外文翻譯--完全公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)時(shí)代的到來(lái) （節(jié)選）

1、<p>　　2200單詞，12500英文字符，3900漢字</p><p>　　本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）</p><p>　　外 文 翻 譯</p><p>　　外文出處 Bank Asset/Liability Management,2009(10):7-8 </p><p>　　外文作者 O

2、rlando Hanselman </p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Full Fair Value Accounting: Its Time Has Come</p><p>　　Executive Summary: It is time to evaluate fair value

3、accounting objectively by returning to the conceptual roots of our modern accounting framework and debunking certain false doctrines. Analyzing the conceptual integrity of fair value compared to historic cost accounting

4、demonstrates the clear superiority of fair value measurement and reporting. True capital adequacy can only be ascertained on a risk-adjusted basis. The starting point for such needed and sound risk-adjustment is reflecti

5、ng chan</p><p>　　Fair value accounting, once a subject relegated for discussion by the green eyeshade and the pocket protector crowd, has moved from accounting cubicles to Main Street and the political power

6、 corridors of America. Much has recently been written about it. Much conversation has been held. The issue has taken on partisan tones with both staunch proponents and determined, well funded opponents raising up their v

7、oices. To sort through this rhetoric it is time to look at fair value accounting objective</p><p>　　Fair value accounting is not a new concept or recent phenomena:</p><p>　　“Asset valuations (fo

8、r financial institutions) were at fair market value. It was not until 1938 that the Federal Reserve forced the other regulators to accede to historic cost accounting for banks’ assets. The 1938…accounting change was made

9、 to encourage new lending and to enable private investors to acquire failed banks’ assets from the federal authorities without immediate write downs of their value.” (Source: “Stress Testing the Banks” by Walker F. Todd,

10、 The Institutional Risk Analyst, Februa</p><p>　　Earnest exploration of fair value accounting began in the early 1980’s, long before it became a force recognized by Main Street and Washington. Elements of fa

11、ir value accounting slowly entered into generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) as promulgated by the U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”). Lower-of-cost or market accounting became an accepted pr

12、actice. Write down to market of permanently impaired assets emerged. Investment accounting based upon management’s intent </p><p>　　During the early days of closed back room discussion, fair value accounting

13、 proponents suggested that movement from an historical cost standard to a market based approach would achieve at least five key financial reporting advantages:</p><p>　　Enhance relevance and transparency; &l

14、t;/p><p>　　Reduce rule complexity; </p><p>　　Lower earnings volatility; </p><p>　　Enhance consistency and comparability;</p><p>　　Converge U.S. accounting standards with

15、 emerging international accounting standards.</p><p>　　As U.S. companies compete in an interdependent global economy and battle to costeffectively obtain equity and debt funding, these purported advantages a

16、ssume a greatersense of urgency and magnitude.</p><p>　　Historical cost accounting, where an asset is valued at the time of acquisition basedupon consideration tendered, is thought to have begun in the days

17、of the ancientRomans. Increasingly this longstanding accounting method is viewed as irrelevant andmisleading. Depreciation rules, used to subsequently reduce asset values by one of many standardized and capricious method

18、s to approximate the expiration of usefulness,are understood to be crude estimations which provide only minor conceptual insightr</p><p>　　The complexity of rules eases with elimination of the current patch-

19、work quilt approach. Consistency, comparability and transparency increases with standardization of rules, elimination of management’s intent and adoption of more detailed disclosures including quantitative and qualitativ

20、e insights regarding valuation assumptions and methods. Global convergence would be achieved as international accounting standards have already greatly embraced fair value accounting. The U.S. would simply be ali</p&g

21、t;<p>　　Thus, fair value proponents appear to be correct in their early assessment related to four of the five key reporting advantages to be gleaned. As to the earnings volatility advantage, we simply prefer obje

22、ctive “as is” measurement and reporting of economic reality which is always enhanced by fair value methods. To further build a comprehensive case to support that the time for full fair value accounting has arrived.</p

23、><p>　　Let us first agree on the definition of fair value. It is the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability in a principal or most advantageous market in an orderly t

24、ransaction between market participants on a set measurement date. This fair value at origination is intended to convey the value derived from an open market and it is not intended to represent a fire sale or forced liqui

25、dation price. Such an exchange price economically considers future expected c</p><p>　　Level One: quoted market prices for specific assets or liabilities.</p><p>　　Level Two: use of valuation t

26、echniques and models or quoted market prices for comparable assets or liabilities.</p><p>　　Level Three:unobservable inputs into the reporting entity’s own analysis of underlying economic data to determine p

27、rice in the absence of well established markets or available traded prices for comparable instruments. This level requires significant judgment and greatly expanded disclosures. Longstanding and widely accepted present

28、value and discounting techniques allow for appropriate fair value estimation for financial instruments which lack an advantageous market or suffer from either perman</p><p>　　The definition and methods to de

29、termine fair value are well articulated in SFAS #159.</p><p>　　The foundation to support this accepted fair value definition and determination model must begin with an understanding of fundamental financial

30、reporting objectives. The key to financial reporting is that the presented information is useful in making informed business decisions. Presented information must convey the economic substance and allow for assessment of

31、 the risk-adjusted cash flow prospects related to all transactions. This information must illuminate the reporting entity’s resources, c</p><p>　　To ascertain the decision making utility of fair value compar

32、ed to historical cost accounting we can either simply rely upon the logic of my audit client or we can alternatively choose to analyze the conceptual integrity of the two methods based upon a well defined and longstandin

33、g conceptual accounting framework. This framework,consisting of ten core characteristics, along with my subjective assessment is shown inTable A.</p><p>　　These ten characteristics define the optimal quality

34、 of reported financial information. A “HIGH”assessment indicates that the accounting method strongly achieves this desired characteristic. A “MODERATE”rating conveys a mixed view of success in capturing the essence of th

35、e trait. And finally, a “LOW”evaluation connotes poor reflection of the desired attribute.</p><p>　　Fair value accounting is preferred to historic cost in decision usefulness, relevance,predictive value, fee

36、dback value, timeliness, reliability and representational faithfulness.When confronting a decision to hold or divest of an asset, historical cost plays an inconsequential role. Greater questions assume decision making pr

37、ominence and relevance:</p><p>　　Does the asset have remaining utility?</p><p>　　Can the asset be sold today at a gain or loss?</p><p>　　Will the risk-adjusted cash flow generated b

38、y the asset exceed the costs to maintain and hold the asset?</p><p>　　Am I incurring economic loss or opportunity cost by continuing to hold this asset?</p><p>　　Fair value answers these questio

39、ns. Historic cost accounting does not.</p><p>　　We are also able to form reasonable expectations about the future from fair value. Aloan underwritten in the past with a 5% interest rate while the market rate

40、 for a similar loan with comparable risk and remaining duration is now 7% indicates an expectede conomic loss, an opportunity cost, to continuing to hold the 5% loan. It also communicates that this loan’s market value is

41、 less than the book carrying value on anhistoric cost basis. Future cash flow insights are gleaned from this fair value i</p><p>　　Historic cost accounting modestly outperforms fair value in just two of the

42、ten core characteristics: understandability and verifiability. The understandability advantage is obtained simply by the longstanding common practice and use of historic cost accounting. Historic cost accounting has beco

43、me for many financial statement preparers the comfortable, old pair of shoes. The verifiability advantage is earned by historic cost accounting since the information is certain to be confirmed by several </p><

44、p>　　All this is not, however, to say that fair value accounting lacks understandability or verifiability. The advantage of historic cost in these attributes is nominal. A reportin gentity can elevate fair value’s rati

45、ng in these two traits by careful and thorough transparent disclosure of methods, significant assumptions and judgments used indetermining fair value. With full disclosure, an independent evaluator can focus on the valid

46、ity of the assumptions and judgments underlying the fair value. Ind</p><p>　　Analyzing the conceptual integrity of fair value accounting compared to historic cost demonstrates the fundamental superiority of

47、fair value accounting. This superiority is supported by the sheer numeric advantage of seven of the ten characteristics favoring fair value. It is further defended by my audit client’s confounding situation. It is also b

48、acked by my assessments of the attributes. Fair value accounting is not “LOW”on any characteristic, while historic cost is rated “LOW”in six dimension</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p><p>　　完全

49、公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)時(shí)代的到來(lái)</p><p>　　摘要：通過(guò)回顧我們現(xiàn)代會(huì)計(jì)框架的概念根源，客觀(guān)地計(jì)量公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)的時(shí)代到來(lái)了。通過(guò)分析比較公允價(jià)值概念的完整性與歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)的區(qū)別來(lái)證實(shí)公允價(jià)值測(cè)量與報(bào)告的明顯的優(yōu)越性。真正的資本充足率只有在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)調(diào)節(jié)的基礎(chǔ)上才能被確定。這些需要合理的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)調(diào)節(jié)，出發(fā)點(diǎn)就是能夠反映所有資產(chǎn)和負(fù)債，確定資本經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值在市場(chǎng)價(jià)值的變化。完全公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)和披露對(duì)于現(xiàn)在所有的報(bào)告實(shí)體和資產(chǎn)負(fù)債都是必

50、需的。這種必需性也會(huì)使完全公允價(jià)值基礎(chǔ)成為實(shí)體規(guī)定。歷史成本應(yīng)該適當(dāng)降低不得高于附注中披露的數(shù)值。完全公允價(jià)值使投資者和管理者更加看重長(zhǎng)期的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)調(diào)節(jié)組織的表現(xiàn)和企業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值的最優(yōu)化。這些都宣布著完全公允價(jià)值的時(shí)代到來(lái)了！</p><p>　　完全公允價(jià)值曾經(jīng)一度是工薪階層討論的話(huà)題，現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)由會(huì)計(jì)領(lǐng)域轉(zhuǎn)移到美國(guó)的大街小巷和政界。最近，很多相關(guān)的文章都在發(fā)表。很多相關(guān)的論壇也在舉行。這個(gè)問(wèn)題已經(jīng)使理事單位和那些堅(jiān)定

51、的支持者和手頭有資金的投資者達(dá)成一致并說(shuō)出他們的觀(guān)點(diǎn)。為了整理這些華麗的詞藻，現(xiàn)在是時(shí)候通過(guò)回歸現(xiàn)代會(huì)計(jì)框架的概念根源和揭穿某些被公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)的評(píng)論家支持的假信條來(lái)客觀(guān)地評(píng)價(jià)完全公允價(jià)值了。如果這些分析將被證實(shí)了，那么現(xiàn)在就是完全公允價(jià)值的時(shí)代了。</p><p>　　公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)，它并不是一個(gè)全新的概念或者最近提出的觀(guān)點(diǎn)。</p><p>　　“資產(chǎn)估價(jià)（針對(duì)金融機(jī)構(gòu)）都是在公允的市場(chǎng)價(jià)

52、值上進(jìn)行的。直到1938年，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)才強(qiáng)迫其他的調(diào)整者去贊同銀行資產(chǎn)的歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)。在1938年，沒(méi)有及時(shí)記錄下資產(chǎn)歷史價(jià)值的情況下，賬戶(hù)變更被用來(lái)鼓勵(lì)新的貸款和使私人投資者能從聯(lián)邦當(dāng)局獲得破產(chǎn)銀行的資產(chǎn)。”（來(lái)源：“銀行的壓力測(cè)試”，沃克 托德，機(jī)構(gòu)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分析，2009，2，24）。</p><p>　　早期公允價(jià)值的探究發(fā)生在二十世紀(jì)八十年代初期，不久后，它被大家和華盛頓（政府）所承認(rèn)。由美國(guó)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)（

53、FASB）發(fā)布的公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)理論被慢慢地認(rèn)定為一般公認(rèn)會(huì)計(jì)原則（GAAP）。成本與市價(jià)孰低會(huì)計(jì)成為公認(rèn)的慣例。資產(chǎn)減值市場(chǎng)的出現(xiàn)。投資會(huì)計(jì)以管理者的意圖為基礎(chǔ)被設(shè)置成三種獨(dú)立的投資組合和對(duì)待方法，它們是持有至到期、可供出售資產(chǎn)、交換資產(chǎn)。美國(guó)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則(公告)(SFAS)中的159號(hào)：在其的報(bào)告?zhèn)€體中規(guī)定，可以選擇使用公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)來(lái)計(jì)量特定的金融資產(chǎn)或金融負(fù)債。實(shí)行這些方法的結(jié)果是使得財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的使用者混淆財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的概念也與管理者的意圖

54、不一致。</p><p>　　在早期的封閉式討論期間，公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)建議者，建議從一項(xiàng)歷史成本標(biāo)準(zhǔn)去設(shè)立一個(gè)市場(chǎng)基礎(chǔ)方法。此方法至少有五項(xiàng)財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告發(fā)面的優(yōu)勢(shì)：</p><p><b>　　提高相關(guān)性和透明度</b></p><p><b>　　降低復(fù)雜程度</b></p><p><b>　

55、　降低收入波動(dòng)的影響</b></p><p><b>　　提高一致和可比較性</b></p><p>　　符合新國(guó)際會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)</p><p>　　由于美國(guó)公司是在一種互助的全球經(jīng)濟(jì)中競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的，并且在競(jìng)爭(zhēng)中獲得真正的公允和債務(wù)融資，這些競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)呈現(xiàn)出一種更強(qiáng)的緊迫感和重要性。</p><p>　　歷史性成本

56、會(huì)計(jì)，資產(chǎn)以取得時(shí)的價(jià)值為入賬價(jià)值，這種做法早在古代的古羅馬人就開(kāi)始了。這種長(zhǎng)期存在的會(huì)計(jì)方法現(xiàn)在看來(lái)是不相關(guān)而且起到誤導(dǎo)作用。會(huì)計(jì)折舊準(zhǔn)則規(guī)定資產(chǎn)價(jià)值的減少應(yīng)當(dāng)使用很多標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的和多變的折舊方法直到資產(chǎn)被耗用完畢?；蛘呖梢岳斫獬墒翘峁┑母艑?duì)短暫的時(shí)間的一項(xiàng)資產(chǎn)的潛在和改變價(jià)值的估計(jì)。 1983 年一位審計(jì)客戶(hù)用自己的評(píng)估方法（非GAAP）評(píng)估自己的固定資產(chǎn)價(jià)值，并且指出這種理論是不符合邏輯的。首先這位審計(jì)客戶(hù)嚴(yán)格的記錄了取得固定資產(chǎn)的時(shí)

57、候價(jià)值，然后他使用一系列適當(dāng)?shù)姆椒p少固定資產(chǎn)的價(jià)值，直到完全折舊或者凈資產(chǎn)為零的這么一個(gè)狀態(tài)。在他的觀(guān)點(diǎn)中，他個(gè)人評(píng)估了資產(chǎn)剩余的效用，這種方法確實(shí)是非常有用的。他為資產(chǎn)的現(xiàn)時(shí)價(jià)值評(píng)估提供了一個(gè)堅(jiān)實(shí)的后盾。后來(lái)美國(guó)一般會(huì)計(jì)公認(rèn)原則（GAAP）將他的觀(guān)點(diǎn)寫(xiě)入資產(chǎn)的折舊過(guò)程即資產(chǎn)周期性的損耗直到資產(chǎn)報(bào)廢。當(dāng)我們審計(jì)程序發(fā)現(xiàn)這種非傳統(tǒng)方法時(shí)，我會(huì)見(jiàn)了這位審計(jì)客戶(hù)并討論他的錯(cuò)誤所在。盡管我解釋得確切，但是我的客戶(hù)并沒(méi)有改變他自己的一整套完整邏

58、輯，他不情愿的接受我的觀(guān)點(diǎn)。</p><p>　　最終結(jié)果提出：當(dāng)資產(chǎn)的賬面價(jià)值為零時(shí)，資產(chǎn)還是有使用價(jià)值。我的客戶(hù)明智的提出了他的觀(guān)點(diǎn)，我的客戶(hù)也強(qiáng)調(diào)了財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告能增加相關(guān)性和透明度優(yōu)點(diǎn)：即資產(chǎn)的賬面價(jià)值余額應(yīng)當(dāng)最準(zhǔn)確的表現(xiàn)資產(chǎn)的內(nèi)在價(jià)值和內(nèi)在效用</p><p>　　這種綜合的方法消除實(shí)時(shí)更新的復(fù)雜性。同時(shí)，這種方法也增加了準(zhǔn)則的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化和相關(guān)信息的透明度：對(duì)于管理者的意圖以及評(píng)估方法在內(nèi)

59、的定性和定量見(jiàn)解應(yīng)當(dāng)通過(guò)財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告披露更詳細(xì)的披露。全球關(guān)注點(diǎn)在于國(guó)際會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)將完全提出公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)。美國(guó)與世界其他各國(guó)觀(guān)點(diǎn)排成一致。從公允價(jià)值的角度計(jì)算降低收入的變動(dòng)所帶來(lái)的預(yù)期收益的觀(guān)點(diǎn)是一種容易誤導(dǎo)別人的觀(guān)點(diǎn)。經(jīng)過(guò)認(rèn)真實(shí)考這種觀(guān)點(diǎn)被否定。健全的會(huì)計(jì)制度和會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)能夠合理的解釋所有經(jīng)濟(jì)業(yè)務(wù)的基礎(chǔ)經(jīng)濟(jì)現(xiàn)象?？陀^(guān)的計(jì)量和報(bào)告要求資產(chǎn)計(jì)量達(dá)到“確實(shí)是”而不是“需要是”。事實(shí)上，對(duì)于最近提出的公允價(jià)值能夠增加準(zhǔn)則標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化和相關(guān)信息的透明度的優(yōu)點(diǎn)

60、已經(jīng)成為歷史，因?yàn)閷?zhuān)業(yè)人士和美國(guó)證券交易委員會(huì)都不同意這個(gè)人觀(guān)點(diǎn)。因此對(duì)于經(jīng)濟(jì)波動(dòng)和盈余波動(dòng)的披露只能作為決策的材料。</p><p>　　因此，在公允價(jià)值建議者看來(lái)，原提出的五個(gè)主要財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告優(yōu)勢(shì)中的四個(gè)優(yōu)勢(shì)是正確的。對(duì)于公允價(jià)值能夠降低收入波動(dòng)的影響的優(yōu)勢(shì)，我們僅“按原樣”選擇目標(biāo)測(cè)量和始終被公允價(jià)值方法的經(jīng)濟(jì)現(xiàn)實(shí)的報(bào)告。進(jìn)一步建立一個(gè)全面的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)從而支持完全公允價(jià)值計(jì)算的時(shí)間已經(jīng)到到了</p>&

61、lt;p>　　首先讓我們贊同對(duì)公允價(jià)值的定義。公允價(jià)值的定義指的是一項(xiàng)資產(chǎn)未來(lái)可收回的價(jià)值或者未來(lái)償還一項(xiàng)負(fù)債的價(jià)值。公允價(jià)值從根源上旨在表達(dá)資產(chǎn)從一個(gè)公開(kāi)市場(chǎng)上取得時(shí)候的價(jià)值。公允價(jià)值并不代表一個(gè)商品甩賣(mài)或強(qiáng)迫清算時(shí)候的價(jià)格。這樣的一個(gè)市場(chǎng)交易價(jià)格，它經(jīng)濟(jì)地考慮了未來(lái)預(yù)期的現(xiàn)金流量和所有不確定性冒險(xiǎn)帶來(lái)的現(xiàn)金流量，以及風(fēng)險(xiǎn)溢價(jià)，廉價(jià)因素和市場(chǎng)流動(dòng)性。對(duì)于金融資產(chǎn)和金融負(fù)債的公允價(jià)值計(jì)量存在三種計(jì)量模式：</p>&

62、lt;p>　　第一種：特定的資產(chǎn)或債務(wù)的市價(jià)</p><p>　　第二種：評(píng)估技術(shù)或用類(lèi)似的資產(chǎn)或債務(wù)的市價(jià)代替</p><p>　　第三種：在完善的市場(chǎng)或提供交易工具的價(jià)格可比的情況下，分析報(bào)告主題的基本經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù)，確定一個(gè)投入時(shí)候的價(jià)值。這種模式首先需要眾多判決和非常充分的揭發(fā)。由于市場(chǎng)不活躍或者市場(chǎng)混亂，不管是從當(dāng)前或者長(zhǎng)期的角度考慮，公允價(jià)值模式都會(huì)允許使用相關(guān)的金融工具來(lái)做一

63、個(gè)適當(dāng)估價(jià)。</p><p>　　這種公允價(jià)值的定義或者方法在 SFAS #159 中被清楚地闡明。</p><p>　　支持這種公認(rèn)的公允價(jià)值定義和決策模型的基礎(chǔ)，首先必須從對(duì)財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的理解開(kāi)始。財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的目標(biāo)在于財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告所提供的信息是否有助于決策。財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告提供的信息必須表達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)物質(zhì)而且還要考慮到與所有交易相關(guān)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)調(diào)整的現(xiàn)金流量的評(píng)估。這條信息必須闡明報(bào)告主體的擁有的資源，以及資源的變

64、化。這條極為重要的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)決定了報(bào)告提供信息的有用性。</p><p>　　為了確定公允價(jià)值的決策效用，拿公允價(jià)值與歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)做比較，我們不能簡(jiǎn)單地憑借審計(jì)客戶(hù)的邏輯，我們可以選擇通過(guò)分析一套完整的概念來(lái)定義長(zhǎng)期會(huì)計(jì)框架。這種框架，包含十種核心特征與我主觀(guān)的評(píng)估一起記錄在A(yíng)篇中。</p><p>　　這十種特征定義了財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的金融信息的最高質(zhì)量水平。對(duì)于“高等”評(píng)估指標(biāo)會(huì)計(jì)方法很難達(dá)到這種特

65、征?！爸械取北磉_(dá)了成功抓住本質(zhì)方面的一個(gè)綜合見(jiàn)解。最后，一次“低等”評(píng)估意味著所需信息的基本反映。</p><p>　　與歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)相比公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)更具有決策有用性、相關(guān)性、預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值、反饋價(jià)值，可靠性。當(dāng)需要做出保留一項(xiàng)資產(chǎn)或者處置一項(xiàng)資產(chǎn)的決定時(shí)，歷史成本不起作用。問(wèn)題的關(guān)鍵在于突出決策有用性和相關(guān)性：</p><p><b>　　資產(chǎn)有無(wú)剩余價(jià)值？</b><

66、;/p><p>　　資產(chǎn)處置的收益或者虧損能馬上現(xiàn)實(shí)嗎？</p><p>　　風(fēng)險(xiǎn)調(diào)整所產(chǎn)生的現(xiàn)金流量是否會(huì)超過(guò)資產(chǎn)的成本或者資產(chǎn)重置成本？</p><p>　　繼續(xù)持有這項(xiàng)資產(chǎn)是否會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)損失或者產(chǎn)生機(jī)會(huì)成本？</p><p>　　公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)能夠回答這些問(wèn)題，但歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)無(wú)法回答。</p><p>　　我們也能對(duì)公

67、允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)的未來(lái)做出合理預(yù)期。以前5%的貸款利率對(duì)于現(xiàn)有市場(chǎng)想類(lèi)似風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的一筆貸款的市場(chǎng)價(jià)格仍然是 7%。它表示一種預(yù)期的經(jīng)濟(jì)損失或者一項(xiàng)機(jī)會(huì)成本。如果繼續(xù)保持 5% 的貸款，這筆貸款的市場(chǎng)價(jià)值少于歷史成本下的賬面價(jià)值。未來(lái)現(xiàn)金流量表明了收集了的公允價(jià)值信息：債務(wù)人提前清償債務(wù)的可能性現(xiàn)在降低了。過(guò)去已經(jīng)理解了貸款的全部經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值。隨后我們知道，市場(chǎng)形式的改變降低了我們預(yù)期的經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值，測(cè)量表明：公允價(jià)值是動(dòng)態(tài)更新的價(jià)值，反應(yīng)的是當(dāng)前價(jià)值而不

68、是歷史價(jià)值。因此在定義中的十個(gè)特征中的七個(gè)特征都表明公允價(jià)值更有效。</p><p>　　十條核心特征中僅僅二個(gè)核心特征，說(shuō)明了歷史成本比公允價(jià)值更加謹(jǐn)慎。對(duì)于優(yōu)勢(shì)的理解，它僅僅簡(jiǎn)單的被表示為長(zhǎng)期的實(shí)踐和歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)的運(yùn)用。因此對(duì)很多財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告編制人而言，很多人選擇了歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)作為編制標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)優(yōu)勢(shì)在于資產(chǎn)的購(gòu)買(mǎi)價(jià)格是固定的，任何后續(xù)調(diào)制都符合折舊的原則。</p><p>　　然而

69、，并不完全是這樣，因?yàn)楣蕛r(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)缺少理解性或可證實(shí)性，所以歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)的優(yōu)勢(shì)只是表面上的。然而通過(guò)充分披露和對(duì)公允價(jià)值的重大決策，會(huì)計(jì)報(bào)告的主體能夠提高對(duì)會(huì)計(jì)可理解性和可證實(shí)性。通過(guò)充分披露，一個(gè)未來(lái)決策者可重點(diǎn)關(guān)注公允價(jià)值的假設(shè)和判斷的有用性。確實(shí)，公允價(jià)值的計(jì)算具有靈活性，能更恰當(dāng)?shù)乇磉_(dá)當(dāng)前的經(jīng)濟(jì)現(xiàn)實(shí)，這是公允價(jià)值的最重大優(yōu)點(diǎn)之一。因此我相信，我的審計(jì)客戶(hù)會(huì)更喜歡使用這些有用的經(jīng)濟(jì)信息，而不是那些報(bào)告中很容易獲得且未經(jīng)證實(shí)的數(shù)據(jù)。