Abstract Realization is a controlling concept in the measurement and reporting of enterprise income. In its broad meaning, it includes all of the possible points in the activity of the enterprise at which revenue may be viewed as having emerged or been realized. However, the broad meaning cannot he applied to specific situations. A specific point of realization must be selected from all of the possible points. This article suggests that there are several important points of realization that produce several different, significant and useful measure of income and that the selection of any single set of tests in the hope of producing the appropriate income measure unnecessarily restricts accounting to serving only those purposes which that single measure tends to accommodate. Realization should not be viewed as a restraint that requires an either point of recognition. It should be regarded as a useful device that permits accountants to observe, measure, and report on the enterprise from several points of interest.

Abstract The two levels of accounting, microaccounting on one hand and macroaccounting on the other, indicate not only that accounting is a rapidly expanding field but also that accounting plays an important role in today's complex economy. The purpose of this article is to explore the interrelationship between microaccounting and macroaccounting. More specifically, it attempts, firstly, to identify macroaccounting as a branch of accounting; secondly, to examine briefly the interrelationships among the four sub-areas of accounting and economics, i.e., microaccounting, macroaccounting, microeconomics, and macroeconomics; thirdly, to compare some of the basic similarities and dissimilarities between microaccounting and macroaccounting; and finally to explore potential influences of macroaccounting on microaccounting. The article concludes that the demand for additional information from accounting for managerial, investment, and analytical purposes points to the need for more constructive and creative thinking in accounting.

Abstract The tendency for one company to merge or combine with another is a common characteristic of American industry. The primary accounting development during the most recent merger movement has been the "pooling of interests" theory. It is the purpose of this article to explain the basis for the pooling theory and to support pooling as a useful, rational accounting practice when applied in the appropriate circumstances. In the foregoing discussion the view is taken that a business combination consummated on the basis of an exchange of shares does not create a new basis of accountability because the businesses are not affected in a substantive way. Because an accounting entity is largely defined by identification of its owners, who in this case have continued in business much as before, the constituent entities are deemed to have merged and become one without change except as to form and legal requirement. The so-called criteria other than exchange of shares which were originally expressed as necessities to a pooling have been tested and tried and in many cases have been found wanting because they represented unrealistic restrictions on reasonable and necessary activities of a business enterprise.

Abstract The typical auditing textbook includes, as one of its final chapters, a detailed coverage of the audit report, with special emphasis on departures from the unqualified report. Nevertheless, students often have difficulty in adequately distinguishing among several types of audit opinions. The student with no experience in the field remains somewhat confused. Perhaps graphic presentation can provide a helpful supplement for the classroom. Chapter 10 of the book "Auditing Standards & Procedures" is an excellent piece of writing and a much-needed contribution in this context. There can be seven type of audit reports, and modifications in the audit report may result from many situations. Primary among them are, a deficiency in auditing resulting from a restriction in the scope of auditing, a deficiency in accounting in the form of incorrect financial statements, and an uncertainty concerning future developments. The article proposes and discusses a graphical representation of these aspects to gain better understanding of audit reports.

The time series of consumption is explained as a consequence of expenditure. The quantity theory hypothesis relates the level of consumption in money terms to the nominal quantity of money. This is, of course, a variant of the normal quantity theory where the level of money income is determined by the amount of money. By subtracting investment from the dependent variable, one makes the quantity theory formulation directly comparable to its Keynesian rival. Money exerts its influence on consumption directly or via elements of expenditure such as investment. With a different definition of autonomous expenditure, we get rather different results for United Kingdom data. Specifically, the monetary hypothesis is more successful for our early period up to the First World War, while the inter-war years are a strongly Keynesian period. After the Second World War, neither model has very high explanatory power, while for the overall period, there is a slightly better fit with expenditure. Exogeneity of Money