Ch4: Measurement

1-Define measurement in context of accounting and financial reporting.

Measurement in the context accounting: refers to the way the figures on the financial statements
or determined is the definition refers to measurement as an act or process this act or process may
involve calculation to determine the quantity of particular assets held by entity and also involved
making estimations and comparisons

Measurement in the context financial reporting: the process of determining the monetary
amounts at which the elements of the financial statements are to be recognized and the carried in
the balance sheet and income statements

2- Why is measurement so important in accounting?

-assists in making financial statements decisions useful by giving meaning to the items included
in them

-it allows investors, management and other users of accounting information to assess the
financial performance and financial position of the entity

-it allows investors, management and other users of accounting information to compare the
entity's performance and position over time

-it allows investors, management and other users of accounting information to compare entities

3- Discuss the current approach to measurement adopted by standard setters.

Why have they adopted such an approach? What are the issuers and
problems associated with this approach?
Standard setters, such as accounting and financial reporting bodies like the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) in the United States and the International Accounting Standards Board
(IASB) globally, typically adopt a mixed approach to measurement. This approach combines
historical cost and fair value measurements, as well as other methods like current cost and net
realizable value, depending on the context and specific standards.
There are several reasons why standard setters have adopted such an approach:

1. Relevance and Reliability: The mixed measurement approach aims to provide financial
information that is both relevant and reliable for users. Historical cost is considered
reliable because it is based on actual transactions, while fair value provides relevant
information about current market values.
 Historical Cost: This approach records assets at their original purchase price and does
not adjust for changes in market value over time. It is considered reliable because it is
based on actual transactions and can be objectively verified.
 Fair Value: Fair value measurement involves estimating the price at which an asset
could be exchanged or a liability settled in an orderly transaction between market
participants at the measurement date. Fair value aims to provide relevant information
about the current economic value of assets and liabilities.
 Issues: While historical cost is reliable, it may lack relevance, especially in industries
with rapidly changing market conditions. Fair value, on the other hand, introduces
subjectivity and estimation uncertainty, particularly for illiquid or unique assets.

2. Decision Usefulness: By incorporating multiple measurement bases, standard setters aim

to enhance the decision-making usefulness of financial statements for various users, such
as investors, creditors, and other stakeholders.

 Mixed Measurement Approach: By combining historical cost and fair value

measurements, standard setters aim to provide financial information that is both relevant
and reliable for decision-making purposes. This approach acknowledges that different
users may have varying information needs.
 Issues: The challenge lies in striking the right balance between relevance and reliability.
Overreliance on fair value measurements may result in increased volatility in financial
reporting, potentially obscuring the underlying economic performance of an entity.

3. Complexity of Assets and Liabilities: Different assets and liabilities possess varying
characteristics and risk profiles, making it necessary to apply different measurement
bases to reflect their economic substance accurately.

 Diverse Characteristics: Different assets and liabilities possess unique characteristics

and risk profiles, necessitating the use of multiple measurement bases to accurately
reflect their economic substance.
 Issues: Applying different measurement bases can increase the complexity of financial
reporting and require preparers to exercise judgment in selecting the most appropriate
method. This complexity may pose challenges for users in interpreting and comparing
financial statements.
 4. International Convergence: The adoption of a mixed measurement approach facilitates
the convergence of accounting standards globally, as different jurisdictions may have
different preferences regarding measurement bases.

 Harmonization Efforts: The adoption of a mixed measurement approach facilitates the

convergence of accounting standards globally, as different jurisdictions may have
different preferences regarding measurement bases.
 Issues: Achieving convergence across diverse regulatory environments and accounting
traditions can be challenging. Differences in measurement practices and standards may
persist, hindering comparability between entities operating in different jurisdictions.

However, there are several issues and problems associated with this approach:

5. Subjectivity in Fair Value Measurement: Fair value measurement often involves

significant judgment and estimation, which can introduce subjectivity and increase the
potential for manipulation or error.

 Judgment and Estimation: Fair value measurement often requires significant judgment
and estimation, particularly for assets and liabilities with no active market or observable
inputs.
 Issues: The subjective nature of fair value measurement introduces the potential for
manipulation or error, raising concerns about the reliability and trustworthiness of
financial information.

6. Volatility in Financial Reporting: Fair value measurements can lead to increased

volatility in financial reporting, especially during periods of market instability or
economic uncertainty. This volatility may obscure the underlying performance of an
entity.

 Market Instability: Fair value measurements can lead to increased volatility in financial
reporting, especially during periods of market turbulence or economic uncertainty.
 Issues: Excessive volatility may obscure the underlying performance of an entity, making
it challenging for users to assess its financial health and stability accurately.

7. Comparability Challenges: The use of multiple measurement bases can hinder

comparability between entities, industries, or jurisdictions, as different reporting entities
may apply different measurement methods for similar transactions or assets.

 Diverse Practices: The use of multiple measurement bases can hinder comparability
between entities, industries, or jurisdictions.
 Issues: Differences in measurement methods may lead to inconsistencies in financial
reporting, making it difficult for users to analyze and benchmark performance across
entities or sectors.
 8. Lack of Faith in Historical Cost: Some argue that historical cost does not provide
relevant information, especially in industries with rapidly changing market conditions or
when assets have significantly appreciated or depreciated in value since acquisition.

 Relevance Concerns: Some stakeholders argue that historical cost does not provide
relevant information, especially in industries with rapidly changing market conditions.
 Issues: There is ongoing debate about the suitability of historical cost as a measurement
basis, with some advocating for greater use of fair value to reflect current market
conditions more accurately.

Overall, while the mixed measurement approach adopted by standard setters aims to balance
relevance and reliability in financial reporting, it is not without its challenges. Efforts to address
these issues often involve refining measurement methodologies, enhancing disclosure
requirements, and promoting transparency in financial reporting practices.

4- Explain the arguments for and against using historical cost as a

measurement base
Arguments for Using Historical Cost:

 Reliability: Historical cost is considered a reliable measurement basis because it is based

on actual transactions. It provides verifiable and objective information about the original
acquisition cost of assets and liabilities.

 Conservatism: Historical cost reflects a conservative approach to financial reporting by

recognizing gains only when realized. This approach helps prevent overstatement of
assets and earnings, thereby promoting prudence in financial reporting.

 Simplicity: Historical cost is relatively simple and easy to apply compared to other
measurement bases, such as fair value. It reduces complexity in financial reporting and
compliance efforts, particularly for small and medium-sized entities with limited
resources.

 Stability: Historical cost measurement results in stable and predictable financial

statements over time, as it does not fluctuate with changes in market conditions or
economic factors. This stability can enhance comparability between periods and facilitate
trend analysis.
Arguments Against Using Historical Cost:

 Relevance: Critics argue that historical cost may lack relevance, especially in industries
with rapidly changing market conditions or when assets have significantly appreciated or
depreciated in value since acquisition. Users may prefer information based on current
market values to make informed decisions.

 Distorted Asset Values: Historical cost may distort the true economic value of assets,
particularly in inflationary environments or when significant changes occur in asset
prices. As a result, financial statements may not accurately reflect the entity's current
financial position and performance.

 Impairment Recognition: Historical cost may delay the recognition of impairments in

asset values, particularly for long-lived assets such as property, plant, and equipment.
This delay can lead to an overstatement of asset values and an understatement of losses,
potentially misleading stakeholders.

 Inadequate Measurement for Certain Assets: Certain assets, such as financial

instruments and intangible assets, may not be appropriately measured at historical cost
due to their unique characteristics and market dynamics. Fair value may provide a more
relevant measurement basis for these assets, reflecting their current market values and
economic substance.

 Lack of Decision Usefulness: Historical cost may not provide decision-useful

information for users, such as investors and creditors, who require timely and relevant
financial information to assess an entity's financial health and prospects. Fair value and
other measurement bases may better meet these information needs.

In summary, while historical cost offers reliability, conservatism, simplicity, and stability in
financial reporting, it may lack relevance, distort asset values, delay impairment recognition, and
inadequately measure certain assets. The choice of measurement basis depends on various
factors, including the nature of assets and liabilities, the industry's characteristics, regulatory
requirements, and stakeholders' information needs.

5- Explain the difference between current and replacement costs.

Current cost: requires an item to be valued and recorded and the amount that would be paid at the
current time to provide or replace the future economic benefits expected to derived from the
current item.

Replacement cost: requires an item to be valued and recorded at the amount that would be paid at
the current time to purchase an identical item.
Current cost is a broader concept in that it represents the costs incurred in order to obtain the
same expected future economic benefits that would be received from the current item

Replacement cost is much more specific in that it refers to the cost associated with purchasing
another item identical to the current one

6. Explain the arguments for and against using fair value as a measurement
base.
(Arguments for Fair Value)

* Relevance

Focuses on future potential.

* Faithful Representation

Determined using objective market prices.

* Understandability

Simply representation of current market value.

* Comparability

Focus on market value not individual entity.

(Arguments Against Fair Value)

* Relevance

Hypothetical and not relevant to specific entity.

* Faithful Representation

If no objective market prices then highly subjective.

* Understandability

Often based on complex assumptions and calculation.

* Comparability

Different models lead to very different results.

7. What role does estimation and judgement play in accounting measurement?

Discuss with particular reference to present value and deprival value.
Estimation and judgment play a crucial role in accounting measurement, particularly when
dealing with concepts such as present value and deprival value. These concepts are essential in
contemporary accounting practices and are often used to assess the value of assets, liabilities, and
the financial performance of an organization. Let's explore the significance of estimation and
judgment in relation to present value and deprival value.

1. Present Value:

Present value calculations are used to determine the current worth of future cash flows or
financial instruments. This technique is employed in various accounting areas, such as measuring
the fair value of financial instruments, assessing the value of long-term liabilities, and evaluating
investment projects.

Estimation: Estimating the future cash flows is a critical aspect of present value calculations.
Accountants need to make assumptions about the amount, timing, and uncertainty of future cash
flows. For example, when valuing long-term liabilities like bonds or pension obligations,
accountants estimate the expected future cash outflows and discount them back to their present
value. These estimates require judgment based on historical data, market conditions, and
economic forecasts.
Judgment: Determining the appropriate discount rate is another crucial element of present value
calculations. The discount rate reflects the time value of money and the risk associated with the
cash flows. Accountants need to exercise judgment in selecting an appropriate discount rate that
reflects the specific circumstances of the cash flows being evaluated. This judgment involves
considering factors such as interest rates, market conditions, and the risk profile of the
organization.

2. Deprival Value:

Deprival value is a concept used in accounting for the measurement of assets. It represents the
value that an entity would lose if it were deprived of an asset. Deprival value is relevant in
situations where an organization has the ability to prevent others from benefiting from its assets,
such as exclusive rights or licenses.

Estimation: Estimating deprival value requires assessing the potential benefits that an entity
would lose if it were deprived of an asset. This estimation involves considering factors such as
the asset's current and potential future value, its contribution to the organization's operations, and
any competitive advantages it provides. Accountants need to exercise judgment in determining
the appropriate estimation techniques and assumptions to measure deprival value accurately.

Judgment: Judgment plays a role in determining the relevance and significance of deprival value
in accounting measurements. Accountants need to assess whether deprival value is applicable in
a particular situation and whether it provides meaningful information to financial statement
users. This judgment requires considering factors such as the nature of the asset, the entity's
business model, and the expectations of financial statement users.

8- Identify factors that may influence the choice of measurement approach.

Discuss how the measurement approach adopted impacts on the quality of
accounting information produced.
 Factors influencing the choice of measurement approach:

 Nature of the item being measured: Different assets, liabilities, revenues, and
expenses may require different measurement approaches based on their
characteristics. For example, tangible assets like property, plant, and equipment might
 be measured at historical cost, while financial assets like stocks might be measured at
fair value.

 Regulatory requirements: Accounting standards or regulations may prescribe specific

measurement approaches for certain items. For instance, International Financial
Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)
provide guidelines on measurement for various financial statement items.

 Stakeholder needs: The preferences and needs of stakeholders such as investors,

creditors, and management may influence the choice of measurement approach. For
instance, investors might prefer fair value measurements for financial instruments to
reflect current market conditions accurately.

 Cost-benefit considerations: Some measurement approaches may be more costly or

complex to implement than others. The cost of obtaining and verifying information
should be weighed against the benefits of using a particular measurement approach.

 Economic environment: Economic conditions and market volatility may influence the
choice of measurement approach. For example, in times of economic uncertainty,
there might be a preference for using more conservative measurement approaches.

 Impact of measurement approach on the quality of accounting information:

 Relevance: The measurement approach adopted should provide relevant information

to users for decision-making. For example, fair value measurements might be more
relevant during periods of market volatility, as they reflect current market prices.

 Reliability: The measurement approach should produce reliable information that is

free from bias and error. Historical cost measurements, for instance, are often
considered reliable because they are based on actual transactions and can be verified.

 Comparability: Consistency and comparability of information are crucial for users to

analyze trends and make comparisons over time and across entities. The chosen
measurement approach should allow for meaningful comparisons with similar items
in the same period or across different periods.

 Faithful representation: The measurement approach should faithfully represent the

economic substance of the underlying transactions or events. For example, fair value
measurements aim to reflect the true economic value of assets and liabilities at the
measurement date.

9-Why has measurement become such a controversial accounting issue in

recent times?
 Measurement has become a controversial accounting issue in recent times due to several
factors:

1. Complexity of Business Transactions: Modern business transactions have become

increasingly complex, involving various financial instruments, derivatives, and intangible
assets. Determining the appropriate measurement basis for these items can be challenging
and subjective, leading to debate and controversy.

2. Subjectivity in Fair Value Measurement: The widespread use of fair value accounting
has sparked controversy, especially during periods of market volatility. Fair value
measurements rely on subjective judgments and market assumptions, leading to concerns
about their reliability and potential for manipulation.

3. Impact on Financial Statements: The choice of measurement basis can significantly

affect reported financial results and financial position. Different measurement approaches
can lead to variations in reported profits, asset values, and financial ratios, which may
influence investor perceptions and market reactions.

4. Stakeholder Conflicts: Various stakeholders, including investors, creditors,

management, regulators, and standard-setting bodies, may have divergent interests and
preferences regarding measurement approaches. Conflicting viewpoints can contribute to
controversy and debates over the appropriate measurement methods.

5. Regulatory Changes: Changes in accounting standards and regulatory requirements,

such as the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and ongoing
revisions to accounting guidelines, can introduce uncertainty and controversy regarding
measurement practices.

6. Economic Uncertainty: Economic uncertainty and market volatility can exacerbate

measurement challenges, particularly for assets and liabilities with no active market
prices. During times of economic turbulence, determining fair values and impairment
losses becomes more contentious, leading to debates over measurement reliability.

7. Public Scrutiny and Litigation: High-profile accounting scandals and financial

restatements have increased public scrutiny of measurement practices. Legal disputes and
litigation arising from disagreements over measurement methods highlight the potential
consequences of controversial accounting issues.

10- Discss the political aspects of accounting measurement?

Accounting treatment or choice of measurement method is often left to discretion of
management, what make the accounting measurement so political is the fact that management as
well as regulators and other lobby groups involved in standard setting process are largely
motivated by their own self interest and often act to fulfil self serving objectives.

The validity and acceptance of use of fair value as a measurement approach in times of economic
downturn where an attempt at providing accounting information which was more relevant to
users only served to highlight losses. The fact that use of fair value has revealed the truth,
highlighting losses that were masked by different accounting treatment and makes financial
reporting a public concern.

The reliability of accounting information prepared using fair value as a measurement base.
Where no active market exists for an item and a market price is unavailable. The amount
determined becomes very subjective, as an estimates of market value of an item must be formed
and this involves application of discretion and substantial judgments on the part of management.

Players have changed their view and opinion of the appropriateness of the various measurements
approaches depending upon current political objectives and what needs to be achieved.

11- In your own words, explain what different stakeholders want from
financial statements. Assess the impact of measurement on the extent to which
accountants are able to fulfil stakeholder needs.
Existing and potential investors are concerned with the risk inherent in, and the return
provided by, their investments. Their main interest is in accounting information which assists
them in deciding whether to buy, hold or sell their shares. They are also interested in information
that enables them to assess the entity's ability to pay dividends. In order to provide information
about the potential value and future viability of the entity, the entity will need to adopt a
measurement approach which is forward looking with a focus on current values. It would seem
that information about items prepared predominantly using a fair value approach would be most
useful from the perspective of investors. This is of course assuming that the many issues
associated with fair value have also been considered. In order to provide information about its
ability to pay dividends, the entity will need to provide an indication of its distributable profits.
Profit is based on a historical cost based approach to measurement which is also important as
evidence of the entity's current ability to generate profits.

Lenders and other creditors are interested in information that enables them to deter- mine
whether amounts owing to them will be paid when due. Of particular interest to creditors is the
entity's net position the amount of liabilities it has compared to its assets. Again, measurement
becomes very important from a valuation perspective in that creditors are interested in
accounting information which reflects the current value of assets and liabilities of the entity,
giving an indication of the future viability of the entity. Fair value would seem to be the most
useful approach, assuming that items can be reliably measured. Creditors would also be
interested in profits made in the shorter term as an indicator of funds available to pay the debts.
Profit is essentially calculated based upon an historical cost approach to measurement.
 References

Financial Reporting, Financial Statement Analysis, and Valuation: A Strategic

Perspective by James M. Wahlen, Stephen P. Baginski, and Mark Bradshaw.

Financial Accounting Theory by William R. Scott.

Intermediate Accounting by Donald E. Kieso, Jerry J. Weygandt, and Terry D. Warfield.

Barth, M. E., Landsman, W. R., & Wahlen, J. M. (1995). Fair value accounting: Effects
on banks' earnings volatility, regulatory capital, and value of contractual cash flows.
Journal of Banking & Finance, 19(3-4), 577-605.

Penman, S. H. (2007). Financial reporting quality: Is fair value a plus or a minus?.

Accounting and Business Research, 37(sup1), 33-44.

Sunder, S. (2007). Measures in financial reporting: The case of income. Journal of

Accounting and Economics, 43(2-3), 361-387.

Laux, C., & Leuz, C. (2009). The crisis of fair-value accounting: Making sense of the
recent debate. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6-7), 826-834.

Herz, R. H. (2007). Fair value accounting--"Does It Work?". Journal of Applied

Corporate Finance, 19(1), 88-95.

Financial Accounting Theory by William R. Scott - This book provides a comprehensive

overview of various accounting theories, including discussions on historical cost
measurement and its relevance in financial reporting

Financial Reporting, Financial Statement Analysis, and Valuation: A Strategic

Perspective by James M. Wahlen, Stephen P. Baginski, and Mark Bradshaw - This book
examines financial reporting practices and valuation techniques, including considerations
related to measurement bases such as historical cost.

Intermediate Accounting by Donald E. Kieso, Jerry J. Weygandt, and Terry D. Warfield -

This textbook covers intermediate-level accounting topics, including discussions on
measurement bases and their implications for financial reporting.

Penman, S. H. (2007). Financial reporting quality: Is fair value a plus or a minus?

Accounting and Business Research, 37(sup1), 33-44. - This article discusses the debate
surrounding fair value accounting versus historical cost accounting, addressing arguments
for and against each approach.

Ball, R., & Brown, P. (1968). An empirical evaluation of accounting income numbers.
Journal of Accounting Research, 159-178. - This classic research paper examines the
empirical relationship between accounting income numbers, including those based on
historical cost, and market prices.

Watts, R. L., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1986). Positive accounting theory. Prentice-Hall. -

This influential book introduces positive accounting theory, which includes discussions
on measurement bases and their implications for managerial decision-making and
contracting.

Basu, S. (1997). The conservatism principle and the asymmetric timeliness of earnings.
Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24(1), 3-37. - This article explores the role of
conservatism in financial reporting, including how historical cost measurement reflects
conservative accounting practices.