Abstract Under-developed countries and many developed countries need outside capital for expansion. The residents of other countries have capital to invest, but they need accounting that they can understand, at two stages. First, to select the businesses they are going to invest in and second, to know how their investments are doing. They cannot do that today because there are different accounting rules in different countries. There are variations from one country to another not only in accounting principles but also in reporting practices, that is, what management customarily discloses to investors and prospective investors. One simple conclusion is that when the citizens of one country invest capital in enterprises in a second country, the accounting principles of the investor nation will follow the capital. Another reason for differences in accounting is found in the legal traditions of the countries. It is quite possible for two countries having similar practices to diverge during the course of their economic development and adopt different accounting customs.

Abstract In the article, the author attempts various aspects about valuation of assets in terms of the net discounted cash flows that they are expected to generate over their productive lives. While there may be much to be said for modifying some features of conventional accounting, this article attempted to show that the discounted services approach was a snare in the way toward improvement as it suffered from crippling internal weaknesses. The author has also argued that whenever a stream of cash flows is jointly generated by more than one asset, the discounted services method cannot be used to value those assets individually without becoming very arbitrary. From a study, it seems that most actual relationships between assets and net receipts would be nonhomogeneous and that few companies would be able to escape the severe flaws of the discounted services approach. Outside of financial accounting, the discounted services approach is largely unaffected by these arguments. The approach breaks down only when it is used to value individual assets for balance sheet purposes.

Abstract A sound knowledge of cost-volume-profit behavior and cost interrelationships is essential to many business decisions. Information which is easily understood but may not represent reality can lead to costly errors in judgment in business decisions. The management accountant certainly has a responsibility to provide management with something more than simply data. He has a responsibility to provide analyzed data, or useful information, for specific purposes. Yet he has a grave responsibility to avoid employing oversimplified techniques, or partial analysis, which may be misused or misunderstood by management. This article serves four purposes. First, to present the application and limitations of the Scatter Graph and Least Squares methods of studying the cost-volume-profit relationships of a company. Second, to present the possible weaknesses or limitations of Break-even Analysis and Profit Graphs. Third, to review some of the major statistical techniques of evaluating the significance of relationships. Fourth, to present the application of Multiple Regression Analysis, with the aid of a computer, to determine the cost-volume-profit relationship.

Abstract The article focuses on the national flow-of-funds analysis. The flow-of-funds accounts indicate whether the proceeds of a sector's saving were used for capital formation or for acquisition of financial assets, whether a sector's capital formation was financed by saving or by borrowing and they also depict the financial channels by which one sector's saving is made available to another for investment. In the flow-of-funds accounts, the economist casts a systematic body of statistics in an accounting framework utilizing such accounting tools as debit and credit and fund flow analysis and summarizes the results in accounting statements of sources and applications of funds. The appearance of "A Quarterly Presentation of flow of Funds, Saving and Investment" in 1959 and "Flow of Funds Seasonally Adjusted" in 1962 marked the third and fourth milestones respectively in the American development of the flow-of-funds system of national accounts. The 1959 version of the flow-of-funds accounts gave evidence of considerable reconstruction and came closer to conformity with the concepts of national income and product accounts. By way of contrast, the 1962 presentation did not introduce any major change in respect to basic concepts.

Abstract The typical tax course today utilizes a reference book as a text, focuses attention on the mechanics of the personal income tax, is taken almost exclusively by accounting majors, and accomplishes little that is educationally worthwhile except as the instructor injects background and philosophy from his own store of experiences. The author of the article like many others writers, has been experimenting with different ways of approaching the first tax course. His objectives agree with those of the American Accounting Association 1961 Committee on Income Tax Instruction. The problem of reaching agreement as to what are the underlying principles of income tax law is probably not much easier than that of defining accounting principles. Each general statement has a number of exceptions. Too often, there is a temptation to focus on the exceptions and ignore the rules. Author's broad objective in teaching is to communicate meaning. Author's basic orientation is directed towards business and investment decisions which also covers income, estate and gift taxes.

Abstract Frequently, the decision to replace or not to replace a plant asset is handled as a separate problem and is not included as a part of the general capital investment problem. This separation has probably resulted in part from the attention given to replacement decisions in engineering economy studies. Engineering studies are made to determine which units of equipment can give the best service at the lowest possible costs. Equipment in operation is in constant competition with new and improved models as they become available on the market and at some point in the life of a piece of equipment replacement may bring about the desired performance at a minimum annual cost. The objective in many replacement studies is to time the replacements so that annual costs will be minimized. The replacement type of decision is also isolated from general capital investment planning because of a difference in point of view that may be attributable to a difference in the level of administrative control. In replacement studies the equipment cost, the future costs of operation and the future salvage values are carefully estimated and applied in an effort to hold costs to a minimum.

Abstract In general, we must conclude that Dr. Marple simply has not demonstrated his case. His arguments either do not apply very well to any type of current value approach, or apply to only a few of them, or apply with equal force to the historical-cost accounting that he wishes to defend. There may well be grave objections to the use of current values in financial reports, but if so, they are unlikely to be uncovered without going to the considerable trouble of determining the fundamental assumptions, postulates, purposes, standards, and ways of looking at things that underlie historical-cost accounting, on the one hand, and the various current value approaches, on the other. It is this very difficult task which accountants must eventually perform. To perform it, to move beyond superficial discussion of the complex issues involved, accountants are going to need all the help that logical analysis can provide. To belittle this tool, as Dr. Marple does, is to hinder and belittle the eventual development of a reasoned accounting theory and a fully responsible accounting practice.