{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

From the start it assumes that accounting is uniform

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: that classifying accounting systems has a major defect. From the start “it assumes that accounting is uniform within each country, which is manifestly not the case. A second problem is that these studies tend to oversimplify the similarities within one grouping, while over-emphasizing the differences between groupings”. We therefore propose to approach the issue of intangible asset classification in the broad sense of the term, through an international comparison of accounting standards covering R & D costs, goodwill and other intangible assets. We decided not to undertake this comparison according to predefined types of intangibles, but to consider that intangibles form a homogeneous group, and to compare country with country. 2. METHODOLOGY 2.1 Research in international accounting This study actually stands on the border between two fields of research, international accounting and classification of intangible assets. Six categories of research into international accounting can be identified, as defined by Walton, Haller and Raffournier (1998): - analysis of different sets of practices, or country studies; investigation of differences, or comparative studies; analysis of the reasons for differences; classification of different sets of practices; evaluation of accounting harmonization; in...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online