and strive to achieve the new game equilibrium state. The accounting institution is improved continuously after many times of game. In the background of international accounting convergence, countries, international organizations and regional organizations have become major players in the evolution of accounting institutions.
In the field of accounting, different countries have different accounting practices, which can be classified to American model, European model and communist model. Since1990, with two camps of socialism and capitalism disappeared and the disintegration of the former Soviet Union, the communist model vanished. At the same time, along with the rapid development of economy internationalization and globalization, the various accounting model showing a trend of integration. All the countries in the world gradually accepted that accounting standards is more adapt to the development of market economy. Many countries originally used other forms, started to use accounting standards. Because of great differences among various accounting standards, international coordination of accounting institution became necessary. Many of the world's international organization for international coordination of accounting institution made great efforts, and the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) is one of the most remarkable. In2000, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) adopted all the IASC's core principles of project, approved the transnational securities issuance and listing of companies to use international accounting standards. In2001, IASC was reorganized as the International Accounting Standards Council (IASB), which proposed the goal of international convergence of accounting standards, the International Financial Reporting Standards have become the convergence of accounting standards in different countries.
Some countries and regions have made significance improvements in the international convergence. The United States is the first country in the world to develop accounting standards in the20th century and has been "leader" status in establish accounting control norms in a long period. The United States did not recognize the International Accounting Standards of IASC, but the financial scandals of Enron and global communication shake the confidence of the people in the United States accounting standards. It was aware that past practice has caused damages to its economics. In the reorganization of IASC, it occupied the stage for the development of international accounting rules, thus embarked on the road of international convergence of accounting standards. Through the arrangement of personnel and institutions, The United States mastered accounting hegemony of the global market. The EU since the1970s has been committed to the coordination of accounting standards. The main form of coordination is to make various EU directives. In view of the complexity of its own internal accounting coordination, the EU has a positive attitude for cooperation with IASB, and required all listed companies in the EU to apply the International Accounting Standards for the preparation of the consolidated financial statements since2005. But the EU insisted firmly to grasp the final adoption of the International Accounting Standards through technical and legislative recognition mechanism. Australia has actively gotten involved in all the works of the IASB, and gotten more "voice" in the international accounting standard setting process. Its government, laws, FRC and AASB actively promoted the convergence of national accounting standards with the International Accounting Standards, required their own for-profit adopt International Accounting Standards completely from2005onwards. Australia also considered the needs of its legal environment and national characteristics retained the part of the original AASB standard, and to explain the international accounting standards on its own.
For the international accounting institution has certain characteristics of public goods, economic globalization requires international accounting institution to coordinate the international interest. Statutory authoritative international governance institutions does not exist currently, and the international accounting institution has to be provided by some strong sovereign states or multilateral institutions dominated by a strong sovereign state. It means insufficient supply of international accounting institution, and causes detached from the rights and obligations of international governance. The existence of externalities of international accounting institution means that the interests of stakeholders may conflict with each other due to the unbalance of supply and demand in the accounting institution. Strong power logic may arise, leading to obvious unfairness in the international accounting institution. Existing international accounting institution, represented by the International Accounting Standards, basically formed under the auspices of the Western countries, implied in the content and operation of the favor of themselves. Advantages of developing countries do not considered inside. Developed countries in the development of international accounting institution, always make every effort to safeguard their own interests, leaving the developing countries at a relative disadvantage and forced to internationalization. At the same time, it should be noted that the current international accounting institution contains the mechanism of bargaining and more attention can be given to developing countries accounting.
Changes in Chinese accounting institution after the reform and opening up, are in time to coincide with Chinese economic institution from the planned economy to a market economy and securities market. The main supply of accounting institution in China adheres to the government, which is the most important role in the decision of the path of accounting institution changes. It is generally believed that, since the founding of new China, the real watershed reform happened in1992. The preparation of the reform, in fact is from beginning of the reform and opening up. Because of great resistance, changes in Chinese accounting institution happened in the near or around t of the old institution. Along with the gradually development of the new accounting institution, the whole environment of accounting institution continuously improved. It was through the incremental reform to the development of the new institution, and with the accumulation of incremental reform the institution structure gradually changed. In Chinese accounting institution changes, path dependence was very strong. There were a series of transitional institutional arrangements, often with some conflicting characteristics of the old and the new institutional arrangements. The path of Chinese accounting institution changes reflected the trend of international convergence of Chinese accounting standards. At present, Chinese accounting standards has been achieved with the integration and convergence of international accounting standards, made the remarkable achievements and gotten extensive recognition by the whole world, especially in the accounting principles, methods of measurement, information disclosure, and pricey financial information quality.
The trend of internationalization of Chinese accounting institution change is irreversible. China is an open economy, being in unprecedented deep integration with the international community, which determines the relationship between China and the international societies is not confrontation. The development of China is to promote reform and development in both sides by participation and cooperation. We should adhere to the national interest in accounting institution changes, keep the development of rational spirit of international convergence of efforts, recognize the reality of the passive to active, take different strategies of institutional changes, and achieve innovation of basic theory. We should actively learn from advanced international experience, construct the system of accounting conceptual framework, clear guidelines for the formulation of the basis-oriented model, try to introduce the market mechanism in the supply of accounting insitution, and strive to promote the accounting standard setters and process more democratic, scientific and institutionalized. Finally, a set of accounting institution conforming with international convention and different specification levels is established, comprehensively enhance the quality of accounting information of our country, to meet the needs of domestic and foreign investors under the new situation. At the same time, on the basis of systemic studies of Chinese accounting theory and problems, more active participation should be taken in the international coordination through two-way communication, dialogue and cooperation, to gain attention to Chinese special political, economic, cultural, legal, accounting theory and problems, and to get the influence adapting to Chinese economic status in IASB.
本文采用规范研究和案例对比研究相结合的方法,以理论规范研究为基础,案例对比研究为支撑,建立了趋同背景下中国会计制度变迁的研究框架。首先对国际会计制度演变情况尤其是趋同情况进行了规范分析。在20世纪以来的会计发展史上,世界各国会计总体呈现出美国模式、欧洲大陆模式和共产主义模式共同存在的格局。20世纪90年代以后,随着社会主义和资本主义两大阵营对抗的减弱以及前苏联的解体,服务于计划经济的共产主义模式已经日渐势微。同时,随着经济全球化和贸易国际化的迅速发展,各种会计模式相互借鉴融合,表现出欧洲大陆会计模式向美国会计模式靠拢、会计核算制度逐渐向会计准则转化的趋势。世界各国逐渐认同会计准则是较为适合市场经济发展的会计制度形式,加快转向和采用会计准则。但由于相互之间存在较大差异,从而使包含各国会计准则在内的会计制度国际协调显得非常必要。曾有许多国际性组织为会计制度的国际协调作出努力,国际会计准则委员会(IASC)是其中取得最显著成绩的一个。2000年,证券委员会国际组织(IOSCO)通过了IASC的全部核心准则项目,批准跨国证券发行和上市的公司使用国际会计准则(IAS)。2001年,IASC改组为IASB,后者提出了会计准则国际趋同的目标,并推动其制定的IFRS成为各国会计准则趋同的对象。笔者认为,会计制度国际趋同仍属会计协调阶段,是一个求同存异并双向互动的前进过程。2007年爆发于美国的次贷危机已转变为一场影响全球的金融危机,各国及相关国际组织纷纷采取积极措施,针对财务报告体系在金融危机环境下暴露出的缺陷和不足,要求加快会计制度国际趋同的步伐,IASB与FASB关于公允价值计量的要求已基本一致。与此同时,部分国家或地区出于自身利益的考量,对趋同IFRS勺态度转为不明确。
不同国家和地区参与会计制度国际趋同具有不同的动机和利益考量。美国是世界上较早制定会计准则的国家,在20世纪长期处于确定会计管制规范领先的地位。它原本不认可IASC的IAS,然而安然、世界通信等财务丑闻事件极大地动摇了人们对美国GAAP的信心。美国意识到以往的做法损害了自身的利益,因此借IASC改组之机迈上了会计制度国际趋同之路,并通过人事安排的亲美化、机构设置的仿美化等方式掌握了国际会计制度的主导权。欧盟自20世纪70年代起就一直致力于会计协调工作,协调的主要形式是制定各种欧盟会计指令(EU Directives),鉴于自身内部会计协调的复杂性,它较早就对与IASC开展合作抱有积极态度,并要求从2005年起所有在欧盟上市的公司按IFRS编制合并财务报表。欧盟坚持通过技术和立法双层认可机制,牢牢掌握了应用IFRS的最终决定权。欧盟提出“等效”(Equivalence)的理念,对已与IFRS趋同的其他国家会计准则开展等效认定,积极探索存在合理差异情况下国际趋同的新路径。澳大利亚会计准则国际趋同由政府主导,它积极参与了IASB各项工作,取得了较多的发言权,于2004年6月发布了与IFRS基本一致的澳大利亚会计准则(EIASB准则),要求本国营利性主体从2005年起全面采用。澳大利亚也考虑了本国法律环境和国情特点,保留了部分特有的原澳大利亚会计准则,并自行解释IFRS的有关内容,以保证本国执行工作需要。
国际会计制度具有公共物品的特征,经济全球化要求有相应的国际会计制度来协调国际利益关系。但由于目前并不存在法定的权威性国际治理机构,因此国际会计制度不得不由某些强势主权国家或由强势主权国家所主导的多边机构来提供。这一方面导致国际会计制度供给不足,另一方面造成国际治理中权利与义务脱节。国际会计制度外部性的存在,意味着利益相关者可能因会计制度供求而产生冲突,会计信息供求过程中就会存在着强权逻辑(strong power logic),导致国际会计制度具有明显的非公平性。以IFRS为代表的国际会计制度提供了一种可能的博弈机制,是不同国家和地区进行不断博弈的结果。这些制度主要是在西方发达国家的主导下形成的,在内容和运作上暗含着对他们利益的倾斜。IASB为扩大自身影响,也需要得到西方主要发达国家的合作,在很多情况下不得不委曲求全。发展中国家受国家实力和制定主导权安排的限制,总体处于相对不利地位,被迫进行国际化且需要付出较高的变迁成本。同时,要看到现行国际会计制度包含着谈判制约机制,IASB为了争取IFRS在更大范围内被采纳,也将会对发展中国家会计情况和问题给予更多的关注。
我国最近三十年会计制度变迁的发生,在时间上正好配合了我国对外开放、经济体制改革和证券资本市场的建立。我国坚持以政府作为会计制度的供给主体,国家在会计制度变迁的路径选择、制度变迁推进的次序确定与时机权衡中起着决定性作用。一般认为,新中国成立以来,真正具有分水岭意义的应是1992年以“两则、两制”为特征的会计改革。此次改革的相关准备工作,实际上从改革开放初期就已经开始,改革之前的会计制度主要是与我国当时的计划经济体制相适应。中国会计制度变迁是在旧的会计制度因阻力较大还改不动的时候,先在其旁边或周围发展起新的会计制度,随着新的会计制度逐步发展壮大,导致会计制度体系的不断变化和环境的不断改善,达到逐步对旧的制度进行改革。它是在整个存量改不动的时侯,先通过增量改革来发展新体制,随着增量改革的积累,逐步改革整个会计的体制结构,为存量的最终制度变迁创造条件。我国会计制度变迁中路径依赖性非常强,出现了一系列过渡性制度安排,往往具有新旧两种制度安排的某些相互矛盾的特性。中国会计制度变迁的前进方向,总体反映了中国会计立足国情不断国际趋同的趋势。目前,我国的企业会计准则在会计确认原则、计量方法、信息披露和提高财务信息质量等方面,已经实现了与IFRS的趋同,得到了国际社会的广泛认可,但也存在着忽视制度经济后果、变迁源发性不强、前进步伐相对缓慢等问题。
中国会计制度变迁的国际化趋势已经不可逆转。会计制度已成为世界经济政治之间寻求平衡的调节器,构建中国会计制度变迁战略的基础是寻求国家利益的最大化。中国是一个开放的经济体,正在以前所未有的深度和广度融入国际社会,这就决定了中国会计制度与国际会计制度不是对立的关系,其发展不是撇开国际会计制度另起炉灶,而是在参与、合作的过程中推动双方的共同改革和发展。应保持国际趋同中的发展理性,立足现实努力化被动为主动,分类采取不同制度变迁策略,强化理论准备实现基础创新的基本原则,积极借鉴国际先进经验,构建和完善我国财务会计概念框架体系,明确准则制订基础导向模式,尝试在会计制度创新中引入市场机制,摆脱单纯的权力中心供给主导模式。努力推动会计准则制定机构及程序更加民主化、科学化和完善化,建立一整套与国际惯例协调、具有不同规范层次的会计制度体系,全面提升我国会计信息质量,满足新形势下国内外财务信息使用者的需求。同时,我国要加强对自身会计理论和问题的研究,更加积极主动地参与国际协调,通过增进双向沟通与交流,重视地区间相互合作和影响,努力获得国际社会对发展中国家和转型国家特殊国情及会计理论和问题的关注,努力争取在IASB中拥有与我国经济地位相适应的话语权。
According to the North's opinion, the institution is the rules of the society. The "accounting institution" in this research, which includes all laws and regulations pertaining to all the accounting and financial reporting, is the formulation of national governments or relevant departments for management accounting affairs relevant laws, regulations, rules, standards, procedures and other normative documents. Accounting theory circle usually understand the property of accounting institution there are three different points of view, namely properties of technical specification, economic consequences and the political process. Three properties is interdependent, and the last two can be regarded as social property of accounting institution. The accounting institution has the property of technical specification, it's should be logically consistent with the conceptual framework and the specific institution, reflect the objective reality of the economic business. At the same time, with property of economic consequences of accounting institution, different institution produce different accounting information, affect the interests of the various stakeholders, leading to the accounting institution become the product of the coordination of stakeholders. Further extension of the economic consequences will give the accounting institution to develop the political color of process."Economic consequence view" and "political process view", is from the impact of the implementation of the accounting institution and the making easier to consider the issue, the effect of accounting institution has determined by the institution development process. Therefore, the political behavior and consequences of accounting institution in the making process, is directly reflected the extension of the economy the consequences. Three properties are not in opposition to each other, but organic combination, constitute the essential attribute of accounting institution. Moreover, with the economic and social development and progress, the social property of accounting institution performs more and more directly and increasingly strengthened. It is necessary for the whole society and the national macroeconomic management, to further understand the important role of the accounting institution. From the perspective of new institutional economics, the change of accounting institution as a continuous process of game. Game equilibrium of accounting institution can't be kept long, once the new interests and needs and the existing accounting institution does not cover. It will lead to a new round of the game, and strive to achieve the new game equilibrium state. The accounting institution is improved continuously after many times of game. In the background of international accounting convergence, countries, international organizations and regional organizations have become major players in the evolution of accounting institutions.
In the field of accounting, different countries have different accounting practices, which can be classified to American model, European model and communist model. Since1990, with two camps of socialism and capitalism disappeared and the disintegration of the former Soviet Union, the communist model vanished. At the same time, along with the rapid development of economy internationalization and globalization, the various accounting model showing a trend of integration. All the countries in the world gradually accepted that accounting standards is more adapt to the development of market economy. Many countries originally used other forms, started to use accounting standards. Because of great differences among various accounting standards, international coordination of accounting institution became necessary. Many of the world's international organization for international coordination of accounting institution made great efforts, and the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) is one of the most remarkable. In2000, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) adopted all the IASC's core principles of project, approved the transnational securities issuance and listing of companies to use international accounting standards. In2001, IASC was reorganized as the International Accounting Standards Council (IASB), which proposed the goal of international convergence of accounting standards, the International Financial Reporting Standards have become the convergence of accounting standards in different countries.
Some countries and regions have made significance improvements in the international convergence. The United States is the first country in the world to develop accounting standards in the20th century and has been "leader" status in establish accounting control norms in a long period. The United States did not recognize the International Accounting Standards of IASC, but the financial scandals of Enron and global communication shake the confidence of the people in the United States accounting standards. It was aware that past practice has caused damages to its economics. In the reorganization of IASC, it occupied the stage for the development of international accounting rules, thus embarked on the road of international convergence of accounting standards. Through the arrangement of personnel and institutions, The United States mastered accounting hegemony of the global market. The EU since the1970s has been committed to the coordination of accounting standards. The main form of coordination is to make various EU directives. In view of the complexity of its own internal accounting coordination, the EU has a positive attitude for cooperation with IASB, and required all listed companies in the EU to apply the International Accounting Standards for the preparation of the consolidated financial statements since2005. But the EU insisted firmly to grasp the final adoption of the International Accounting Standards through technical and legislative recognition mechanism. Australia has actively gotten involved in all the works of the IASB, and gotten more "voice" in the international accounting standard setting process. Its government, laws, FRC and AASB actively promoted the convergence of national accounting standards with the International Accounting Standards, required their own for-profit adopt International Accounting Standards completely from2005onwards. Australia also considered the needs of its legal environment and national characteristics retained the part of the original AASB standard, and to explain the international accounting standards on its own.
For the international accounting institution has certain characteristics of public goods, economic globalization requires international accounting institution to coordinate the international interest. Statutory authoritative international governance institutions does not exist currently, and the international accounting institution has to be provided by some strong sovereign states or multilateral institutions dominated by a strong sovereign state. It means insufficient supply of international accounting institution, and causes detached from the rights and obligations of international governance. The existence of externalities of international accounting institution means that the interests of stakeholders may conflict with each other due to the unbalance of supply and demand in the accounting institution. Strong power logic may arise, leading to obvious unfairness in the international accounting institution. Existing international accounting institution, represented by the International Accounting Standards, basically formed under the auspices of the Western countries, implied in the content and operation of the favor of themselves. Advantages of developing countries do not considered inside. Developed countries in the development of international accounting institution, always make every effort to safeguard their own interests, leaving the developing countries at a relative disadvantage and forced to internationalization. At the same time, it should be noted that the current international accounting institution contains the mechanism of bargaining and more attention can be given to developing countries accounting.
Changes in Chinese accounting institution after the reform and opening up, are in time to coincide with Chinese economic institution from the planned economy to a market economy and securities market. The main supply of accounting institution in China adheres to the government, which is the most important role in the decision of the path of accounting institution changes. It is generally believed that, since the founding of new China, the real watershed reform happened in1992. The preparation of the reform, in fact is from beginning of the reform and opening up. Because of great resistance, changes in Chinese accounting institution happened in the near or around t of the old institution. Along with the gradually development of the new accounting institution, the whole environment of accounting institution continuously improved. It was through the incremental reform to the development of the new institution, and with the accumulation of incremental reform the institution structure gradually changed. In Chinese accounting institution changes, path dependence was very strong. There were a series of transitional institutional arrangements, often with some conflicting characteristics of the old and the new institutional arrangements. The path of Chinese accounting institution changes reflected the trend of international convergence of Chinese accounting standards. At present, Chinese accounting standards has been achieved with the integration and convergence of international accounting standards, made the remarkable achievements and gotten extensive recognition by the whole world, especially in the accounting principles, methods of measurement, information disclosure, and pricey financial information quality.
The trend of internationalization of Chinese accounting institution change is irreversible. China is an open economy, being in unprecedented deep integration with the international community, which determines the relationship between China and the international societies is not confrontation. The development of China is to promote reform and development in both sides by participation and cooperation. We should adhere to the national interest in accounting institution changes, keep the development of rational spirit of international convergence of efforts, recognize the reality of the passive to active, take different strategies of institutional changes, and achieve innovation of basic theory. We should actively learn from advanced international experience, construct the system of accounting conceptual framework, clear guidelines for the formulation of the basis-oriented model, try to introduce the market mechanism in the supply of accounting insitution, and strive to promote the accounting standard setters and process more democratic, scientific and institutionalized. Finally, a set of accounting institution conforming with international convention and different specification levels is established, comprehensively enhance the quality of accounting information of our country, to meet the needs of domestic and foreign investors under the new situation. At the same time, on the basis of systemic studies of Chinese accounting theory and problems, more active participation should be taken in the international coordination through two-way communication, dialogue and cooperation, to gain attention to Chinese special political, economic, cultural, legal, accounting theory and problems, and to get the influence adapting to Chinese economic status in IASB.
引文
① 陈毓圭,《会计准则讲座》,中国财政经济出版社,2005年。
① 葛家澍、刘峰,从会计准则的性质看会计准则的制定[J],会计研究,1996(2)。
① R·科斯等著：《财产权利与制度安排》,上海三联书店1991年版。
① 常勋,《国际会计》,东北财经大学出版社,2005年。
① 苏长和,《全球公共问题与国际合作：一种制度的分析》,上海：上海人民出版社,2000年。
① 转引自张历历,《现代国际关系学》,重庆：重庆出版社,1989年。
[1]财政部会计司.企业会计准则[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2006.
[2]常勋.国际会计[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社,2001.
[3]常勋等著.会计大典——国际会计[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,1999.
[4]陈国辉.会计理论研究[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,2001.
[5]杜兴强.会计信息的产权问题研究[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,2002.
[6]冯淑萍.中国会计改革与会计协调[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2002.
[7]弗雷德里克·乔伊等著,周晓苏等译.国际会计学(第三版)[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,2000.
[8]葛家澍,林志军.现代西方会计理论(第三版)[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社,2011.
[9]葛家澍,刘峰编.会计大典(第一卷)——会计理论[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,1998.
[10]郭道扬.郭道扬文集[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2009.
[11]郭永清.会计国际化[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2003.
[12]国际会计准则委员会(IASB).国际会计准则2004[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2005.
[13]郝振平.会计的国际透视[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,1997.
[14]哈耶克,冯克利译.经济、科学与政治[M].南京：江苏人民出版社,2000.
[15]霍奇逊,任荣化等译.演化与制度[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007.
[16]雷光勇.会计契约论[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2004.
[17]李宁.会计准则制度变迁问题研究——基于演化博弈的视角[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2011.
[18]刘端.会计政策的博弈论研究[M].成都：西南财经大学出版社,2000.
[19]刘峰.会计准则变迁[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2000.
[20]曲晓辉,陈少华,杨金忠等.会计准则研究——借鉴与反思[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社,1999.
[21]曲晓辉,杨钰等著.中国会计国际化研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社，2010.
[22]盛洪.现代制度经济学(上下卷)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
[23]王保忠.中国会计制度变迁经济学研究[M].北京：中国物资出版社,2010.
[24]王建新.我国会计准则制定及其效果研究[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2005.
[25]汪祥耀,邓川等.国际会计准则与财务报告准则——研究与比较[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2005：94-96.
[26]汪祥耀等著.与国际财务报告准则趋同——路径选择与政策建议[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2006：11-24.
[27]汪祥耀,邵毅平著.美国会计准则研究——从经济大萧条到全球金融危机[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2010.
[28]魏海明等.我国会计协调测定与政策研究[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2006.
[29]威廉姆·R.斯科特,陈汉文等译.财务会计理论[M].北京：机械工业出版,2006.
[30]吴革.国际会计产权制度研究[M].北京：对外经济贸易大学出版社，2002.
[31]吴革,张新民.中国会计的国际化[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2007.
[32]修宗峰.制度环境、制度变迁与决策有用性[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,2012.
[33]许家林.会计理论发展通论(上中下)[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2011.
[34]于永生,卢桂荣.次贷危机背景下的公允价值会计问题研究[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2010.
[35]张育军,肖立见等.转轨时期中国证券市场改革与发展[M].成都：西南财经大学出版社，2004.
[36]蔡宁,魏明海等.投资者保护变迁与会计改革的共生互动性[J].会计研究,2008,03：19-26.
[37]陈冬华,陈信元.中国会计准则制定中的利益协调：来自世纪星源的证据[J].会计研究,2004,06：3-10.
[38]陈冬华,梁上坤等.不同市场化进程下高管激励契约的成本与选择：货币薪酬与在职消费[J].会计研究,2010,11：56-64.
[39]陈圣飞,张忠寿等.会计稳健性研究的理论回顾与展望——基于契约观和信息观的视角[J].会计研究,2011,04：35-42.
[40]陈信元,叶鹏飞.我国会计信息环境的初步分析[J].会计研究,2000,08：8-16.
[41]陈瑜,曲晓辉.国际会计准则委员会改组的政治层面分析[J].财务与会计,2003,05：17-18.
[42]陈玉媛.美国资贷危机涉及公认会计原则及其应对措施[J].财会通讯,2008,10：108-109.
[43]邓大才.论制度变迁的速率与选择[J].财经问题研究,2006,04：11-18.
[44]邓力平,曲晓辉.西方国际税收竞争理论与会计准则全球趋同关系之辨析[J].会计研究,2003,09：37-45.
[45]董必荣.证券委员会国际组织(IOSCO)对国际会计准则制定机构的支持及其影响[J].财务与会计,2003,08：23-26.
[46]董盈厚.准则变革背景下财务会计有效边界的反思与构建[J].河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,09：67-72.
[47]董盈厚,盖地等.会计信息相关性与可靠性的逻辑关系[J].郑州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,09：63-67.
[48]董盈厚,侯铁建.基于IASB概念框架的可靠性质量特征之认识理性—一个经济学视角的分析与讨论[J].会计研究,2011,01：4-10.
[49]樊纲,胡永泰.“循序渐进”还是“平等推进”?——论体制转轨最优路径的理论与政策[J].经济研究,2005,01：13-17.
[50]冯巧根.会计准则国际化中的权益失衡及其对策[J].会计研究,2003,02：63-69.
[51]冯淑萍.关于我国当前环境下的会计国际化问题[J].会计研究,2003,02：3-9.
[52]冯淑萍.中国对国际会计协调的基本态度与所面临的问题[J].会计研究，2004,01：3-8.
[53]冯淑萍.关于建立国家统一会计核算制度的若干问题[J].会计研究,2001,01：3-9.
[54]付磊.我国企业会计改革的回顾与思考[J].会计研究,2007,12：48-53.
[55]付磊.企业制度演变与会计发展[J].会计研究,2012,07：3-8.
[56]高筠燕,卢锐.会计准则制定：政府导向和程序民主[J].中山大学学报,2005,06：17-19.
[57]葛家澎.评价IASB/FASB联合概念框架的某些改进[J].会计研究,2009,04：3-9.
[58]葛家澍,陈朝琳.财务会计概念框架的新篇章——评美国FASB第8号概念公告(2010年9月)[J].会计研究,2011,03：3-8.
[59]龚光明、陈若华.产权保护、收益计量与会计制度改革[J].会计研究,2012,07：8-14.
[60]龚翔,许家林.会计法规变迁与产权保护机制演进[J].会计研究,2008,10：9-17.
[61]郭道扬.论论两大法系的会计法律制度[J].会计论坛,2002,05：3-6.
[62]郭道扬.论统一会计制度[J].会计研究,2005,01：11-24.
[63]贺建刚.法律、会计国际化与会计者保护——基于自我实施理论的解释[J].山西财经大学学报,2007,03：33-35.
[64]黄世忠,刘维.提高会计信息质量的重大举措——感悟企业会计制度[J].会计研究,2001,9-13.
[65]黄世忠.公允价值会计的顺周期效应及其应对策略[J].会计研究,2009,11：55-57.
[66]黄中生.交易费用、制度变迁与会计准则[J].山西财经大学学报,2004,10：35-38.
[67]江百灵.会计准则国际化的新制度经济学解释——基于制度变迁理论的分析[J].特区经济,2009,03：33-36.
[68]姜国华,饶品贵.宏观经济政策与微观企业行为——拓展会计与财务研究新领域[J].会计研究,2011,03：9-18.
[69]康虎彪,贺旭玲.我国会计制度变迁的理论动因探析[J].煤炭经济研究,2005,11：28-31.
[70]蓝荣梅,李颖,王红帅.基于制度经济学的工程造价计价模式变迁分析[J].四川建材,2012,02：14-16.
[71]雷光勇,姚晗.会计制度变迁和会计寻租[J].财经理论与实践,2005,01：24-26.
[72]李国运.论资本市场与会计的演化关系[J].会计研究,2007,05：46-52.
[73]李红霞.公允价值计量问题的国际进展及其在中国应用的思考[J].会计 研究,2008,10：18-24.
[74]李连军.会计制度变迁与政府治理结构[J].会计研究,2007,06：33-44.
[75]李宁.基于游说的会计准则变迁研究[J].经济管理,2007,10：45-49.
[76]李晓强.国际会计准则和中国会计准则下的价值相关性比较[J].会计研究,2004,01：15-23.
[77]李玉环.改革开放以来我国会计制度改革的回顾与评价[J].会计研究,2001,01：3-7.
[78]李玉环.深化会计制度改革打造高质量会计准则制度[J].会计研究,2003,03：3-8.
[79]林钟高,于鑫,吴玉莲.全球会计治理框架下的会计准则国际趋同分析[J].安徽工业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,11：45-48.
[80]刘爱东.会计准则趋同对我国企业应对反倾销影响的调查分析[J].会计研究,2008,09：33-37.
[81]刘国强.论会计信息属性与政府会计监管[J].会计研究,2006,07：3-8.
[82]刘峰.科斯定理与会计准则[J].会计研究,1992,12：22-26.
[83]刘峰.会计学科的边界与会计帝国[J].财会通讯,2011,07：33-35.
[84]刘峰.中国特色与国际化之争：一种解释[J].财务与会计导刊,2003,03：39-41.
[85]刘峰,吴风等.会计准则能提高会计信息质量吗[J].会计研究,2004,05：13-18.
[86]李心合.丧失相关性的会计与会计的持续性变革[J].会计研究,2012,10：3-10.
[87]刘玉廷.企业会计制度的中国特色及与国际惯例的协调[J].会计研究,2001,03：3-8.
[88]刘玉廷.关于中国企业会计准则与国际财务报告准则持续全面趋同问题[J].会计研究,2009,09：3-6.
[89]楼继伟.中国企业会计准则建设的可贵实践和崭新突破[J].会计研究,2006,02：3-5.
[90]刘威,秦毅.国际会计准则的发展及其启迪[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版),2003,02：54-57.
[91]刘玉延,王鹏等.亚大会计准则制定机构共商国际准则中国会计地区 及国际影响力持续提升[J].会计研究,2010,11：87-95.
[92]陆正飞,王春飞等.制度变迁、集团客户重要性与非标准审计意见[J].会计研究,2011,10：71-78.
[93]罗胜强.会计实务国际协调初评研究综述[J].财经理论与实践,2005,05：41-43.
[94]罗婷,薛健等.解析新会计准则对会计信息价值相关性影响[J].中国会计评论,2008,02：43-47.
[95]马骏.体制不协调与监管瓶颈：我国会计监管体制的演变及路径选择[J].会计研究,2005,08：11-14.
[96]毛述新,戴德明.会计制度变迁与盈余稳健性：一项理论分析[J].会计研究,2008,09：26-32.
[97]潘琰,陈凌云等.会计准则的信息含量：中国会计准则与IFRS之比较[J].会计研究,2003,07：15-23.
[98]平来禄,刘峰等.后安然时代的会计准则：原则导向还是规则导向[J].会计研究,2003,05：22-27.
[99]綦好东.中国会计制度变迁：特征及解释[J].当代财经,2000,08：33-36.
[100]綦好东,王斌.创新特色趋同：我国农业会计改革与发展30年述评[J].会计研究,2008,10：3-8.
[101]曲晓辉,邱月华,强制性制度变迁与盈余稳健性[J].会计研究,2007,07：27-35.
[102]孙铮,贺建刚.会计制度变迁及原因分析[J].会计研究,2008,07：23-27.
[103]孙铮,刘浩.中国会计改革新形势下的准则理论实证研究及其展望[J].会计研究,2006,09：12-18.
[104]汤云为,陆建桥.论证券市场中的会计研究：发现与启示[J].经济研究,1998,08：22-27.
[105]王保忠,黄解宇等.我国会计制度变迁理论研究综述[J].财会通讯,2009,06：32-34.
[106]王保忠.我国会计制度变迁动力和主体分析[J].运城学院学报,2007,02：44-47.
[107]王保忠,黄解宇等.我国会计制度的变迁——基于新制度经济学视角和博弈论视角的分析[J].财会月刊,2008,07：5-8.
[108]王建新.会计准则制定的博弈过程与我国会计准则[J].中南财经大学学报,2005,01：43-47.
[109]王军.学习好宣传好贯彻好新会计准则全面提升会计工作在经济社会发展中的服务效能[J].会计研究,2006,08：3-9.
[110]王磊磊、尚媛.试论会计准则国际化及其对我国的启示[J].齐鲁珠坛,2002,06：17-19.
[11 1]王小强,汪立.基于“诺沃克协议”的我国会计准则国际协调[J].财会通讯(综合版),2008,08：14-15.
[112]王晓军.国外公允价值会计应用状况研究[J].中国管理信息化,2008,02：32-33.
[11 3]王开田,胡晓明.中国会计国际化与国际会计中国化的文化思考[J].会计研究,2006,07：72-76.
[114]王跃堂,孙铮等.会计改革与会计信息质量[J].会计研究,2001,07：64-69.
[11 5]王砚.浅议国际会计准则的变迁史[J].财会研究,2008,02：38-40.
[116]汪祥耀,潘莹.公允价值计量新国际准则评述——与美国SFAS 157比较[J].财会月刊.2012,1：41-43.
[117]汪祥耀,潘莹.中欧会计准则持续等效挑战与对策[J].财会通讯.201 2，07：25-27.
[118]汪祥耀.财务报告监管及未来发展趋势[J].财经论丛(浙江财经学院学报),2003,02：11-24.
[119]汪祥耀.会计准则：市场经济发展的必然选择[J].商业经济与管理,2001,03：42-46.
[120]汪祥耀,邓川.主权国家会计准则与国际财务报告准则趋同的经验及启示——以澳大利亚为例[J].会计研究,2005,01：24-28.
[121]吴本洲.国际会计准则趋同原因剖析[J].商业时代,2006,09：24-26.
[122]吴革.中国会计制度国际化变迁：路径、特征、困境与创新[J].财会通讯，2004,09：9-11.
[123]吴革.国际会计制度的隐性成本与中国的策略[J].金融会计,2006,05：33-36.
[124]伍中信等.产权范式的会计研究：回顾与展望[J].会计研究,2006,07：83-89.
[125]夏冬林.财务会计：基于价值还是基于交易[J].会计研究,2006,08：10-17.
[126]谢德仁.会计准则、资本市场监管规则与盈余管理之遏制：来自上市公司债务重组的经验证据[J].会计研究,2011,03：19-26.
[127]谢诗芬,戴子礼,廖雅琴.FASB和IASB有关《公允价值计量》会计准则研究的最新动态述评[J].当代财经,2010,05：107-115.
[128]徐玉德.中国企业会计规范的历史变迁与现实选择[J].经济与管理研究,2008,09：46-50.
[129]杨海峰.IASB与FASB金融工具会计准则联合改进项目的背景、进展及评价[J].会计研究,2009,08：25-30.
[130]杨敏.会计准则国际趋同最新进展与我国应对举措[J].会计研究,2011,09,3-6.
[131]杨敏,陆建桥,徐华新.当前国际会计趋同形势和我国企业会计准则国际趋同的策略选择[J].会计研究,2011,10：9-15.
[132]杨瑞龙.我国制度变迁方式转换的三阶段论[J].经济研究，1998,01：17-23.
[133]杨兴全,李莉霞.我国会计制度变迁的经济学分析[J].石河子大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002,09：54-57.
[134]于永生.美国公允价值会计的应用研究[J].财经论丛(浙江财经学院学报),2005,10：47-49.
[135]邹小平、吕越金.国际分部报告准则的最新发展及启示[J].国际商务财会,2007,03：16-19.
[136]赵建新.金融危机环境下公允价值计量准则国际趋同问题研究[J].财会月刊,2010,12：22-23.
[137]张然,张会丽.新会计准则中合并报表理论变革的经济后果研究[J].会计研究,2008,1 2：44-52.
[138]张天阳,李丹.论产权制度与公司治理[J].会计之友,2008,01：13-16.
[139]张新民,吴革.会计制度国际化变迁：中国的经验与难题[J].财务与会计,2007,06：24-26.
[140]章雁.会计准则国际趋同度量、趋同路径与模式及执行效果研究述评[J].新会计,2011,12：29-31.
[141]中国会计学会IASB-FASB金融危机高层顾问组会议综述[J].会计动态,2009,01：17-18.
[142]钟文欣.会计准则性质研究[J].中山大学学报论丛,2002,08：47-49.
[143]陈峰.欧盟会计协调的演进过程和理论解释[D].武汉：武汉大学,硕士论文,2005.
[144]陈瑜.我国会计准则国际协调研究——历程与对策[D].厦门：厦门大学,博士学位论文,2004.
[145]高利芳.基于趋同的会计准则变迁与会计准则执行研究[D].厦门：厦门大学,博士学位论文,2009.
[146]韩晓明.会计制度变迁与财务报告的价值相关性[D].大连：东北财经大学,博士后研究报告,2009.
[147]黄燕飞.中国会计准则国际趋同策略研究[D].北京：财政部财政科学研究所,博士学位论文,2012.
[148]马笑芳.我国会计国际协调效果及其影响因素分析[D].厦门：厦门大学,博士学位论文,2008.
[149]游相华.知识经济下的若干会计问题研究[D].厦门：厦门大学,博士学位论文,2003.
[150]杨敏.中国会计准则建设和国际趋同的经验——在巴西第九届国际财务报告准则研讨会上的演讲[EB].财政部网站,2012,12.
[151]杨敏.在国际会计准则理事会新兴经济体工作组第三次全体会议上的工作报告[EB].财政部网站,2012,05.
[152]Shiller, Rober J. The subprime solution:how today's global financial crisis happened and what to do about it[M]. Princeton University Press,2008:55-60.
[153]Alford A., Jones J..The relative informativeness of accounting disclosure in different countries[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 1993,31:183-223.
[154]Ali A., Hwang L..Country-specific factors related to financial reporting and the value relevance data[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 2000,38:1-21
[155]Amir E., Harris T. S..A comparison of the value relevance of U.S. versus Non-U.S. GAAP accounting measures using form 20-F reconciliation[J]. Journal of Accounting Research,1993,31:230-264.
[156]Ashbaugh H., Lafond R..Reporting incentives and the quality of non-U.S. firms'working capital accruals[J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, 1996,13:135-170.
[157]Ashbaugh H., Olsson P..An exploratory study of the valuation properties of cross-listed firms'IAS and U.S. GAAP earnings and book values[J]. The Accounting Review,2002,77:107-126.
[158]Ball R., Kothari S. P..The effect of international institutional factors on properties of accounting earnings[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics,2000, 29:1-52.
[159]Ball R., Robin A., Wu J.S.. Accounting standards, the institutional environment and issuer incentives:effect on timely loss recognition in China[J]. Asian-Pacific Journal of Accounting and Economics,2000,7:71-96.
[160]Chen J.P., Chen S., Su X..Is accounting information value relevant in the emerging Chinese stock market? [J]. Journal of international Accounting,2001, 10:1-22.
[161]Demsetz H..Toward a theory of Property rights[J]. The American Economics Reivew,1967,5:347-359.
[162]Francis J., K. Schipper.Have financial statements lost their relevance? [J]. Journal of Accounting Research,1999,37:319-352.
[163]Gomes A..Going public without governance:Managerial reputation effects[J]. The Journal of Finance,2001,55:615-646.
[164]Harris M. S., Muller K..The market valuation of IAS versus U.S. GAAP accounting measures using form 20-F reconciliation[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics,1999,26:285-312.
[165]Hawkins D. M..The Standards Board and Economic Development[J]. The bernal M. Baurch College, city university of New York,1975.
[166]Hung M. G..Accounting standards and value relevance of financial statements:an international analysis[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2003,41:235-272.
[167]Mary E. Barth, Waye R. Landsman, Mark H. Lang. International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 2008,46:72-85.
[168]Pope P.. Discussion of Disclosure practices, enforcement of accounting standards and analyst forecast accuracy:an international study[J]. Journal of Accounting Research,2003,41:273-283.
[169]Rahman A. R..Discussion of earnings attributes and investor protection: international evidence[J]. The International Journal of Accounting,2006, 41:358-368.
[170]Rees L., Elgers P.. The market's valuation of non-reported accounting measures:retrospective reconciliations of non-U.S. and U.S. GAAP[J]. Journal of Accounting Research,1997,35:115-127.
[171]Solomons David. The FASB's Conceptual Framework:An Evaluation[J]. Journal of Accountancy,1986,06:33-37.
[172]IASC.Framework for Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements[R].UK:IASC,1989.
[173]IASB.Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting:The Reporting Entity (ED) [R].UK:IASB,2010.
[174]FASB. A roadmap for covergence between IFRSs and US GAAP [EB/OL]. www.fasb.org,2006-1-27:
[175]FASB. Completing the February 2006 memorandum of understanding [EB/OL]. www.fasb.org,2008-9-11:
① 葛家澍、刘峰,从会计准则的性质看会计准则的制定[J],会计研究,1996(2)。
① R·科斯等著：《财产权利与制度安排》,上海三联书店1991年版。
① 常勋,《国际会计》,东北财经大学出版社,2005年。
① 苏长和,《全球公共问题与国际合作：一种制度的分析》,上海：上海人民出版社,2000年。
① 转引自张历历,《现代国际关系学》,重庆：重庆出版社,1989年。
[1]财政部会计司.企业会计准则[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2006.
[2]常勋.国际会计[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社,2001.
[3]常勋等著.会计大典——国际会计[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,1999.
[4]陈国辉.会计理论研究[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,2001.
[5]杜兴强.会计信息的产权问题研究[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,2002.
[6]冯淑萍.中国会计改革与会计协调[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2002.
[7]弗雷德里克·乔伊等著,周晓苏等译.国际会计学(第三版)[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,2000.
[8]葛家澍,林志军.现代西方会计理论(第三版)[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社,2011.
[9]葛家澍,刘峰编.会计大典(第一卷)——会计理论[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,1998.
[10]郭道扬.郭道扬文集[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2009.
[11]郭永清.会计国际化[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2003.
[12]国际会计准则委员会(IASB).国际会计准则2004[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2005.
[13]郝振平.会计的国际透视[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,1997.
[14]哈耶克,冯克利译.经济、科学与政治[M].南京：江苏人民出版社,2000.
[15]霍奇逊,任荣化等译.演化与制度[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007.
[16]雷光勇.会计契约论[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2004.
[17]李宁.会计准则制度变迁问题研究——基于演化博弈的视角[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2011.
[18]刘端.会计政策的博弈论研究[M].成都：西南财经大学出版社,2000.
[19]刘峰.会计准则变迁[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2000.
[20]曲晓辉,陈少华,杨金忠等.会计准则研究——借鉴与反思[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社,1999.
[21]曲晓辉,杨钰等著.中国会计国际化研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社，2010.
[22]盛洪.现代制度经济学(上下卷)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
[23]王保忠.中国会计制度变迁经济学研究[M].北京：中国物资出版社,2010.
[24]王建新.我国会计准则制定及其效果研究[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2005.
[25]汪祥耀,邓川等.国际会计准则与财务报告准则——研究与比较[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2005：94-96.
[26]汪祥耀等著.与国际财务报告准则趋同——路径选择与政策建议[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2006：11-24.
[27]汪祥耀,邵毅平著.美国会计准则研究——从经济大萧条到全球金融危机[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2010.
[28]魏海明等.我国会计协调测定与政策研究[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2006.
[29]威廉姆·R.斯科特,陈汉文等译.财务会计理论[M].北京：机械工业出版,2006.
[30]吴革.国际会计产权制度研究[M].北京：对外经济贸易大学出版社，2002.
[31]吴革,张新民.中国会计的国际化[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2007.
[32]修宗峰.制度环境、制度变迁与决策有用性[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,2012.
[33]许家林.会计理论发展通论(上中下)[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2011.
[34]于永生,卢桂荣.次贷危机背景下的公允价值会计问题研究[M].上海：立信会计出版社,2010.
[35]张育军,肖立见等.转轨时期中国证券市场改革与发展[M].成都：西南财经大学出版社，2004.
[36]蔡宁,魏明海等.投资者保护变迁与会计改革的共生互动性[J].会计研究,2008,03：19-26.
[37]陈冬华,陈信元.中国会计准则制定中的利益协调：来自世纪星源的证据[J].会计研究,2004,06：3-10.
[38]陈冬华,梁上坤等.不同市场化进程下高管激励契约的成本与选择：货币薪酬与在职消费[J].会计研究,2010,11：56-64.
[39]陈圣飞,张忠寿等.会计稳健性研究的理论回顾与展望——基于契约观和信息观的视角[J].会计研究,2011,04：35-42.
[40]陈信元,叶鹏飞.我国会计信息环境的初步分析[J].会计研究,2000,08：8-16.
[41]陈瑜,曲晓辉.国际会计准则委员会改组的政治层面分析[J].财务与会计,2003,05：17-18.
[42]陈玉媛.美国资贷危机涉及公认会计原则及其应对措施[J].财会通讯,2008,10：108-109.
[43]邓大才.论制度变迁的速率与选择[J].财经问题研究,2006,04：11-18.
[44]邓力平,曲晓辉.西方国际税收竞争理论与会计准则全球趋同关系之辨析[J].会计研究,2003,09：37-45.
[45]董必荣.证券委员会国际组织(IOSCO)对国际会计准则制定机构的支持及其影响[J].财务与会计,2003,08：23-26.
[46]董盈厚.准则变革背景下财务会计有效边界的反思与构建[J].河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,09：67-72.
[47]董盈厚,盖地等.会计信息相关性与可靠性的逻辑关系[J].郑州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,09：63-67.
[48]董盈厚,侯铁建.基于IASB概念框架的可靠性质量特征之认识理性—一个经济学视角的分析与讨论[J].会计研究,2011,01：4-10.
[49]樊纲,胡永泰.“循序渐进”还是“平等推进”?——论体制转轨最优路径的理论与政策[J].经济研究,2005,01：13-17.
[50]冯巧根.会计准则国际化中的权益失衡及其对策[J].会计研究,2003,02：63-69.
[51]冯淑萍.关于我国当前环境下的会计国际化问题[J].会计研究,2003,02：3-9.
[52]冯淑萍.中国对国际会计协调的基本态度与所面临的问题[J].会计研究，2004,01：3-8.
[53]冯淑萍.关于建立国家统一会计核算制度的若干问题[J].会计研究,2001,01：3-9.
[54]付磊.我国企业会计改革的回顾与思考[J].会计研究,2007,12：48-53.
[55]付磊.企业制度演变与会计发展[J].会计研究,2012,07：3-8.
[56]高筠燕,卢锐.会计准则制定：政府导向和程序民主[J].中山大学学报,2005,06：17-19.
[57]葛家澎.评价IASB/FASB联合概念框架的某些改进[J].会计研究,2009,04：3-9.
[58]葛家澍,陈朝琳.财务会计概念框架的新篇章——评美国FASB第8号概念公告(2010年9月)[J].会计研究,2011,03：3-8.
[59]龚光明、陈若华.产权保护、收益计量与会计制度改革[J].会计研究,2012,07：8-14.
[60]龚翔,许家林.会计法规变迁与产权保护机制演进[J].会计研究,2008,10：9-17.
[61]郭道扬.论论两大法系的会计法律制度[J].会计论坛,2002,05：3-6.
[62]郭道扬.论统一会计制度[J].会计研究,2005,01：11-24.
[63]贺建刚.法律、会计国际化与会计者保护——基于自我实施理论的解释[J].山西财经大学学报,2007,03：33-35.
[64]黄世忠,刘维.提高会计信息质量的重大举措——感悟企业会计制度[J].会计研究,2001,9-13.
[65]黄世忠.公允价值会计的顺周期效应及其应对策略[J].会计研究,2009,11：55-57.
[66]黄中生.交易费用、制度变迁与会计准则[J].山西财经大学学报,2004,10：35-38.
[67]江百灵.会计准则国际化的新制度经济学解释——基于制度变迁理论的分析[J].特区经济,2009,03：33-36.
[68]姜国华,饶品贵.宏观经济政策与微观企业行为——拓展会计与财务研究新领域[J].会计研究,2011,03：9-18.
[69]康虎彪,贺旭玲.我国会计制度变迁的理论动因探析[J].煤炭经济研究,2005,11：28-31.
[70]蓝荣梅,李颖,王红帅.基于制度经济学的工程造价计价模式变迁分析[J].四川建材,2012,02：14-16.
[71]雷光勇,姚晗.会计制度变迁和会计寻租[J].财经理论与实践,2005,01：24-26.
[72]李国运.论资本市场与会计的演化关系[J].会计研究,2007,05：46-52.
[73]李红霞.公允价值计量问题的国际进展及其在中国应用的思考[J].会计 研究,2008,10：18-24.
[74]李连军.会计制度变迁与政府治理结构[J].会计研究,2007,06：33-44.
[75]李宁.基于游说的会计准则变迁研究[J].经济管理,2007,10：45-49.
[76]李晓强.国际会计准则和中国会计准则下的价值相关性比较[J].会计研究,2004,01：15-23.
[77]李玉环.改革开放以来我国会计制度改革的回顾与评价[J].会计研究,2001,01：3-7.
[78]李玉环.深化会计制度改革打造高质量会计准则制度[J].会计研究,2003,03：3-8.
[79]林钟高,于鑫,吴玉莲.全球会计治理框架下的会计准则国际趋同分析[J].安徽工业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,11：45-48.
[80]刘爱东.会计准则趋同对我国企业应对反倾销影响的调查分析[J].会计研究,2008,09：33-37.
[81]刘国强.论会计信息属性与政府会计监管[J].会计研究,2006,07：3-8.
[82]刘峰.科斯定理与会计准则[J].会计研究,1992,12：22-26.
[83]刘峰.会计学科的边界与会计帝国[J].财会通讯,2011,07：33-35.
[84]刘峰.中国特色与国际化之争：一种解释[J].财务与会计导刊,2003,03：39-41.
[85]刘峰,吴风等.会计准则能提高会计信息质量吗[J].会计研究,2004,05：13-18.
[86]李心合.丧失相关性的会计与会计的持续性变革[J].会计研究,2012,10：3-10.
[87]刘玉廷.企业会计制度的中国特色及与国际惯例的协调[J].会计研究,2001,03：3-8.
[88]刘玉廷.关于中国企业会计准则与国际财务报告准则持续全面趋同问题[J].会计研究,2009,09：3-6.
[89]楼继伟.中国企业会计准则建设的可贵实践和崭新突破[J].会计研究,2006,02：3-5.
[90]刘威,秦毅.国际会计准则的发展及其启迪[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版),2003,02：54-57.
[91]刘玉延,王鹏等.亚大会计准则制定机构共商国际准则中国会计地区 及国际影响力持续提升[J].会计研究,2010,11：87-95.
[92]陆正飞,王春飞等.制度变迁、集团客户重要性与非标准审计意见[J].会计研究,2011,10：71-78.
[93]罗胜强.会计实务国际协调初评研究综述[J].财经理论与实践,2005,05：41-43.
[94]罗婷,薛健等.解析新会计准则对会计信息价值相关性影响[J].中国会计评论,2008,02：43-47.
[95]马骏.体制不协调与监管瓶颈：我国会计监管体制的演变及路径选择[J].会计研究,2005,08：11-14.
[96]毛述新,戴德明.会计制度变迁与盈余稳健性：一项理论分析[J].会计研究,2008,09：26-32.
[97]潘琰,陈凌云等.会计准则的信息含量：中国会计准则与IFRS之比较[J].会计研究,2003,07：15-23.
[98]平来禄,刘峰等.后安然时代的会计准则：原则导向还是规则导向[J].会计研究,2003,05：22-27.
[99]綦好东.中国会计制度变迁：特征及解释[J].当代财经,2000,08：33-36.
[100]綦好东,王斌.创新特色趋同：我国农业会计改革与发展30年述评[J].会计研究,2008,10：3-8.
[101]曲晓辉,邱月华,强制性制度变迁与盈余稳健性[J].会计研究,2007,07：27-35.
[102]孙铮,贺建刚.会计制度变迁及原因分析[J].会计研究,2008,07：23-27.
[103]孙铮,刘浩.中国会计改革新形势下的准则理论实证研究及其展望[J].会计研究,2006,09：12-18.
[104]汤云为,陆建桥.论证券市场中的会计研究：发现与启示[J].经济研究,1998,08：22-27.
[105]王保忠,黄解宇等.我国会计制度变迁理论研究综述[J].财会通讯,2009,06：32-34.
[106]王保忠.我国会计制度变迁动力和主体分析[J].运城学院学报,2007,02：44-47.
[107]王保忠,黄解宇等.我国会计制度的变迁——基于新制度经济学视角和博弈论视角的分析[J].财会月刊,2008,07：5-8.
[108]王建新.会计准则制定的博弈过程与我国会计准则[J].中南财经大学学报,2005,01：43-47.
[109]王军.学习好宣传好贯彻好新会计准则全面提升会计工作在经济社会发展中的服务效能[J].会计研究,2006,08：3-9.
[110]王磊磊、尚媛.试论会计准则国际化及其对我国的启示[J].齐鲁珠坛,2002,06：17-19.
[11 1]王小强,汪立.基于“诺沃克协议”的我国会计准则国际协调[J].财会通讯(综合版),2008,08：14-15.
[112]王晓军.国外公允价值会计应用状况研究[J].中国管理信息化,2008,02：32-33.
[11 3]王开田,胡晓明.中国会计国际化与国际会计中国化的文化思考[J].会计研究,2006,07：72-76.
[114]王跃堂,孙铮等.会计改革与会计信息质量[J].会计研究,2001,07：64-69.
[11 5]王砚.浅议国际会计准则的变迁史[J].财会研究,2008,02：38-40.
[116]汪祥耀,潘莹.公允价值计量新国际准则评述——与美国SFAS 157比较[J].财会月刊.2012,1：41-43.
[117]汪祥耀,潘莹.中欧会计准则持续等效挑战与对策[J].财会通讯.201 2，07：25-27.
[118]汪祥耀.财务报告监管及未来发展趋势[J].财经论丛(浙江财经学院学报),2003,02：11-24.
[119]汪祥耀.会计准则：市场经济发展的必然选择[J].商业经济与管理,2001,03：42-46.
[120]汪祥耀,邓川.主权国家会计准则与国际财务报告准则趋同的经验及启示——以澳大利亚为例[J].会计研究,2005,01：24-28.
[121]吴本洲.国际会计准则趋同原因剖析[J].商业时代,2006,09：24-26.
[122]吴革.中国会计制度国际化变迁：路径、特征、困境与创新[J].财会通讯，2004,09：9-11.
[123]吴革.国际会计制度的隐性成本与中国的策略[J].金融会计,2006,05：33-36.
[124]伍中信等.产权范式的会计研究：回顾与展望[J].会计研究,2006,07：83-89.
[125]夏冬林.财务会计：基于价值还是基于交易[J].会计研究,2006,08：10-17.
[126]谢德仁.会计准则、资本市场监管规则与盈余管理之遏制：来自上市公司债务重组的经验证据[J].会计研究,2011,03：19-26.
[127]谢诗芬,戴子礼,廖雅琴.FASB和IASB有关《公允价值计量》会计准则研究的最新动态述评[J].当代财经,2010,05：107-115.
[128]徐玉德.中国企业会计规范的历史变迁与现实选择[J].经济与管理研究,2008,09：46-50.
[129]杨海峰.IASB与FASB金融工具会计准则联合改进项目的背景、进展及评价[J].会计研究,2009,08：25-30.
[130]杨敏.会计准则国际趋同最新进展与我国应对举措[J].会计研究,2011,09,3-6.
[131]杨敏,陆建桥,徐华新.当前国际会计趋同形势和我国企业会计准则国际趋同的策略选择[J].会计研究,2011,10：9-15.
[132]杨瑞龙.我国制度变迁方式转换的三阶段论[J].经济研究，1998,01：17-23.
[133]杨兴全,李莉霞.我国会计制度变迁的经济学分析[J].石河子大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002,09：54-57.
[134]于永生.美国公允价值会计的应用研究[J].财经论丛(浙江财经学院学报),2005,10：47-49.
[135]邹小平、吕越金.国际分部报告准则的最新发展及启示[J].国际商务财会,2007,03：16-19.
[136]赵建新.金融危机环境下公允价值计量准则国际趋同问题研究[J].财会月刊,2010,12：22-23.
[137]张然,张会丽.新会计准则中合并报表理论变革的经济后果研究[J].会计研究,2008,1 2：44-52.
[138]张天阳,李丹.论产权制度与公司治理[J].会计之友,2008,01：13-16.
[139]张新民,吴革.会计制度国际化变迁：中国的经验与难题[J].财务与会计,2007,06：24-26.
[140]章雁.会计准则国际趋同度量、趋同路径与模式及执行效果研究述评[J].新会计,2011,12：29-31.
[141]中国会计学会IASB-FASB金融危机高层顾问组会议综述[J].会计动态,2009,01：17-18.
[142]钟文欣.会计准则性质研究[J].中山大学学报论丛,2002,08：47-49.
[143]陈峰.欧盟会计协调的演进过程和理论解释[D].武汉：武汉大学,硕士论文,2005.
[144]陈瑜.我国会计准则国际协调研究——历程与对策[D].厦门：厦门大学,博士学位论文,2004.
[145]高利芳.基于趋同的会计准则变迁与会计准则执行研究[D].厦门：厦门大学,博士学位论文,2009.
[146]韩晓明.会计制度变迁与财务报告的价值相关性[D].大连：东北财经大学,博士后研究报告,2009.
[147]黄燕飞.中国会计准则国际趋同策略研究[D].北京：财政部财政科学研究所,博士学位论文,2012.
[148]马笑芳.我国会计国际协调效果及其影响因素分析[D].厦门：厦门大学,博士学位论文,2008.
[149]游相华.知识经济下的若干会计问题研究[D].厦门：厦门大学,博士学位论文,2003.
[150]杨敏.中国会计准则建设和国际趋同的经验——在巴西第九届国际财务报告准则研讨会上的演讲[EB].财政部网站,2012,12.
[151]杨敏.在国际会计准则理事会新兴经济体工作组第三次全体会议上的工作报告[EB].财政部网站,2012,05.
[152]Shiller, Rober J. The subprime solution:how today's global financial crisis happened and what to do about it[M]. Princeton University Press,2008:55-60.
[153]Alford A., Jones J..The relative informativeness of accounting disclosure in different countries[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 1993,31:183-223.
[154]Ali A., Hwang L..Country-specific factors related to financial reporting and the value relevance data[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 2000,38:1-21
[155]Amir E., Harris T. S..A comparison of the value relevance of U.S. versus Non-U.S. GAAP accounting measures using form 20-F reconciliation[J]. Journal of Accounting Research,1993,31:230-264.
[156]Ashbaugh H., Lafond R..Reporting incentives and the quality of non-U.S. firms'working capital accruals[J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, 1996,13:135-170.
[157]Ashbaugh H., Olsson P..An exploratory study of the valuation properties of cross-listed firms'IAS and U.S. GAAP earnings and book values[J]. The Accounting Review,2002,77:107-126.
[158]Ball R., Kothari S. P..The effect of international institutional factors on properties of accounting earnings[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics,2000, 29:1-52.
[159]Ball R., Robin A., Wu J.S.. Accounting standards, the institutional environment and issuer incentives:effect on timely loss recognition in China[J]. Asian-Pacific Journal of Accounting and Economics,2000,7:71-96.
[160]Chen J.P., Chen S., Su X..Is accounting information value relevant in the emerging Chinese stock market? [J]. Journal of international Accounting,2001, 10:1-22.
[161]Demsetz H..Toward a theory of Property rights[J]. The American Economics Reivew,1967,5:347-359.
[162]Francis J., K. Schipper.Have financial statements lost their relevance? [J]. Journal of Accounting Research,1999,37:319-352.
[163]Gomes A..Going public without governance:Managerial reputation effects[J]. The Journal of Finance,2001,55:615-646.
[164]Harris M. S., Muller K..The market valuation of IAS versus U.S. GAAP accounting measures using form 20-F reconciliation[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics,1999,26:285-312.
[165]Hawkins D. M..The Standards Board and Economic Development[J]. The bernal M. Baurch College, city university of New York,1975.
[166]Hung M. G..Accounting standards and value relevance of financial statements:an international analysis[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2003,41:235-272.
[167]Mary E. Barth, Waye R. Landsman, Mark H. Lang. International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 2008,46:72-85.
[168]Pope P.. Discussion of Disclosure practices, enforcement of accounting standards and analyst forecast accuracy:an international study[J]. Journal of Accounting Research,2003,41:273-283.
[169]Rahman A. R..Discussion of earnings attributes and investor protection: international evidence[J]. The International Journal of Accounting,2006, 41:358-368.
[170]Rees L., Elgers P.. The market's valuation of non-reported accounting measures:retrospective reconciliations of non-U.S. and U.S. GAAP[J]. Journal of Accounting Research,1997,35:115-127.
[171]Solomons David. The FASB's Conceptual Framework:An Evaluation[J]. Journal of Accountancy,1986,06:33-37.
[172]IASC.Framework for Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements[R].UK:IASC,1989.
[173]IASB.Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting:The Reporting Entity (ED) [R].UK:IASB,2010.
[174]FASB. A roadmap for covergence between IFRSs and US GAAP [EB/OL]. www.fasb.org,2006-1-27:
[175]FASB. Completing the February 2006 memorandum of understanding [EB/OL]. www.fasb.org,2008-9-11: