本文選題：會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式 + 金融工具��； 參考：《東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：金融工具會(huì)計(jì)問(wèn)題一直備受關(guān)注。近年來(lái),國(guó)際上最有影響力的兩個(gè)準(zhǔn)則制定機(jī)構(gòu)國(guó)際會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則理事會(huì)(IASB)和美國(guó)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)(FASB)在金融工具問(wèn)題上密切配合,共同應(yīng)對(duì)難題,做了許多扎實(shí)的基礎(chǔ)性工作,包括金融工具確認(rèn)、計(jì)量、披露、減值、套期會(huì)計(jì)、公允價(jià)值相關(guān)理論以及IASB、FASB聯(lián)合概念框架制定等問(wèn)題。其中以IASB在2009年11月12日發(fā)布的《國(guó)際財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告準(zhǔn)則第9號(hào)——金融工具》(IFRS9)最有代表性和影響力。IFRS9的發(fā)布將對(duì)所有在IASB準(zhǔn)則趨同范圍內(nèi)的國(guó)家和地區(qū)產(chǎn)生重大影響,各國(guó)積極反饋意見(jiàn)。由于需要協(xié)調(diào)的項(xiàng)目非常多,2010年11月,理事會(huì)主席戴維·泰迪在《我們改革金融工具會(huì)計(jì)的工作正在完成》文中強(qiáng)烈暗示IFRS9還存在很多未決的問(wèn)題,原定的生效日期2013年1月1日顯得不太合適,IASB有可能在2011年6月30日之前修改(延后)IFRS9生效日期。IFRS9的一個(gè)最大變化在于金融工具的分類和會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量問(wèn)題,IFRS9中提出了按照主體的商業(yè)模式和現(xiàn)金流量模式分類金融工具的模式,在此基礎(chǔ)上,進(jìn)一步擴(kuò)大了公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的應(yīng)用范圍,金融工具全面公允價(jià)值計(jì)量模式又向前邁進(jìn)一步。我國(guó)金融工具目前采用成本計(jì)量為基礎(chǔ)的混合計(jì)量模式。由于我國(guó)已經(jīng)與國(guó)際會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則達(dá)成了持續(xù)趨同路線,國(guó)際上IFRS9關(guān)于金融工具全面公允價(jià)值計(jì)量模式將會(huì)對(duì)我國(guó)金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式選擇的理論和實(shí)務(wù)造成很大影響,未雨綢繆,研究我國(guó)金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式的選擇問(wèn)題意義重大,金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式的選擇將對(duì)我國(guó)下一步改進(jìn)金融工具會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則起到導(dǎo)向性作用。 文章總體寫作目標(biāo)定位在我國(guó)金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式的選擇上。針對(duì)IFRS9倡導(dǎo)的金融工具采用公允價(jià)值計(jì)量為基礎(chǔ)的計(jì)量模式,文章通過(guò)理論分析和實(shí)際數(shù)據(jù)驗(yàn)證的方法,提出我國(guó)在金融工具會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則國(guó)際趨同下的計(jì)量模式選擇策略以及進(jìn)一步完善歷史成本基礎(chǔ)下混合計(jì)量模式、適時(shí)推動(dòng)公允價(jià)值計(jì)量發(fā)展的相關(guān)建議。主要內(nèi)容包括： 理論分析方面,從經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)角度界定會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式的本質(zhì),會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式屬于一種制度和公共產(chǎn)品,目的在于降低交易費(fèi)用和管理費(fèi)用,所以會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式的選擇需要考略特殊的制度背景；會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式由計(jì)量屬性和計(jì)量單位兩要素構(gòu)成,幣值穩(wěn)定的前提下,作為計(jì)量基礎(chǔ)要素的計(jì)量屬性的選擇主要決定了計(jì)量模式的種類,本文主要探討公允價(jià)值計(jì)量基礎(chǔ)和成本計(jì)量基礎(chǔ)的選擇；并從概念框架中的會(huì)計(jì)目標(biāo)理論、信息質(zhì)量理論、公允價(jià)值計(jì)量理論以及會(huì)計(jì)環(huán)境因素等方面分析我國(guó)與國(guó)際上的在影響金融工具計(jì)量模式選擇的各個(gè)因素的差別以及適用于我國(guó)的金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式。 實(shí)際數(shù)據(jù)分析方面,按照非金融行業(yè)和金融行業(yè)分別描述了我國(guó)金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量的現(xiàn)狀以及存在問(wèn)題。重點(diǎn)分析了我國(guó)如果采用IFRS9公允價(jià)值計(jì)量為基礎(chǔ)的計(jì)量模式預(yù)期產(chǎn)生的經(jīng)濟(jì)后果。分析方法主要采用手工調(diào)整財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表數(shù)據(jù)方式,按照IFRS9的規(guī)定將上市公司各項(xiàng)金融工具重分類,觀察可能會(huì)對(duì)財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表數(shù)據(jù)產(chǎn)生的影響。最后在理論和實(shí)際數(shù)據(jù)分析的基礎(chǔ)上,提出我國(guó)金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式的選擇路徑。首先,在指導(dǎo)思想上,金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式的選擇應(yīng)該根據(jù)實(shí)際國(guó)情和市場(chǎng)環(huán)境；其次,在總體思路上,綜合考慮市場(chǎng)發(fā)達(dá)程度、財(cái)政承受能力、計(jì)量技術(shù)、人員素質(zhì)以及監(jiān)管體系等因素,我國(guó)目前宜繼續(xù)保持金融工具成本計(jì)量為基礎(chǔ)的混合計(jì)量模式,謹(jǐn)慎的擴(kuò)大公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的應(yīng)用范圍；再次,在具體路徑安排上,以制定一套金融工具會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則體系為著力點(diǎn),包括制定理論基礎(chǔ)的財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)概念框架,制定技術(shù)保障的《公允價(jià)值計(jì)量》準(zhǔn)則,有選擇的接受IFRS9的基礎(chǔ)上制定我國(guó)金融工具計(jì)量以及披露準(zhǔn)則；最后,完善環(huán)境建設(shè)和監(jiān)管體系建設(shè)等配套措施,配合我國(guó)金融工具會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量發(fā)展和逐步擴(kuò)大公允價(jià)值的應(yīng)用。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the international accounting standards board (IASB) and the American Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), the two most influential international accounting standards board (IASC) and the United States financial accounting standards board (FASB) have been working closely together to deal with the problems and have done a lot of solid basic work, including the confirmation of financial instruments, Measurement, disclosure, devaluation, hedging accounting, fair value related theory and IASB, FASB joint conceptual framework formulation, among which IASB's most representative and influential.IFRS9 issued by IASB in November 12, 2009, financial instruments > (IFRS9), will be in all countries within the range of IASB standards. In November 2010, the president of the Council, David Teddy, in the work of our reform of financial instruments accounting, strongly hinted that IFRS9 still had many unresolved issues, and the original date of entry into force was not quite suitable for January 1, 2013, IA. One of the biggest changes that SB may change before June 30, 2011 (postponed) IFRS9's effective date.IFRS9 is the classification of financial instruments and accounting measurement problems. In IFRS9, the model of classifying financial instruments in accordance with the main business model and cash flow pattern is proposed. On this basis, the application of fair value measurement is further expanded. The overall fair value measurement model of financial instruments is further advanced. China's financial instruments are currently using a mixed measurement model based on cost measurement. Since China has reached a continuous convergence line with international accounting standards, the international IFRS9 on the comprehensive fair value measurement model of financial instruments will be for our financial workers. The choice of accounting measurement model has great influence on the theory and practice. It is of great significance to study the choice of accounting measurement model of financial instruments in China. The choice of financial instruments accounting measurement model will play a guiding role in improving the financial instruments accounting standards in our country.
The overall writing goal of the article is located in the choice of the accounting measurement model of financial instruments in China. According to the measurement model based on the fair value measurement of financial instruments advocated by IFRS9, the article puts forward the selection strategy of the measurement mode under the international convergence of financial instruments accounting standards in China through theoretical analysis and actual data verification. And further improve the historical cost basis of the mixed metering mode, and timely promote the development of fair value measurement related suggestions.
In the theoretical analysis, the essence of the accounting measurement model is defined from the economic perspective. The accounting measurement model belongs to a system and public product. The purpose is to reduce the transaction costs and management costs. Therefore, the choice of the accounting measurement mode needs a special system background; the accounting measure mode is composed of two elements of measurement and measurement units. On the premise of stable currency value, the selection of measurement attributes as the basic element of measurement mainly determines the type of measurement model. This paper mainly discusses the selection of the basis of fair value measurement and the basis of cost measurement, and from the theory of accounting objectives in the conceptual framework, the theory of information quality, the theory of fair value measurement and the environmental factors of accounting. This paper analyzes the differences between the various factors affecting the choice of the financial instruments measurement mode in China and in the world and the accounting measurement model applicable to China's financial instruments.
In terms of actual data analysis, the current situation and existing problems of financial instruments accounting measurement in China are described in accordance with non-financial industry and financial industry. The economic consequences of the measurement model based on the IFRS9 fair value measurement in China are emphatically analyzed. The analytical method mainly adopts the manual adjustment of financial statements data. In accordance with the provisions of IFRS9, the financial instruments of the listed companies are reclassified and the influence of the financial statement data may be observed. Finally, on the basis of the theoretical and practical data analysis, the selection path of the accounting measurement model of financial instruments in China is put forward. First, the choice of the accounting measurement mode of financial instruments should be taken as the guiding thought. According to the actual situation and the market environment, secondly, in the overall thinking, considering the market developed degree, financial capacity, measurement technology, personnel quality and supervision system, our country should continue to maintain the mixed measurement model based on the cost measurement of financial instruments, and prudently expand the application scope of fair value measurement. Thirdly, on the specific path arrangement, we should make a set of financial instruments accounting standards system as the focus point, including the financial accounting concept framework of formulating the theoretical basis, the formulation of the fair value measurement guidelines for technical guarantee, and the selection of the financial instruments measurement and disclosure standards on the basis of the choice of accepting IFRS9; finally, perfect the environment construction. The supporting measures such as setting up and supervising system construction, developing and expanding the application of fair value in line with the accounting measurement of financial instruments in China.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：F233;F830.42

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 梁爽,董晶;中外會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量模式比較研究[J];財(cái)經(jīng)問(wèn)題研究;2003年07期

2 鄭鳴;倪玉娟;劉林;;公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)制度對(duì)金融穩(wěn)定的影響——兼論美國(guó)金融危機(jī)的啟示[J];財(cái)經(jīng)研究;2009年06期

3 葛家澍;關(guān)于財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)幾個(gè)基本概念的思考——兼論商譽(yù)與衍生金融工具確認(rèn)與計(jì)量[J];財(cái)會(huì)通訊;2000年01期

4 葛家澍;陳秧秧;;美國(guó)SEC“關(guān)于調(diào)到市價(jià)會(huì)計(jì)的研究”報(bào)告評(píng)介(三)——公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則對(duì)金融機(jī)構(gòu)資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表的影響[J];財(cái)會(huì)通訊;2009年13期

5 余晨怡;葉建芳;;關(guān)于IFRS9金融工具分類的思考[J];財(cái)會(huì)學(xué)習(xí);2010年04期

6 吳丹;略談公允價(jià)值對(duì)會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量觀念的革新[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2000年18期

7 常勛;公允價(jià)值計(jì)量研究[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2004年01期

8 陳敏;公允價(jià)值的本質(zhì)及其理論缺陷淺探[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2005年22期

9 何乃飛;陳艷;;公允價(jià)值計(jì)量:SFAS157及其對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2007年29期

10 陳秧秧;;如何降低金融工具報(bào)告中的復(fù)雜性——IASB最新討論稿解讀[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2008年23期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 袁文輝 王振林 德勤華永會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所有限公司;[N];中國(guó)會(huì)計(jì)報(bào);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 袁安金;西氣東輸管道公司資產(chǎn)減值問(wèn)題研究[D];中國(guó)石油大學(xué);2011年

2 張宏梅;衍生金融工具的會(huì)計(jì)問(wèn)題研究[D];對(duì)外經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2002年

3 韓曉敏;金融工具會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的變革及與國(guó)際準(zhǔn)則比較研究[D];東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2007年

4 張涵;公允價(jià)值計(jì)量下上市公司盈余管理實(shí)證研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2008年

5 趙鵬遠(yuǎn);利率市場(chǎng)化下我國(guó)商業(yè)銀行人民幣貸款定價(jià)研究[D];北方工業(yè)大學(xué);2008年

6 段建琴;金融資產(chǎn)公允價(jià)值的價(jià)值相關(guān)性研究[D];中山大學(xué);2008年

7 余春香;金融工具會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的國(guó)際比較[D];廈門大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：1799232