Abstract ABSTRACT: Previous studies analyzing the publication rates of various accounting faculties concentrated upon only four journals, two of which were primarily academic. This study examines publications in 12 journals, representing the much broader audience addressed by accounting authors. The 25 schools with the largest number of publications are listed both on a total publications basis and on the basis of average output per faculty member. The concentration of effort by some schools on particular segments of the audience is highlighted.
Abstract The accounting profession and accounting education have increasingly become more specialized, and necessarily so. The field is too large and the material too complex for accountants to be true experts in every area. The operations research area is perhaps analogous to the area of federal income taxes. Each accountant must have a certain minimum knowledge about taxes, but people need not know all of intricacies of tax law. The first big problem to be overcome is fear of tackling the area at all. As indicated in the allegory, the two indispensable aids in accomplishing this end are an understanding of college algebra, and an understanding of elementary statistics. To become a real expert in linear programming would require a commitment of time and effort which is probably not justified, but to become thoroughly conversant in it and comfortable about it, is not such a big task, and will provide with a solid springboard for tackling the rest of the quantitative field. It seems that this approach is better than starting out with a survey of the entire operations research/quantitative methods field on a general level.
Abstract The legal concept of realization has developed gradually over a period of about eighty years, and even today is not a completely static idea. It does, however, occupy a place of importance in law as an integral part of the legal concept of income. No income is deemed to arise until "realization" has taken place. The development of this concept may be traced back to the days when income was regarded as the difference in the value of net worth between two points of time. Any increase or decrease in the value of assets between these two points of time thus affected the net income figure. The break away from this point of view came in 1861, at the start of the Civil War, when the federal government passed an income tax law which defined income as the excess of cash receipts over cash payments. Thus a new theory of income computation was established, and with it a theory of realization. Income was conceived of as a "net" figure, which required the evidence of cash receipts. This point of view prevailed throughout the administration of the Civil War tax laws up to 1871. From 1872 to 1909 there was no federal income tax law in effect. Finally in 1909 a federal excise tax based on income was passed. The same concept of income that had prevailed from 1861 to 1871 was embodied in that law. The excess of cash receipts over cash payments was the measure of income. In ensuing years the strict cash requirement was modified. The concept of "cash or its equivalent" came into being, and was followed by the concept of "the completed transaction." Thus, from the requirement that cash alone must be the evidence of realization, it became generally accepted that a valid account receivable was sufficient. The sale became the test of realization for the majority of situations. About 1913, the courts began to express a new concept of income. They began to conceive of income as the "gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined."
Abstract Many accounting textbooks fail to analyze completely the causes of a change in gross profit. Typically, any change is first divided into the change in sales and the change in cost of sales. Each of these is in turn split into the change due to volume and the change due to unit prices or cost. This last breakdown is pictured as clear cut, and as easily determinable. Actually, the split between volume and price, or between volume and cost is not so easily determined. A portion of the change may be due to a combination of these factors, which are impossible to separate. The failure to point this out to students, especially to good students, leaves them confused on the whole problem. They fail to see the logic of the textbook presentation, and understandably so. It is a practical short-cut which ignores the realities of the situation, and departs in a degree from a purely logical basis. It is not intended here that the traditional way is wrong from a practical analysis viewpoint. It is contended, however, that an effort should be made to show the student what the realities of the situation are, and why the practical approach is followed.
Abstract In addition to the criteria set forth above, additional sets could be given for the realization of a capital contribution, a capital withdrawal, an investment, a liability liquidation, and a loan. It is felt, however, that those presented illustrate adequately the type of criteria currently used in practice. There are, of course, some instances where they are not strictly followed. The criteria are not thereby discredited, however, they apply in the vast majority of situations, and the exceptions perhaps point to inconsistencies in accounting theory. It should be understood that the writer does not advocate that these criteria necessarily should be followed. They are merely those which seem currently to be in effect. The criteria presented embody the factors of measurability and permanence, and serve as guides to the accountant in determining if a change in an asset or liability is sufficiently definite and objective to warrant recognition in the accounts. It should perhaps be pointed out here that the sale and the purchase are often the signal to the accountant that certain criteria have been met. In the normal situation, the sale is the signal that revenue has been realized and the purchase is the signal that a cost has been realized. They merely serve as prime facie evidence, however, that specific criteria have been met. It can be seen that the judgment of the accountant plays an important part in all these criteria. He must reach conclusions in each case as to the degree of permanence and objectivity present. His decision, one way or the other, will determine whether or not a particular item is to be considered realized.
Abstract This article explores the business entity concept of the 1964 Concepts and Standards Research Committee of the American Accounting Association and its significance to accounting. The committee's study of the business entity concept has caused it to depart significantly from the concise statement of the concept contained in the 1957 Revision. The committee believes that in referring to concepts underlying the conventions of accounting the use of the term business is inappropriately restrictive. The committee suggests that, in accounting, the term entity concept be used. In accounting the entity with which one is concerned may be defined as an area of economic interest to a particular individual or group. The boundaries of such an economic entity are identifiable by determining the interested individual or group, and by determining the nature of that individual's or that group's interest. An economic entity encompasses the activities, events, and utilization of resources that affect the interest of the individual or group. Simply stated, the committee advocates a user-oriented approach in defining an entity. That is, accounting reports about entities are developed to meet the needs of particular individuals or groups.