Question

英语高手 帮忙翻译一下一篇英语文章 谢谢哦

Consider the problem of accounting for research and development outlays, an early project and pronouncement of the FASB. FAS No. 2 (FASB 1974) was issued a year after it was established. Consider two companies: Company A that spends $1 million on R&D and manages to get a patent of doubtful value; and Company B that also spends $1 million on R&D and manages to develop a patent whose market value is estimated by the firm to be $10 million. Consider two possible standards: X that allows firms to capitalize that part of the R&D cost that does not exceed the firm's estimate of the value of the R&D; and Y mat requires the firm to treat all R&D outlays as expense when incurred.
Under Standard X, Company A could capitalize an amount between 0 and $1 million depending on what it claims to be the value of the future benefits of the R&D project. Company B also could do the same, although it will likely capitalize the entire cost of $1 million. In any case, to the user of the statements the two companies could look the same when their underlying states are entirely different. This is the problem that led the FASB to issue its FAS No. 2 in 1974 (labeled Y in this discussion).
Under Standard Y, both firms must expense the $1 million outlay against the current period income, and their balance sheets and income statement for the year would be identical (other things being the same) when, in fact, their underlying economic situations are quite different. They are comparable in the sense that they both spent the same amount of money on R&D during the year, and both show this entire amount as a charge against current income. They are also comparable in the sense that they have no resulting assets on their balance sheets. However, they are not comparable in the sense that while Standard Y (the current method) reveals the economic situation of Company A in its financial statements quite accurately, it misleads the user about the valuable resource of a patent Company B has but does not show on its balance sheet. So, even in this simplest of accounting examples, it is not clear which of these two possible standards is of higher quality and which one results in financial statements that are more comparable-an attribute so highly valued in the Accounting Consensus and yet hard to define.

Answer 1

考虑一下这个问题的研究与发展经费占早期的项目和声明的FASB。美国2号(FASB 1974)发布了一年后它成立。认为两家公司,花费:100万美元的研发及管理上获得专利,与公司价值的怀疑。我也花费百万美元的研发及管理开发一种专利的市场价值是由该公司是1000万美元。考虑两种可能的标准:X,使公司能利用这部分的研发费用不超过该公司的估计价值的研发,Y垫要求公司对所有研发支出费用应当在发生时一样。
在标准的X,公司能利用数量介于0和1百万美元这取决于它声称是价值的未来收益的研发项目。乙公司也会做同样的事情,尽管它可能会利用整个成本为100万美元。在任何情况下,用户的言论,这两家公司可能看起来一样当他们潜在的状态是完全不同的。这是个问题,领导FASB发行其~ 2号在1974年(标记的Y在此讨论)。
根据标准,这两家公司一定费用支出的100万美元的收入,对当前的时间和他们的资产负债表和损益表,去年将是相同的(其他的事情都是相同的)的时候,事实上,他们的潜在的经济情况有很大的不同。他们是相当的,也就是说它们两者的同样多的钱花在开发中,双方都表现出了这全部金额作为对现有的收入。他们也有相当的,也就是说它们没有导致资产。然而,他们没有可比性,标准(当前的经济形势的方法),揭示了其公司的财务报表准确、误导了相当的宝贵资源的用户已申请专利,但不是B公司的资产负债表上显示。所以,即使在这个简单的例子,会计尚不清楚这两种可能的高品质的标准是哪一种财务报表中导致更多的comparable-an属性如此高度重视会计共识,却难以确定的。

有的我不知道

Answer 2

no