This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: s” encountered at the first level of approach
(Definitions) are “filled in”, in the official standards, by the development of recognition
criteria. These criteria are examined in the following paragraph.
Finally, it is worth noting that of the ten entities having a conceptual approach to intangible
assets, six belong to Mueller’ Anglo-Saxon model (Ireland, the Netherlands, the UK,
Australia, Canada, and the USA). The three countries belonging to the Continental model
(France, Germany and Austria) are the only ones to have a definition by opposition alone.
Mueller’ two models, then, are indeed valid as far as approaches to intangible assets in our
sample countries are concerned, with the national accounting systems in our survey falling
into similar categories.
4. HOW INTANGIBLE ASSETS ARE RECOGNIZED
The criteria for recognition of intangible assets given in accounting standards are
indissociable from the thinking behind the way they are defined. When the approach applied
in defining intangibles turns out to be conceptually weak, the recognition criteria compensate
for the gaps left by inventory-style approaches.
From the various accounting standards, we see that three...
View Full Document
- Fall '13
- The Land