Difference between Fed and ECB
The Fed's mandate is "to promote sustainable growth, high levels of employment, stability of prices to help preserve the purchasing power of the dollar and moderate long-term interest rates." The ECB has no mandate to promote high levels of employment. The result is very real with 29 million unemployed in Europe.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
A negative interest rate is impossible under CMUCPP in terms of the Daily CPI.
Friday, 15 February 2013
EMU countries are dollarized in terms of the Euro (Deutsche Mark)
EMU countries are dollarized in terms of the Euro (Deutsche Mark)
Dollarized countries have no independent monetary policies. EMU countries have no independent monetary policies. Their Central Banks have no autonomous monetary policy capability, the same as in dollarized countries like Zimbabwe, Equador and Panama.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Dollarized countries have no independent monetary policies. EMU countries have no independent monetary policies. Their Central Banks have no autonomous monetary policy capability, the same as in dollarized countries like Zimbabwe, Equador and Panama.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Wednesday, 13 February 2013
Unlimited credit for PIGS
America and Japan successfully use the economic policy of unlimited credit in their economies: creating inflation in the case of Japan and quantitive easing in the case of the USA. Germany used the policy of unlimited credit very successfully in the case of East Germany after unification, but refuses to agree to the ECB using it in the case of Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain.
Europe uses the economically destructive policy of austerity in Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain (PIGS).
Inflation means that where the inflation is created, i.e., where the unlimited credit or free money is injected in the economy the country receives unlimited credit at no cost while the rest of the economy (consumers) pays for it in a slight increase in prices over a single year.
The ECB should supply PIGS with unlimited credit and consumers in the European Monetary Union would pay for it in a sligth increase in prices in every transaction over a single year. This would eliminate the neccessity for disastrous bail-outs at punitive payback rates that could stretch over a number of years.
When PIGS are economically sound again, the ECB would stop the unlimited credit.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Europe uses the economically destructive policy of austerity in Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain (PIGS).
Inflation means that where the inflation is created, i.e., where the unlimited credit or free money is injected in the economy the country receives unlimited credit at no cost while the rest of the economy (consumers) pays for it in a slight increase in prices over a single year.
The ECB should supply PIGS with unlimited credit and consumers in the European Monetary Union would pay for it in a sligth increase in prices in every transaction over a single year. This would eliminate the neccessity for disastrous bail-outs at punitive payback rates that could stretch over a number of years.
When PIGS are economically sound again, the ECB would stop the unlimited credit.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Thursday, 31 January 2013
Objectives of accounting / general purpose financial reporting
Objectives of accounting / general purpose financial reporting
Updated on 14 January 2014
The objectives of general purpose financial reporting / accounting are
1. "To provide financial information about the reporting entity that is useful to existing and potential investors, lenders and other creditors in making decisions about providing resources to the entity.” Conceptual Framework
and
2. To legalise measurement bases that result in automatic capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power in terms of an index that follows all (at least DAILY) changes in the general price level for an indefinite period of time in entities that at least break even in real value - ceteris paribus - during low inflation, high inflation, hyperinflation and deflation.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Updated on 14 January 2014
The objectives of general purpose financial reporting / accounting are
1. "To provide financial information about the reporting entity that is useful to existing and potential investors, lenders and other creditors in making decisions about providing resources to the entity.” Conceptual Framework
and
2. To legalise measurement bases that result in automatic capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power in terms of an index that follows all (at least DAILY) changes in the general price level for an indefinite period of time in entities that at least break even in real value - ceteris paribus - during low inflation, high inflation, hyperinflation and deflation.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Monday, 28 January 2013
How to automatically maintain your compay´s capital (equity) constant in real value
How to automatically maintain your compay´s capital (equity)
constant in real value
Stop the stable
measuring unit assumption (i.e. stop Historical Cost Accounting).
Guidance
1.
Implement
IFRS-authorised Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power in
terms of a Daily Index.
2.
Keep
no monetary item overnight unless it is inflation-indexed on a daily basis
during inflation.
3.
Your
General Conditions of Sale (Contracts) has to state that outstanding
receivables and payables will be measured in units of constant purchasing power on a
daily basis in terms of a Daily Index from the date of sale (contract) till the
date of settlement.
Do not ask
the IASB for guidance in this issue. They do not understand IFRS-authorised
CMCUPP. Contact me for guidance at realvalueaccounting[at]yahoo.com.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
How to automatically stabilise your economy
How to automatically stabilise your economy
Stop the stable
measuring unit assumption (i.e. stop Historical Cost Accounting).
Guidance
1. Implement IFRS-authorised Capital
Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power in terms of a Daily Index.
2. Inflation-index all monetary items
daily in terms of a Daily Index with all money inside the banking system.
3. The Central Bank is required to pay
to (during inflation) or receive from (during deflation) commercial banks
interest in terms of the Daily Index on the total overnight cash balances in
commercial banks.
Do not ask
the IASB for guidance in this issue. They do not understand IFRS-authorised
CMCUPP. Contact me for guidance at realvalueaccounting[at]yahoo.com.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Friday, 25 January 2013
IASB incapable of expressing a view about IAS 29 in Zimbabwe
According to Michael Stewart, Director of Implementation Activities at the IASB:
'I made a comment that until such time as the IASB decides that IAS 29 should be either amended or withdrawn, it is the appropriate standard to apply when the functional currency of an entity is the currency of a hyperinflationary economy (as defined in that standard). I think this is very different from the statement that you have attributed to me that "the IASB is satisfied with the implementation of IAS 29 during 8 years in Zimbabwe's hyperinflationary economy". The IASB has not conducted a review of the implementation of IAS 29 during 8 years in Zimbabwe's hyperinflationary economy so it is not possible for the IASB to express such a view without having undertaken such a review.'
Personal communication, 2013
Most accountants in the world, except the members of the IASB according to Michael Stewart as well as himself, can express the view that the implementation of IAS 29 had no positive effect in Zimbabwe.
Only the IASB and Michael Stewart need a review.
Most other interested parties can recognise what is obvious in history.
Nicolaas Smith
Opinions on this blog expressed by me are my personal opinions.
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
IASB clueless about financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power
IASB clueless about financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power
Updated 12-01-2014
The IASB does not understand the difference between
1. Financial statements measured in constant purchasing power units (Agenda Paper 20)
and
2. Financial statements prepared under the concept of financial capital maintenance in constant purchasing power units. (Paper Topic)
The proofs are in the links.
(The IASB removed the title of Agenda Paper 20 which hides (in order to hide?) the fact that they had the two different descriptions for the same item: the one in the Title of Agenda Paper 20 on the Schedule for the 22 - 23 January 2013 IFRS Interpretations Committee meeting and the other in the actual Paper Topic in the actual Agenda Paper 20 pdf file.)
The IASB does not understand that financial statements prepared under the CAPITAL MAINTENANCE CONCEPT of finacial capital maintenance in constant purchasing power units is very, very, very different from year end financial statements simply measured (restated after year-end) in constant purchasing power units. The IASB is as blind as a bat about capital maintenance: absolutely clueless. However, I have come to realise that this is simply a reflection of the general view in most (not all - see CPA Australia and the Institute of Chartered Accountants Australia´s view that the IASB has "a lack of understanding about the fundamental role a capital maintenance concept has within the accounting framework") of the accounting profession about the financial capital maintenance concept.
Agenda Paper 20 contains 16 unresolved errors / problems / disagreements with the submitter (me).
As can be seen from the links, the IASB uses the two different descriptions of two different concepts for (the same) Agenda Paper 20.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Updated 12-01-2014
Updated 12-01-2014
The IASB does not understand the difference between
1. Financial statements measured in constant purchasing power units (Agenda Paper 20)
and
2. Financial statements prepared under the concept of financial capital maintenance in constant purchasing power units. (Paper Topic)
The proofs are in the links.
(The IASB removed the title of Agenda Paper 20 which hides (in order to hide?) the fact that they had the two different descriptions for the same item: the one in the Title of Agenda Paper 20 on the Schedule for the 22 - 23 January 2013 IFRS Interpretations Committee meeting and the other in the actual Paper Topic in the actual Agenda Paper 20 pdf file.)
The IASB does not understand that financial statements prepared under the CAPITAL MAINTENANCE CONCEPT of finacial capital maintenance in constant purchasing power units is very, very, very different from year end financial statements simply measured (restated after year-end) in constant purchasing power units. The IASB is as blind as a bat about capital maintenance: absolutely clueless. However, I have come to realise that this is simply a reflection of the general view in most (not all - see CPA Australia and the Institute of Chartered Accountants Australia´s view that the IASB has "a lack of understanding about the fundamental role a capital maintenance concept has within the accounting framework") of the accounting profession about the financial capital maintenance concept.
Agenda Paper 20 contains 16 unresolved errors / problems / disagreements with the submitter (me).
As can be seen from the links, the IASB uses the two different descriptions of two different concepts for (the same) Agenda Paper 20.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Updated 12-01-2014
Thursday, 24 January 2013
The most destructive requirement in IFRS authorised by the very inefficient IASB
The most destructive requirement in IFRS authorised by the very inefficient IASB
The failed
IAS 29, the IASB´s greatest failure to date, affected the Zimbabwe economy very
negatively during hyperinflation. It was implemented during various years in
Zimbabwe´s hyperinflationary economy with no positive effect. The failed IAS 29
had a very negative effect since it encourages and requires the implementation
of the Historical Cost Accounting model during hyperinflation, the most destructive
requirement in IFRS authorised by the very inefficient IASB.
Nicolaas Smith
Opinions on this blog expressed by me are my personal opinions.
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Financial reporting affects the economy
Financial reporting
affects the economy
Accounting
which includes financial reporting affects the economy via the accounting
policies and especially the measurement bases adopted by entities. Accounting records economic activity.
Economic activity is affected by the choice of accounting policies and
measurement bases. Accounting is recording of economic activity. Accounting
policies influence the choice of measurement bases which affects the economy.
The single
most powerful measurement base affecting the economy is the choice of
implementing the stable measuring unit assumption, i.e., choosing Historical Cost
Accounting.
The actual
implementation of the stable measuring unit assumption is not the recording of
economic activity. Implementing the stable measuring unit assumption is a business practice / policy which is
after the event recorded via accounting and financial reporting when the
period-end financial statements are prepared.
Thus
implementing the stable measuring unit assumption is not accounting. It is the
implementation of a business practice. The Conceptual Framework states that the
choice of the measurement bases and the capital maintenance concept chosen,
determines the accounting model.
HCA causes
the cost of inflation and the cost of hyperinflation because it is chosen by
the board of directors as the accounting model to be used by the entity. HCA
requires the implementation of the stable measuring unit assumption in the
measurement of certain items.
HCA
determines the business practice. HCA decides when economic items will be
required to be measured implementing the stable measuring unit assumption.
Thus, HCA
causes the cost of inflation and the cost of hyperinflation, not actual
inflation and actual hyperinflation which are economic processes, not
accounting practices.
Nicolaas Smith
Opinions on this blog expressed by me are my personal opinions.
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Tuesday, 22 January 2013
World Bank response
World Bank response to my unsuccessful request for funding for Sustainable Development without Borders (NGO):
"The research that you propose would indeed be of great interest to countries experiencing high inflation rates."
Jean-Jaques Dethier
Research Manager
Development Economics
World Bank
Nicolaas Smith
Opinions on this blog expressed by me are my personal opinions.
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Monday, 21 January 2013
Venezuela in hyperinflation struggles for food supplies
Venezuela in hyperinflation struggles for food supplies
Nicolaas Smith Opinions on this blog expressed by me are my personal opinions. Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Friday, 18 January 2013
Financial reporting is accounting and it does affect the economy
Financial
reporting is accounting and it does affect the economy
Every
accounting entry eventually is part of the financial reports for the financial
period. To prepare the financial reports in terms of IFRS or US GAAP or
whatever standard at the end of the financial period, an entity´s economic
activities are accounted from the first till the last day of the financial
period. That all ends up finally in the financial report. The measurement bases
used during the reporting period do affect the economy. In principle, it all
boils down to whether you implement the stable measuring unit assumption or
not.
To
be able to prepare the financial reports at the year-end you have to do the
whole financial year’s accounting: from the beginning to the end. So, all of
accounting is part of financial reporting. It is impossible to do the financial
reports without accounting.
David
Mosso stated that accounting is a measurement instrument. He could just as well
have stated financial reporting is a measurement instrument. Financial
reporting includes accounting: all accounting entries during the financial year
and the financial reports at the end of the financial period.
So,
financial reporting does affect the economy.
Nicolaas Smith
Opinions on this blog expressed by me are my personal opinions.
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Thursday, 17 January 2013
Implementation of the failed IAS 29 in Zimbabwe
The implementation
of daily measurement of most non-monetary and some monetary items in units of
constant purchasing power in terms of a daily index based almost entirely on
the daily USD free-market exchange rate during hyperinflation, for example the
Unidade Real de Valor (URV),
in Brazil during 30 years of very high and hyperinflation resulted in a
relative stable non-monetary economy from 1964 to 1994 in that country.
Brazil´s hyperinflation ended in 1994 with the implementation of the Real Plan.
IAS 29 was authorized in 1989.
The above model of
daily measurement in units of constant purchasing power did not happen during the implementation of the failed IAS 29
during hyperinflation in Zimbabwe.
In this respect,
the implementation of the failed IAS 29 Financial Reporting in
Hyperinflationary Economies, had no positive effect on the economy in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe´s economy imploded in 2008.
Under IFRS-authorised Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power in terms of a URV-based Daily Index, Zimbabwe´s economy would not have imploded in 2008. This model would today stabilise Belarus, Venezuela and (I am sorry, President Obama) Iran´s economy.
CMUCPP was authorised in IFRS in the original Framework (1989), Par. 104 (a), now the Conceptual Framework (2010), Par. 4.59 (a) which states:
"Financial capital maintenance can be measured in either nominal monetary units or in units of constant purchasing power."
Under IFRS-authorised Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power in terms of a URV-based Daily Index, Zimbabwe´s economy would not have imploded in 2008. This model would today stabilise Belarus, Venezuela and (I am sorry, President Obama) Iran´s economy.
CMUCPP was authorised in IFRS in the original Framework (1989), Par. 104 (a), now the Conceptual Framework (2010), Par. 4.59 (a) which states:
"Financial capital maintenance can be measured in either nominal monetary units or in units of constant purchasing power."
Nicolaas Smith
Opinions on this blog expressed by me are my personal opinions.
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Tuesday, 15 January 2013
Monday, 14 January 2013
No guidance from the IASB to hyperinflationary countries
No guidance from the IASB to
hyperinflationary countries
The
replacement of the failed IAS 29 was not initially
about the replacement of the failed IAS 29 restatement
model; it was initially
about when – at what level of annual or cumulative inflation – the failed IAS
29 restatement model has to be implemented as stated by the Chairman of the
IASB, Mr Hans Hoogervorst, in the covering letter to the 2011 Agenda
Consultation comment letter request.
The
Argentinean Federation (supported by the Mexican, Chilean and Brazilian
accounting standard-setting authorities) proposed the continued use of the failed
IAS 29 restatement model at
10% annual inflation or at 26% cumulative inflation over three years instead of
at 100% cumulative inflation over three years as required in the failed IAS 29.
They proposed this in their draft IFRS ´X`INFLATION submitted to the IASB in
2010. I support a change from HCA at the above levels of inflation as proposed
by the Argentinean Federation as I set out in my amendment to the Argentinean Federation´s
proposal in which I changed the core principle and the name of the proposal
from IFRS ´X`INFLATION to IFRS
´X`CAPITAL MAINTENANCE IN UNITS OF CONSTANT PURCHASING POWER. In it I
propose the adoption of the IFRS-authorised CMUCPP model instead of the failed
IAS 29 restatement model. I am
totally against the continuance of the failed IAS 29 restatement model which had no
positive effect during its implementation during 8 years in Zimbabwe´s
hyperinflation.
In
my opinion, the future replacement of the failed IAS 29 is only now being researched correctly to determine:
(1)
Whether
it is correct to implement a change in financial reporting at 10% annual
inflation or at 26% cumulative inflation over three years as proposed in the
Argentinean Accounting Federation´s proposal IFRS `X´ INFLATION instead of at
100% cumulative inflation over three years as required in the failed IAS 29 and
(2)
Whether
the failed IAS 29 restatement model should be maintained in the future
replacement of IAS 29 or whether it should be replaced with the IFRS-authorised
Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Puchasing Power in terms of a Daily
Index model as proposed in the amended IFRS
´X`CAPITAL MAINTENANCE IN UNITS OF CONSTANT PURCHASING POWER.
I
do realise that I may also be totally wrong in my assumption that the replacement of the failed IAS 29 now
also includes the analysis of whether or not the failed replacement model
should be replaced with the IFRS-authorised Capital Maintenance in Units of
Constant Purchasing Power model. There is no official statement from the IASB to this effect. The IASB so
far only indicated officially what its Chairman, Mr Hans Hoogervorst, stated in
the 2011 Agenda Consultation comment letter request document: “Inflation accounting (revisions to IAS 29
Financial Reporting in Hyperinflationary Economies)
IAS 29 provides guidance on the
preparation of financial statements in a functional currency that is suffering
from hyperinflation. Concerns have been raised from some countries whose economies
suffer from high inflation, but which are not hyperinflationary. Those concerns
are that the effects of high inflation on an entity’s financial results are not
adequately reflected in IFRS financial statements. A research paper was
prepared on this issue and submitted to the IASB
by the
Federación Argentina de Consejos Profesionales de Ciencias Económicas. A
future project could use this research paper to consider revisions to IAS 29 to
include guidance for entities whose functional currency is that of an economy subject
to high inflation, but not to hyperinflation.”
The
fact that I have sent an amendment to the Argentinean Federation´s proposal to
the IASB in January 2012, does not mean that my proposal to change the core
principle of the Argentinean Federation´s proposal from INFLATION to CAPITAL
MAINTENANCE IN UNITS OF CONSTANT PURCHASING POWER was accepted by the IASB as a
second valid reason for
replacing the failed IAS 29. In my opinion, there seems to be very little
understanding of the benefits of the IFRS-authorised CMUCPP in terms of a Daily
Index model at the IASB.
During
my collaboration with the IASB in my IFRIC agenda request I was informed, I assume
unofficially, “And
with regard to the point on whether the IASB would accept the method written in
the IFRS 'X', I would say that it won't be a short period of time to know if
the IASB decides to use that concept. As you know, currently it is just a
research project and therefore it is reasonable to expect the IASB to take a
time to decide if it wants to add the project to the IASB's agenda. After that,
it will decide what kind of model the IASB should explore.”
However,
there is nothing official
from the IASB regarding researching the future replacement of the failed IAS 29
with the view of replacing the failed restatement
model as required in the failed IAS 29 with the IFRS-authorised CMUCPP
model in terms of a Daily Index as proposed in the amendment IFRS
`X´ CAPITAL MAINTENANCE IN UNITS OF CONSTANT PURCHASING POWER.
The
last indication I had from the IASB was from what Micheal Stewart, the Director
of Implementation Activities at the IASB, very firmly indicated during the
teleconference on 8 January 2013, namely that the IASB is satified with the
implementation of IAS 29 during 8 years
in Zimbabwe´s hyperinflationary economy, because financial reporting has no effect in the economy. This
statement from Michael Stewart is obviously totally wrong. That was his very
firm response when I asked him what the IASB´s response was to the fact that
IAS 29 had no positive effect during 8 years of implementation during
Zimbabwe´s hyperinflation. According to him it is what people do with the
information in financial reports that affects the economy.
View that financial reporting has no
effect in the economy may be widely held at the IASB
In my opinion, the IASB has a very
irresponsible attitude to the fact that the implementation of IFRS-authorised Capital
Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power in terms of a Daily Index in
the current hyperinflationary economies of Belarus, Venezuela and Iran would
stabilise these countries´ economies. In
my opinion, this may be because the view that financial reporting has no effect in the economy may be widely
held at the IASB: it may not be generally accepted or realised (understood) at
the IASB that financial reporting
affects the economy (see Michael Stewart´s very firm indication in this
regard) and that the implementation of CMUCPP in terms of a Daily Index – as
authorised in IFRS in 1989 – would very quickly stabilise the hyperinflationary
economies in Belarus, Venezuela and Iran.
This is only my private opinion: I may be wrong. Maybe
the IASB does realise that CMUCPP in terms of a Daily Index – as authorised in
IFRS in 1989 – would stabilise the above hyperinflationary economies very
quickly and are about the put the replacement of the failed IAS 29 on a fast
track.
On
the other hand, I doubt this very much especially when Michael Stewart indicated
very firmly that financial reporting has no effect in the economy: a totally
wrong – and very worrying - indication. I thus have little hope for guidance
from the IASB for the accountants in the above hyperinflationary countries. An
IFRS requiring CMUCPP in
terms of a Daily Index during hyperinflation – CMUCPP was authorised in IFRS as
an option to HCA in 1989 at
all levels of inflation and deflation, including during hyperinflation - would
stabilise these countries´ economies overnight at no cost. In my opinion, the
IASB does not demonstrate the necessary understanding of the real value
maintaining benefits of CMUCPP in terms of a Daily Index during hyperinflation
to authorise such an IFRS and to provide such guidance. So, in my opinion, concluding from
what I have stated before, the IASB would, most probably, also not be able to sufficiently
understand (similar to what I personally experienced with the two IASB staff members
in my collaboration with them during my IFRIC agenda request) the real value
maintaining benefits of IFRS-authorised Capital Maintenance in Units of
Constant Purchasing Power in terms of a Daily Index, to put the replacement of
the failed IAS 29 on a fast track. In my opinion, Michael Stewart will
certainly not be able to convey the real value maintaining benefits of
IFRS-authorised CMUCPP in terms of a Daily Index to the IASB. In my opinion, he
does not understand those benefits and he would not be able to describe those
benefits in detail nor the reason
why IFRS-authorised CMUCPP in terms of a Daily Index affects the economy very
positively. According to him financial reporting has no effect in the economy: in
my opinion, a totally wrong understanding of financial reporting. That is very unfortunate for the populations
of Belarus, Venezuela and Iran and the populations of all high inflationary
countries in the world economy.
The
benefits of CMUCPP in terms of a daily index was instinctively understood and widely
implemented in Brazil during very high and hyperinflation from 1964 to 1994: it
was widespread. It was also implemented instinctively and widely understood in
Chile from 1967 to 2010 (mostly during low inflation) and in other Latin
American countries: it was widespread in Latin America. Latin American
countries seem to have understood it instinctively and applied it widely during
low inflation, very high and hyperinflation.
The
IASB, at best, could actively assist, like IASB staff actively assisted the
Argentinean Federation in the preparation of their 2010 proposal, the national
accounting standard-setting authorities in the above hyperinflationary
countries to rapidly authorise national accounting standards requiring IFRS-authorised
Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power in terms of a Daily
Index in order to stabilise these countries´economies – before the requirement by the IASB of IFRS-authorised CMUCPP
in the replacement of the failed IAS 29.
With respect to both
(1)
the
preparation of the IFRIC agenda request, namely: to include in IFRIC that “IAS 29 is not required during
hyperinflation when an entity implements CMUCPP because this model is not a HCA
model and only HC and CC financial statements are restated as required in IAS
29”, being directed by Michael Stewart, as well as
(2)
the
future work (as detailed above) on the replacement of the failed IAS 29,
it is important to acknowledge that
it is a fact that financial
reporting affects the economy – and that it is not what Michael Stewart very firmly indicated, namely that
financial reporting has no effect
in the economy.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2012 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Financial reporting affects the economy
Financial reporting affects the
economy
From
the here
it is very clear that financial reporting affects the economy.
According
to Michael Stewart, the Director of Implementation Activities at the
International Accounting Standards Board, financial reporting has no effect in the economy and
that is the reason why the IASB is satisfied with the implementation of IAS 29
during 8 years in Zimbabwe´s hyperinflationary economy with no positive effect.
The
above indication by Michael Stewart is completely wrong.
It
is very strange and very worrying that a senior director at the IASB makes such
an indication which, in my opinion,
indicates no understanding on
the part of Michael Stewart of the effect of financial reporting in the economy.
This was certainly the impression to
me during the teleconference on 8 January 2013: in my opinion, Michael Stewart has no understanding of the effect of financial reporting in the
economy otherwise he would have clearly
indicated such understanding during the teleconference which dealt very
much with the measurement of economic items in units of constant purchasing
power in terms of a Daily Index, i.e., with IFRS-authorised CMUCPP. He
indicated the opposite.
Update from Michael Stewart: "In response to comments you made about how you think that CMUCPP would have solved Zimbabwe's hyperinflation problem, I expressed a view about the effect of financial reporting on the economy. As you noted in your blog of 10 January 2013 I expressed a view that it is the actions that people take and the way that they use the information contained in financial reporting that I think can affect an economy, rather than just the financial reporting itself (in retrospect I accept that the language I used could have been more specific to the matter we were discussing, which was about how financial reporting could have solved Zimbabwe's hyperinflation problem)."
Update from Michael Stewart: "In response to comments you made about how you think that CMUCPP would have solved Zimbabwe's hyperinflation problem, I expressed a view about the effect of financial reporting on the economy. As you noted in your blog of 10 January 2013 I expressed a view that it is the actions that people take and the way that they use the information contained in financial reporting that I think can affect an economy, rather than just the financial reporting itself (in retrospect I accept that the language I used could have been more specific to the matter we were discussing, which was about how financial reporting could have solved Zimbabwe's hyperinflation problem)."
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2012 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)