學術產出-NSC Projects

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 跨期間所得稅分配之負債方法對於財務報表之影響
其他題名 The Effects of the Liability Method of Interperiod Income Tax Allocation on the Financial Statements of Early Adopters of SFAS 96.
作者 郭弘卿
貢獻者 會計學系
關鍵詞 所得稅;財物報表;負債方法
Income tax;Financial statement;Liability method
日期 1993
上傳時間 9-Sep-2014 17:36:46 (UTC+8)
摘要 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.
關聯 行政院國家科學委員會
計畫編號NSC82-0301-H004-035-T
資料類型 report
dc.contributor 會計學系en_US
dc.creator (作者) 郭弘卿zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 1993en_US
dc.date.accessioned 9-Sep-2014 17:36:46 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 9-Sep-2014 17:36:46 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 9-Sep-2014 17:36:46 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/69651-
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 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.en_US
dc.format.extent 261 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype text/html-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.relation (關聯) 行政院國家科學委員會en_US
dc.relation (關聯) 計畫編號NSC82-0301-H004-035-Ten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 所得稅;財物報表;負債方法en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Income tax;Financial statement;Liability methoden_US
dc.title (題名) 跨期間所得稅分配之負債方法對於財務報表之影響zh_TW
dc.title.alternative (其他題名) The Effects of the Liability Method of Interperiod Income Tax Allocation on the Financial Statements of Early Adopters of SFAS 96.en_US
dc.type (資料類型) reporten