Historical PerspectiveThe rapidly i

Historical Perspective
The rapidly increasing number of pension plans adopted by companies immediately after World War II caused accountants to question the treatment of accounting for pension costs. A major concern was that many new pension plans gave employees credit for their years of service before the plan was adopted. The point at issue was the most appropriate treatment of costs associated with this past service. In Accounting Research Bulletin No. 47, “Accounting for Costs of Pension Plans” (superseded), the Committee on Accounting Procedure expressed its preference that costs based on current and future service be systematically accrued during the expected period of active service of the covered employees and that costs based on past services be charged off over some reasonable period. The allocation of past service cost was to be made on a systematic and rational basis and was not to cause distortion of the operating results in any one year.
Later, the Accounting Principles Board (APB) observed that despite the recommendations of ARB No. 47, accounting for the cost of pension plans was inconsistent from year to year, both among companies and within a single company. Sometimes the cost charged to operations was equal to the amount paid into the fund during a given year; at other times, no actual funding occurred. Moreover, the amortization of past service cost ranged up to 40 years.
Accounting inconsistencies and the growing importance of pension plan costs prompted the APB to authorize Accounting Research Study No. 8, “Accounting for the Cost of Pension Plans.” This study was published in 1965, and, after careful examination of its recommendations, the APB issued Opinion No. 8, “Accounting for the Cost of Pension Plans” (superseded), in 1966. Because the conclusions of the APB were generally similar to those of the research study, we review only the opinion here.
APB Opinion No. 8
APB Opinion No. 8 identified basic problems associated with accounting for the cost of DBPPs as (1) measuring the total amount of costs associated with a pen- sion plan, (2) allocating the total pension costs to the proper accounting periods, (3) providing the cash to fund the pension plan, and (4) disclosing the significant aspects of the pension plan on the financial statements.
The APB’s conclusions concerning these questions were based to a large extent on two basic beliefs or assumptions. First, the Board believed that most companies will continue the benefits called for in a pension plan even if the plan is not fully funded year to year. Therefore the cost should be recognized annually whether or not the plan is funded. Second, the Board adopted the view that the cost of all past service should be charged against income after the adoption or amendment of a plan and that no portion of such cost should be charged directly to retainedearn- ings. In APB Opinion No. 8, several issues were addressed, and various terms were introduced. In the following paragraphs we examine these issues and terms as originally defined by the APB. However, it should be noted that subsequent pro- nouncements have modified these definitions and/or changed the terminology.
Normal Cost
The current expense provision of pension cost was termed normal cost in APB Opinion No. 8. This was the amount required to be expensed each year, based on
(Schroeder 490)
Schroeder, Richard G., Myrtle Clark, Jack Cathey. Financial Accounting Theory and Analysis: Text and Cases, 11th Edition. Wiley, 2013-11-04. VitalBook file.
ฉันรักแปล

ผลลัพธ์ (แอฟริกา) 1:

Historiese perspektief
Die vinnig toenemende aantal Pension deur maatskappye onmiddellik na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog aangeneem planne veroorsaak Rekenmeesters bevraagteken die Behandeling van rekeningkunde vir Pension koste. 'N groot bekommernis was dat baie nuwe pensioen planne Het werknemers Krediet vir hul jaar van diens voor die Plan was. aangeneem. Die punt aan die orde was die mees gepaste behandeling van die koste wat verband hou met die afgelope diens. In Rekeningkunde Navorsing Bulletin No. 47, "Rekeningkunde vir die koste van pensioen planne" (vervang), die Komitee oor Rekeningkunde Prosedure uitgespreek voorkeur dat die koste gebaseer is. op die huidige en toekomstige diens stelselmatig toegeval gedurende die verwagte tydperk van aktiewe diens van die gedek werknemers en dat die koste gebaseer op verstreke dienste gehef af oor 'n paar redelike tydperk. Die toekenning van die verlede diens koste was gemaak op 'n sistematiese en rasionele basis. en is nie om die vervorming van die bedryfsresultate in enige jaar veroorsaak.
Later, die rekeningkundige beginsels Board (APB) waargeneem dat die aanbevelings van ARB No. 47 Ten spyte van, rekeningkunde vir die koste van die planne strydig was van jaar tot jaar Pension, beide. . onder maatskappye en binne 'n enkele maatskappy Soms is die koste wat teen bedrywighede was gelyk aan die in die fonds gestort gedurende 'n gegewe jaar; ander kere nie, geen werklike befondsing plaasgevind Verder het die amortisasie van vorige diens koste gewissel tot 40 jaar.. .
Rekeningkunde teenstrydighede en die belangrikheid van die groeiende Pension Plan koste daartoe gelei dat die APB te magtig Rekeningkunde Studie No. 8, "Rekeningkunde vir die koste van pensioen planne." Dit was studie gepubliseer in die 1965, en na deeglike ondersoek van die aanbevelings, die. APB Kennisgewing No. 8 uitgereik, "Rekeningkunde vir die koste van pensioen planne" (vervang), in 1966. Omdat die gevolgtrekkings van die APB was oor die algemeen soortgelyk aan dié van die navorsingstudie ons hersien eers die advies hier.
APB Kennisgewing No. 8
APB Kennisgewing No. 8 Basiese probleme wat geïdentifiseer is wat verband hou met rekeningkunde vir die koste van die DBPPs as (1) meet die totale bedrag van die koste wat verband hou met 'n pen ging Plan, (2) die toewysing van die totale koste van die Pensioenfonds behoorlike rekeningkundige periodes, (. 3) die verskaffing van die kontant aan die Pension Plan-fonds, en (4) Onthul die belangrikste aspekte van die Pension Plan op die finansiële state.
Die APB se Gevolgtrekkings Oor hierdie vrae is gebaseer op 'n groot mate op twee basiese oortuigings of aannames. Eerstens, die. raad het geglo dat die meeste maatskappye die voordele genoem in 'n pensioen plan, selfs as die plan is nie ten volle befonds jaar tot jaar. Daarom is die koste moet jaarliks ​​of die plan is befonds erken sal voortgaan. Tweedens, die raad het die siening dat. die koste van alle vorige diens moet gehef word teen inkomste na die aanneming of wysiging van 'n plan en dat geen gedeelte van sodanige koste moet direk gehef derings retainedearn-. In APB Kennisgewing No. 8, verskeie kwessies aangespreek word, en verskillende terme. bekendgestel. In die volgende paragrawe ondersoek ons hierdie kwessies en terme soos gedefinieer deur Oorspronklik die APB. Maar dit moet kennis geneem word dat hierdie definisies Gewysig Daaropvolgende pro-Nouncements en / of verander die terminologie.
Normale Koste
Die huidige voorsiening van Pension Expense. normale koste is genoem APB Kennisgewing No. 8. Dit was koste in die vereiste elke jaar 'n uitgawe, gebaseer op bedrag
(Schroeder 490)
Schroeder, Richard G., Myrtle Clark, Jack Cathey Finansiële Rekeningkunde teorie en analise. Teks en gevalle. , 11de uitgawe. Wiley, 2013/11/04. VitalBook lêer.
Ek is lief vir die vertaling.