The Unresolved Flaws in Financial Accounting

The Unresolved Flaws in Financial Accounting be disappointed to find out later that in trying to
The users of accounting information includecollect on the accounts receivable only one-third
company owners, managers, investors, creditors,was actually obtained. This weakness was the
and government agencies. It is generallyreason of the now defunct cash basis versus the
acknowledged that most financial reporting iscurrent accrual basis. In the cash basis accounting,
“primarily externally oriented” and most ofrevenue or expenses were recorded when actual
the users are nonaccountants who get frustratedunits of measurement (money) exchanged
trying to understand the statements. Since theyhands. 
are not part of the management team, theySUBJECTIVE vs. OBJECTIVE REPORTING:
more or less are looking from the outside in. A greater existing flaw in financial accounting is
Despite the many accounting associations fromthe subjective latitude given to accountants
the Accounting Principles Board to the Americanpreparing financial statements to use their
Institute of Certified Public Accountants to the“professional” judgment. This flaw gives
Financial Accounting Association that establishedsome accountants the latitude to manipulate
the Financial Accounting Standards Board, therereports as we witnessed in the Enron debacle of
continues to be alternative ways of reporting2001. Business transactions between entities,
which adds to the confusion and limitations ofpeople or business, are concrete events that are
financial reporting.recorded. In the Unites States for example, the
Recognizing and Reporting Methods:unit for measuring these events is the dollar. As a
FIFO vs. LIFO:result, there should be no basis subjective
FIFO and LIFO are two of the major methods ofjudgment when reporting an empirical event or
reporting transactions. Because these aretransaction. It is odd that different accountants
alternative methods left to the discretion of theshould reach different acceptable conclusions for
entities, two similar companies in the samethe same event. This creates room for more
industry could report the same transactions forquestions and further skepticism from the public.
similar goods and arrive at two separateAs a quantifiable unit of measurement, a dollar
conclusions. The FIFO method assumes thatamount should always be the same no matter
earliest goods purchased are the first to be sold.how it is reported.
The LIFO method assumes that the latest goodsLESSONS FROM OTHER DISCIPLINES:
purchased are the first to be sold “as a resultECONOMICS
the first cost assigned to ending inventory are theThe above mentioned flaws do not exhaust the
costs of the beginning inventory.” So goodslist of limitations of financial statements which
purchased in September can be included in a prioramong others include quantitative versus
month’s cost of goods sold. This method,qualitative values in reporting; the principle of cost
though acceptable alters final reporting for betterwhich does not reflect current market value after
or for worse.an asset is purchased; and the inability to compare
ACCRUAL vs. CASH: firms in the same industry because of different
Under current generally accepted accountingreporting methods for example Coke and Pepsi. 
principles, financial accounting is backward looking.Economists have their share of inconsistencies,
By reporting past transactions that rely on accrualmost of them over the future effects of policy.
accounting to conform to the matching principle,Financial reporting however is backward looking. It
financial statements do not account for howreports events that already took place. But when
much of the outstanding debit accrued underit comes to measuring quantitative values, the
accounts receivable will actually be collected. Thiskind accountants handle in reporting, economists
could mislead non accountants into overhave a more unified angle from which to measure
estimating assets in the immediate period aftertransactions. For example, in computing the price
the release of a report because the adjustmentselasticity of demand which measures the
due to non collection are done much later. In thisresponsiveness of quantity demanded to a
scenario, a report released at the end of the yearchange in price, economists realized that the price
may project that a firm has $10,000.00 inelasticity going from point A to point B was not
accounts receivable. That projects $10,000.00the same with going from point B to point A, a
more in the asset column of the firm. This maymathematical approach. So they developed the
give a more positive outlook when in actuality themidpoint method for measuring elasticity which
firm may end up recouping only $3,000.00 of itsgives the same answer regardless of the direction
account receivable. An investor attracted to theof change.
company on the basis of its strong outlook may