Magisteruppsats, ht -09 IFRS för små och medelstora ...lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1585147/file/  · 2 Sammanfattning Titel: IFRS för små och medelstora företag som underlag för K3 regelverket – en studie på avskrivningsområdet Seminariedatum: 2010-01-26

Embed Size (px)

Text of Magisteruppsats, ht -09 IFRS för små och medelstora...

  • Fretagsekonomiska institutionen Magisteruppsats Januari 2010 IFRS fr sm och medelstora fretag som underlag

    fr K3 regelverket en studie p avskrivningsomrdet

    Frfattare Handledare Karl Bohlin Kristina Artsberg Maja Clementson

  • 2

    Sammanfattning Titel: IFRS fr sm och medelstora fretag som underlag fr K3

    regelverket en studie p avskrivningsomrdet Seminariedatum: 2010-01-26 mne/kurs: FEKP01 Examensarbete magisterniv, 15pong Frfattare: Karl Bohlin, Maja Clementson Handledare: Kristina Artsberg Fem nyckelord: Avskrivning, IFRS for SMEs, K3, komponentavskrivning,

    normbildning Syfte: Syftet med denna uppsats r att delta i den allmnna

    debatten och bidra i normbildningen. Studien avser att underska lmpligheten fr IFRS for SMEs som underlag fr K3 regelverket. Detta genom att tillfrga revisorer om vad de tycker i specifika jmfrelser mellan IFRS for SMEs och RL, samt de normer som ger rd om hur denna lag ska tolkas. Komponentavskrivningar och omprvning av restvrde, nyttjandeperiod och avskrivningsmetod r de problem som studien behandlar.

    Metod: Med ett deduktivt angreppsstt grs en kvantitativ

    underskning i form av en webbenkt. Enkten skickas till experter inom redovisningsomrdet. Den analyseras med hjlp av den litteraturgenomgng som presenterats.

    Teoretiska perspektiv: Det teoretiska perspektivet har sin utgngspunkt i tidigare

    forskning inom normbildning. Vidare utgngspunkt r IFRS for SMEs och K-projektet.

    Empiri: Empirin bestr av enktunderskningen. Den tidigare

    forskningen har anvnts fr att arbeta fram enktfrgorna. Respondenterna har utgjorts av godknda och auktoriserade revisorer.

    Slutsats: Studiens slutsats r att IFRS for SMEs r ett lmpligt

    regelverk fr BFN att ta efter i de frgor som studien behandlar. Respondenternas svar verensstmmer vl med frhllandet i IFRS for SMEs vad gller komponentavskrivningar samt omprvning av restvrde, nyttjandeperiod och avskrivningsmetod.

  • 3

    Abstract Title: IFRS for small and medium-sized entities as the

    foundation for K3 regulation a study in the depreciation area

    Seminar date: 2010-01-26 Course: Degree project/master thesis in accounting, 15 credits Authors: Karl Bohlin, Maja Clementson Advisor: Kristina Artsberg Five key words: Depreciation, IFRS for SMEs, K3, component

    depreciation, standard setting Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to participate in the public

    debate and make a contribution to the standard setting. The study aims to examine the suitability of having IFRS for SMEs as the foundation for K3 regulation. By asking accountants for their opinions on specific comparisons between IFRS for SMEs and RL, and the norms that contribute with advise of how the law should be interpreted. The problems, which the study deals with, are component depreciation and reappraisal of residual value, utilized period, and method of depreciation.

    Methodology: With a deductive approach, a quantitative investigation in

    the shape of a web survey is conducted. The survey is sent to experts within the area of accounting. It is analyzed by using the presented literature run-through.

    Theoretical perspective: The theoretical perspective has its starting point in

    previous research in standard setting. Additional starting points are IFRS for SMEs and the K-project.

    Empirical foundation: The empirical foundation consists of the questionnaire

    survey. The previous research is used to develop the questions for the questionnaire. The respondents are accountants and chartered public accountants.

    Conclusion: The study concludes that IFRS for SMEs would be a

    suitable regulation for BFN in the area, which the study treats. The respondents answers correspond well with IFRS for SMEs when it comes to component depreciation and reappraisal of residual value, utilized period and method of depreciation.

  • 4

    Frkortningar AcSEC Accounting Standards Executive Committee ASB Accounting Standards Board BFL Bokfringslagen BFN Bokfringsnmnden BFNAR Bokfringsnmndens allmnna rd CIG Coalition and Influence Group EAA FRSC European Accounting Associations

    Financial Reporting Standards Committee EEC European Economic Community ECOSOC Economic and Social Council ED Exposure draft ETDG Economic Theory of Democracy Group FAR Freningen Auktoriserade Revisorer FASB Financial Accounting Standards Board FEE Fdration des Experts Comptables

    Europens FI Finansinspektionen GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Principles GAAS Generally Accepted Auditing Standards IASB International Accounting Standards Board IAS International Accounting Standards IASC International Accounting Standards

    Committe IFAC International Federation of Accountants IFRS International Financial Reporting Standards IFRS for SMEs International Financial Reporting Standards

    for Small and Medium-sized Entities IOSCO International Organization of Securities

    Commissions ISAR International Standards of Accounting and

    Reporting K-projekt Kategori projekt K1-K4 Kategori 1-4 K2-B K2 rsbokslut K2-R K2 rsredovisning NBK Nringslivets Brskommitt PATG Positive Accounting Theory Group RR Redovisningsrdet SEC Securities and Exchange Commission SFF Sveriges Finansanalytikers Frening SME Small and Medium-sized Entities SOP Statement Of Positions TFV True and Fair View WG The IASB Working Group on Accounting

    Standards for SME RL rsredovisningslagen

  • 5

    Innehllsfrteckning 1. INLEDNING.................................................................................................................................7

    1.1 BAKGRUND ............................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 PROBLEMATISERING/PROBLEMDISKUSSION ................................................................................ 9 1.3 SYFTE..................................................................................................................................... 11 1.4 AVGRNSNING ........................................................................................................................ 12 1.5 DISPOSITION ........................................................................................................................... 12

    2. METOD ...................................................................................................................................... 14 2.1 ANGREPPSSTT ....................................................................................................................... 14 2.2 KVANTITATIV METOD .............................................................................................................. 14 2.3 TILLVGAGNGSSTT............................................................................................................. 15 2.4 ENKTER ................................................................................................................................ 15

    2.4.1 Urval av respondenter..................................................................................................... 17 2.4.2 Urval av frgor............................................................................................................... 18 2.4.3 Mjliga orsaker till fel i underskningen ......................................................................... 18

    2.5 KLLKRITIK............................................................................................................................ 19 2.6 SAMMANFATTNING ................................................................................................................. 19

    3. LITTERATURGENOMGNG.................................................................................................. 21 3.1 NORMBILDNING ...................................................................................................................... 21

    3.1.1 Modeller inom normbildning........................................................................................... 23 3.2 SVENSKA STANDARDSTTARE ................................................................................................. 26 3.3 INTERNATIONELLA STANDARDSTTARE ................................................................................... 28 3.4 BFN OCH GOD REDOVISNINGSSED ............................................................................................ 30 3.5 K-PROJEKTET .......................................................................................................................... 31 3.6 POLITISK PVERKAN ............................................................................................................... 32

    3.6.1 Redovisningens aktrer och deras inflytande ................................................................... 35 3.7 HARMONISERING..................................................................................................................... 36 3.8 REGELBASERAT VS. PRINCIPBASERAT REGELVERK ................................................................... 38 3.9 IFRS FOR SMES...................................................................................................................... 39 3.10 FR- OCH NACKDELAR MED DIFFERENTIERAD REDOVISNING ................................................... 41

    3.10.1 Argument fr och emot differentierad finansiell rapportering......................................... 41 3.11 SKILLNADER OCH LIKHETER MELLAN STORA OCH SM FRETAG ............................................. 42

    3.11.1 Skillnader ...............................................................................