ATTEMPTS TO ESTABLISH

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF ACCOUNTING



First attempt-early 1960's
Maurice Moonitz Robert Sprouse
ARS Number 1, "The Basic Postulates of Accounting", Maurice Moonitz, 1961 

ARS Number 3, "A Tentative Set of Broad Accounting Principles For Business Enterprises", Robert T. Sprouse And Maurice Moonitz


ARS Number 1 consisted of an exposition and explanation of three tiers of accounting postulates. . .
. . . many readers found the Moonitz study to be too abstract and general to engage their interest and critical thought.

In ARS Number 3, Sprouse and Moonitz argued that the use of current costs should be expanded. They advocated the use of current replacement costs for merchandise inventories and for plant and equipment, as well as the use of discounted present values for receivables and payables to be settled in cash. In the early 1960s, the use of present values of expected future cash receipts was virtually unknown in U.S. financial reporting, and current values (except in “lower of cost or market”) were hardly to be found.

(source:  Stephen Zeff, THE EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR BUSINESS ENTERPRISES IN THE UNITED STATES, Accounting Historians Journal Vol. 26, No. 2 December 1999)

In the opinion of the Director of Accounting Research, these two studies comply with the instructions to the Accounting Research Division to make a study of the basic postulates and broad principles of accounting.  Prior to its publication, Study No. 3 has been read and commented upon by a limited number of people in the field of accounting.  Their reaction range from endorsement of the ideas set forth in the study of "Broad Principles: to misgivings that compliance with the recommendations set forth by the authors would lead to misleading financial statements.  The Board is therefore treating these two studies as conscientious attempts by the accounting research staff to resolve major accounting issues which, however, contain inferences and recommendations in part of a speculative nature.

   The Board feels that there is ample room for improvement in present generally accepted accounting principles and a need to narrow or eliminate areas of difference which now exist.  It hopes the studies will stimulate constructive comment and discussion in the areas of the basic postulates and broad principles and practices of accounting.  Accounting principles and practices should be adapted to meet changing conditions, and therefore, there should be experimentation with new principles and new forms of reporting to meet these conditions. The Board believes, however, that while these studies are a valuable contribution to accounting thinking, they are too radically different from present generally accepted accounting principles for acceptance at this time.

   After a period of exposure and consideration, some of the specific recommendations in these studies may prove acceptable to the Board while others may not.  The Board therefore will await the results of this exposure and consideration before taking further action on these studies.. 

From APB Statement No. 1)


Second attempt--mid 1960's
Paul Grady




ARS Number 7, "An Inventory of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles", Paul Grady, 1965
  • Was to be a review of existing accounting pronouncements
  • Purposes: to discuss the basic concepts of accepted accounting principles, to summarize accepted principles and practices, and to summarize the existing pronouncements of the APB the CAP
  • Emphasized inductive and pragmatic methods instead of the deductive method
  • Had greater acceptance by the profession than ARS 1 & 3
  • Did not lead to a statement of broad principles of accounting
grady pic
  •  

  • Third attempt--1970
    APB Statement No. 4, "Basic Concepts and Accounting Principles Underlying Financial Statements of Business Enterprises", 1970

    This statement was developed as a result of the dissatisfaction with the earlier attempts at establishing a theoretical framework.

    Major portions of APB Statement No. 4 have been included in the FASB's Conceptual Framework project.

    Criticized because the document is more descriptive than prescriptive in nature.

    Hendriksen states that Statement No. 4 is an important document, but "is not a theory of accounting practice nor a clear statement of generally accepted accounting principles."












    Fourth and most recent attempt--1976 to current
    Financial Accounting Standards Board 

    Discussion Memorandum: Conceptual Framework for Financial Accounting and Reporting: Elements of Financial Statements and Their Measurement, 1976 

    Statements of Financial Accounting Concepts, Numbers 1-7  1978--2000

    1. Objectives of Financial Reporting by Business Enterprises, 1978 (replaced by CON 8)
    2. Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information, 1980  (replaced by CON 8)
    3. Elements of Financial Statements of Business Enterprises, 1980 (superseded by CON 6)
    4. Objectives of Financial Reporting by Nonbusiness Organizations, 1980
    5. Recognition and Measurement in Financial Statements of Business Enterprises, 1984
    6. Elements of Financial Statements, 1985 (supersedes CON 3)
    7. Using Cash Flow Information and Present Value in Accounting Measurements, 2000
    8. Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting--Chapter 1, The Objectives of General Purpose Financial Reporting and Chapter 3, Qualitative Characteristics of Useful Financial Information ( a replacement of FASB Concepts Statement No. 1 and No. 2)  2010
     


    Review Questions
    return to topical outline
       return to contemporary accounting issues