【摘要】：金融負(fù)債與權(quán)益工具的劃分一直以來都是會計難題之一,加之近些年來不斷有創(chuàng)新型、復(fù)合型金融工具產(chǎn)生,二者的分類所引發(fā)的爭議越來越多。對于企業(yè)而言,豐富的金融工具給企業(yè)提供了更加多元化的融資渠道,從而助力企業(yè)發(fā)展,但是相關(guān)會計劃分也給其帶來前所未有的挑戰(zhàn);對于投資者而言,對金融工具分類合理與否可能會對他們的投資決策產(chǎn)生重大影響;對于監(jiān)管者而言,金融負(fù)債與權(quán)益工具分類存在的爭議和模糊地帶大大提高了監(jiān)管的難度;對于會計準(zhǔn)則的各個制定機(jī)構(gòu)而言,合理劃分金融工具這個會計命題無疑是橫亙在會計準(zhǔn)則制定者心中的一大難題。合理劃分金融工具,不僅會有助于及時、準(zhǔn)確地計算企業(yè)的權(quán)益、負(fù)債與凈收益,還會對財務(wù)杠桿比率和其他相關(guān)財務(wù)指標(biāo)的正確計算有所幫助,進(jìn)而影響企業(yè)的財務(wù)目標(biāo);其次,金融負(fù)債與權(quán)益工具的劃分與企業(yè)資本結(jié)構(gòu)的確定密切相關(guān),劃分的合理與否可以不僅與企業(yè)的融資政策相關(guān),還會影響投資影響者的投資決策,即影響到企業(yè)金融產(chǎn)品的發(fā)行方式和發(fā)行效果,資本結(jié)構(gòu)的不同也會左右企業(yè)對于最佳籌資組合的決策;最后,金融負(fù)債與權(quán)益工具的合理分類,對于報表使用者而言決策相關(guān)。因此,研究如何準(zhǔn)確有效的對金融負(fù)債與權(quán)益工具進(jìn)行分類就顯得十分重要。目前,國際會計準(zhǔn)則理事會所制定的相關(guān)準(zhǔn)則較為復(fù)雜,對會計人員的職業(yè)判斷提出了較高要求;國際準(zhǔn)則背后的相關(guān)理論和有關(guān)準(zhǔn)則條款還存在一些不夠完善的地方,甚至還存在不一致的觀點;在某些情況下,會計判斷結(jié)果與法律裁決的結(jié)果不同,對投資者而言影響重大;評級機(jī)構(gòu)對金融工具的劃分也存在不同的認(rèn)識,這無疑會影響評級報告使用者對公司財務(wù)杠桿等情況的判斷等�；谏鲜鍪聦�,包括國際會計準(zhǔn)則理事會、美國財務(wù)會計準(zhǔn)則委員會、歐盟財務(wù)報告咨詢組等在內(nèi)的會計準(zhǔn)則制定機(jī)構(gòu)對金融工具的劃分都進(jìn)行了長期、深入的研究,他們分別提出了許多有創(chuàng)造性的方法和建議,其中有共同之處,也有相悖之處,各有優(yōu)劣。然而,各方直至今日在某些方面都沒有形成統(tǒng)一的觀點。本文對現(xiàn)行會計準(zhǔn)則中有關(guān)金融負(fù)債和權(quán)益工具劃分存在的問題和各界對此的研究進(jìn)展進(jìn)行了細(xì)致的分析和研究,認(rèn)為國際會計準(zhǔn)則理事會提出的嚴(yán)格債務(wù)法在眾多備選方法中應(yīng)屬于優(yōu)選方法。該方法優(yōu)點眾多,適合作為金融負(fù)債與權(quán)益工具的劃分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。同時,本文研究認(rèn)為,該方法尚不能解決現(xiàn)存的所有問題,對會計要素定義的修改等等工作仍然有待進(jìn)一步研究,以從根本上解決有關(guān)金融負(fù)債和權(quán)益工具的劃分。
[Abstract]:The division of financial liabilities and equity instruments has always been one of the accounting difficulties. In addition, in recent years, innovative and complex financial instruments have been produced, the classification of the two has caused more and more controversy. For enterprises, rich financial instruments provide enterprises with more diversified financing channels, thus contributing to the development of enterprises, but the related accounting division also brings them unprecedented challenges; for investors, Whether the classification of financial instruments is reasonable or not may have a significant impact on their investment decisions, for regulators, the disputes and fuzzy areas in the classification of financial liabilities and equity instruments have greatly increased the difficulty of supervision. For the various organizations that make accounting standards, the accounting proposition of dividing financial instruments rationally is undoubtedly a difficult problem in the hearts of accounting standards makers. The rational division of financial instruments will not only help to calculate the equity, liabilities and net income of enterprises in a timely and accurate manner, but also help to calculate the financial leverage ratio and other relevant financial indicators, thus affecting the financial objectives of enterprises. Secondly, the division of financial liabilities and equity instruments is closely related to the determination of the capital structure of enterprises. Whether the division is reasonable or not can be related not only to the financing policies of enterprises, but also to the investment decisions of investors. That is to say, it affects the issuing method and effect of enterprise financial products, and the difference of capital structure will also influence the decision of the best financing combination. Finally, the reasonable classification of financial liabilities and equity instruments. Decisions are relevant to report users. Therefore, it is very important to study how to classify financial liabilities and equity instruments accurately and effectively. At present, the relevant standards formulated by the International Accounting Standards Board are relatively complex, and the professional judgment of accounting personnel is required, and there are still some imperfections in the relevant theories and relevant standard provisions behind the international standards. There are even conflicting views; in some cases, the results of accounting judgments are different from those of legal decisions, which have a significant impact on investors; and ratings agencies have different perceptions of the division of financial instruments. This will undoubtedly affect the rating report users of corporate financial leverage and so on. Based on the above facts, accounting standard-setting organizations, including the International Accounting Standards Board, the Financial Accounting Standards Board of the United States, the European Union Financial reporting Advisory Group, and so on, have carried out a long-term and in-depth study on the division of financial instruments. They put forward a lot of creative methods and suggestions, which have some common points, but also contradictory, each has its own advantages and disadvantages. However, the parties have not yet formed a unified view in some respects to this day. This paper makes a detailed analysis and study on the problems existing in the division of financial liabilities and equity instruments in the current accounting standards and the research progress in this regard. It is considered that the strict debt method proposed by IASB should be an optimal method among many alternatives. This method has many advantages and is suitable for the classification of financial liabilities and equity instruments. At the same time, this paper believes that the method can not solve all the existing problems, and the modification of the definition of accounting elements still needs to be further studied in order to fundamentally solve the division of financial liabilities and equity instruments.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國財政科學(xué)研究院
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：F275;F832

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

中國期刊全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前10條

1 劉敏;劉云;;新會計準(zhǔn)則中“金融資產(chǎn)與金融負(fù)債分類”的詮釋[J];會計之友(上旬刊);2007年02期

2 王孟津;;非金融負(fù)債國際識別與會計處理研究[J];財會通訊;2009年22期

3 陳敏;羅艷清;劉穎莎;;新會計準(zhǔn)則對金融工具分類的影響——基于上市公司的調(diào)查統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)[J];金融會計;2008年08期

4 陳昌平;陳婉嵐;嚴(yán)桂芳;;對交易性金融負(fù)債會計核算的幾點認(rèn)識[J];財會月刊;2009年35期

5 莉莎·鄭;;金融工具的損益影響[J];中國資產(chǎn)評估;2010年01期

6 劉英;;論金融工具的后續(xù)確認(rèn)與計量[J];中國鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)企業(yè)會計;2011年03期

7 毛幫春;;金融資產(chǎn)與金融負(fù)債會計與稅法處理的差異分析——基于新的會計準(zhǔn)則和稅法差異的視角[J];商場現(xiàn)代化;2011年15期

8 曹文芳;;交易性金融負(fù)債會計處理之改進(jìn)[J];財會月刊;2013年03期

9 ;《企業(yè)會計準(zhǔn)則第22號——金融工具確認(rèn)和計量》應(yīng)用指南[J];財會月刊;2007年01期

10 劉Z，

本文編號：2188613