English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88613/118155 (75%)
Visitors : 23493765      Online Users : 296
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/69651

    Title: 跨期間所得稅分配之負債方法對於財務報表之影響
    Other Titles: The Effects of the Liability Method of Interperiod Income Tax Allocation on the Financial Statements of Early Adopters of SFAS 96.
    Authors: 郭弘卿
    Contributors: 會計學系
    Keywords: 所得稅;財物報表;負債方法
    Income tax;Financial statement;Liability method
    Date: 1993
    Issue Date: 2014-09-09 17:36:46 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: In December, 1987, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.96 (SFAS 96), "Accounting for Income Taxes", to supersede Accounting Principles Board Opinion No.11 (APB 11). In SFAS 96, the Board began to require the liability method to be used for interperiod income tax allocation in place of the deferred method which was previously prescribed by APB 11. Because of the complexity of the requirements in SFAS 96, the FASB deferred the Statement's effective date three times. At last, the longest transition period of accounting pronouncements in history came to an end. As a consequence, the liability method became mandated, not under SFAS 96, but under a new FASB statement (SFAS No.109) for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 1992, with early adoption encouraged. Thus, SFAS 96's requirements never formally went into effect, although the provisions about income tax allocation that can be found in SFAS 96 for a large part remain practically unchanged in SFAS 109. At any rate, the unusually lengthy transition period of SFAS 96 allowed a great deal of flexibility for companies to determine when to adopt the new method to account for income taxes. In some ways, both APB 11 and SFAS 96 are similar, because the FASB continued to require comprehensive tax allocation without discounting the deferred liability. However, by requiring the liability method, the Board introduced dramatic changes in the way deferred tax assets, liabilities, and income tax expense were determined. A significant impact on the financial statements of early adopters of SFAS 96 (hereafter early adopters) could have resulted from these changes (Carpenter and Wilburn 1988; Merryman and Robinson 1991). Additionally, because of the lengthy transition period during which both methods were permitted, some were concerned that intercompany comparisons of financial results between early adopters and late adopters might somehow be hindered.
    Relation: 行政院國家科學委員會
    Data Type: report
    Appears in Collections:[會計學系] 國科會研究計畫

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat

    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback