外幣折算會計簡史[文獻(xiàn)翻譯]

本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計）外 文 翻 譯題 目 外幣報表折算方法分析及中國的選擇初探 專 業(yè) 會 計 學(xué) 外文題目 A Brief History of Accounting for the Translation of Foreign Currencies 外文出處 Journal of Management History 外文作者 Todd Jackson, Doris M. Cook 原文：A Brief History of Accounting for the Translation of Foreign CurrenciesAccounting for the translation of foreign currency is a topic that has received a great deal of attention from the various accounting standard-setting bodies this century. The attention given to this topic is a natural result of the phenomenal increase in international trade that has taken place.Trade among enterprises domiciled in different countries can be traced back to ancient times. The Phoenicians are remembered as the great barterers of the ancient world. During the latter part of the Middle Ages, enterprising individuals saw that the establishment of foreign branches could facilitate international trade. The importance of international commerce to the economic well-being of nations has increased ever since.Accounting for foreign operations and transactions has taken many forms throughout history. This paper primarily discusses the evolution of accounting for foreign currency translation in the USA in the twentieth century. However, some of the evidence of foreign currency accounting practices from the ancient Greeks to the colonial Americans are discussed first.Some early foreign currency accounting practicesThe existence of foreign currency transactions can be traced back to the earliest civilization known to have used coined money, the ancient Greeks. The invention of coined money is believed to have taken place in this civilization about bc 630 (Chatfield, 1977, p. 21). Although the use of coinage spread rather slowly, in time a number of the Greek city-states issued their own coins. These Greek city-states engaged in trade with each other, thus resulting in essentially foreign currency transactions. The ancient Greeks often translated to the local coinage transactions denominated in a foreign coinage, but this treatment was not consistent (Littleton and Yamey, 1956, p. 21). They also were inclined to record quantities of commodities and units of a foreign currency in the accounts.During the middle ages (400 to 1400 ad), international trade expanded significantly as a result of the crusades which stimulated European demand for foreign goods. Toward the end of this period foreign trade had become quite prevalent and the establishment of foreign business branches was a natural result. In the Datini Archives is a balance sheet for the Barcelona branch dated January 31, 1399, and an income statement covering the period from 11 July 1397 to 31 January 1399. The income statement is interesting because it contains an account entitled Pro di Cambio (Profits on foreign exchange (Littleton and Yamey, 1956, p. 145). The Barcelona branch kept the accounts with the foreign correspondents, the Nostro accounts, in terms of both the foreign currencies and the local currency. At a point in time, the exchange profit or loss was calculated by taking the difference between the balances stated in the foreign currencies and the balances stated in the local currency (Littleton and Yamey, 1956, p. 145).A similar accounting technique was used by colonial American merchants during the 15 years between 1795 and 1810 when businesses were making the transition from English pounds to US dollars. The accounts of these merchants were often kept in terms of both currencies (Littleton and Yamey, 1956, p. 287).Early twentieth century foreign currency accountingA 1900 textbook by George Lisle, an English chartered accountant, describes accounting for foreign currencies at that time in England (Lisle, 1900). Lisle wrote that domestic companies that have branches in foreign countries “should convert the transactions which take place in the various local currencies into pounds sterling on a correct basis, with the view of these transactions being recorded in the Home Book and being submitted in the Annual Abstract of Accounts to the proprietors of the business” (Lisle, 1900, p . 285). He noted that a number of erroneous principles were being used by companies at that time for converting their foreign transactions.According to Lisle, when the trial balance of a foreign branch is sent home, the first thing to be done is to convert each item to pounds sterling (Lisle, 1900, p. 288). He stated that various exchange rates should be used to translate the items in the trial balance. He essentially advocated what later came to be known as the monetary-nonmonetary method.The impact of the First World War on foreign currency accountingBefore the First World War, exchange rates were fairly stable and the volume of trade between USA and European nations was not so great as to make the topic of foreign currency translation a major issue in the USA. A number of accounting texts were written after Lisles which contain no discussion on the topic. The stability of exchange rates prior to the First World War can be attributed largely to the fact that most nations had established a fixed relationship between their currencies and the gold standard (Roberts, 1920, p. 321).One of the effects of the First World War was to make the shipping of gold practically impossible. As a result, when the USA entered the war in 1917, it chose to go off the gold standard (Gray, 1983, p. 261). By the end of the war, most other nations had also gone off the gold standard (Finney, 1923, p. 451).However, the stability of exchange rates is also dependent on a stable set of trade relations. The First World War upset that stability. The European industries became disorganized and were desperately in need of raw materials that could only be obtained from the USA. Roberts described the situation by stating that “we have seen the European exchange sinking lower and lower from month to month” (Roberts, 1920, p. 325).The exchange rate instability prompted renewed interest in accounting for foreign currency translation in the USA. In 1921, H.A. Finney wrote that accountants would now “have to understand the principles involved in the accounting for foreign commerce and the conversion of foreign balances” (Finney, 1923, p. 451).In his discussion of the appropriate methodology for translating the accounts of a foreign branch, Finney advocated the monetary-nonmonetary method that was prescribed by Lisle in 1900 for balance sheet items. However, for nominal accounts, he felt that end of the period exchange rates were preferable to average exchange rates (Finney, 1923, p. 458).The impact of the Great DepressionBy 1925, most nations had gone back to the gold standard and the foreign exchange stabilized (Gray, 1983, p. 261). The worldwide Great Depression of the 1930s, however, proved to be too much for the gold standard. According to McConnell, each nation became afraid that “its economic recovery would be aborted by a balance of payments deficit which would lead to an outflow of gold and consequent contractionary effects” (McConnell, 1981, p. 855). In an attempt to bolster exports and reduce imports, several nations began to devalue their currencies in terms of gold (McConnell, 1981, p. 855). The result of these devaluations was a breakdown of the gold standard system.During this time, the number of writings on foreign currency accounting increased. An early article by Cecil S. Ashdown described the current-noncurrent method (Ashdown, 1922, p. 262). The most notable publication was a recommendation made in 1931 by a special committee on accounting procedure of the American Institute of Accountants (now AICPA) that the current-noncurrent method be used (AIA, 1931). This was the first official pronouncement on the subject in the USA. This method essentially involves: the translation of current assets and current liabilities at end of year exchange rates; and noncurrent assets and noncurrent liabilities at historical exchange rates. The nominal accounts were to be translated at average exchange rates (the same as monetary-nonmonetary method). The committee reiterated their position in another bulletin in 1934 (AIA, 1934).Foreign currency provisions of ARB 4The special committee was disbanded in 1938 and the new Committee on Accounting Procedures (CAP) took over. In December 1939, the CAP issued Accounting Research Bulletin No. 4 (ARB 4) entitled “Foreign operations and foreign exchange”. In 1953, ARB 4 was incorporated into ARB 43 as chapter 12 (AICPA, 1953). This bulletin essentially repeated the special committees endorsement of the current-noncurrent method but also stressed the desirability of conservatism when reporting foreign earnings and consolidating foreign subsidiaries. ARB 4 also required that both realized and unrealized losses in foreign exchange be charged against operations and that realized gains be credited to operations (AICPA, 1953). The bulletin stated that unrealized gains should only be recognized to the extent of unrealized losses charged to income in prior periods (AICPA, 1953).Impact of the Second World WarWith the stimulus of additional economic turmoil created by the Second World War, leaders of the major industrial nations set out to create an economic system that would not be susceptible to the risk of another depression. One significant result of their efforts was a fixed exchange rate system established in a conference at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, in 1944 (Gordon, 1987, p. 544).For some years, the Bretton Woods system worked well. But, economic pressures soon came to bear again and nations began to depart from the agreement by devaluing their currencies in relation to the US dollar. The resulting instability created new interest in foreign currency accounting. In 1948, A.B. Hecker, an English chartered accountant, described the reporting situation of the time as follows: “Increasing chaos in foreign currency rates makes impossible general rules for handling statements of foreign subsidiaries” (Hecker, 1948).The economic situation raised many questions about the appropriateness of the current-noncurrent method. One of the critics was Samuel R. Hepworth who is usually given primary credit for developing the monetary-nonmonetary method of translation (Hepworth, 1956, p. 8). Monetary assets and liabilities are those which are fixed in terms of a number of units of a foreign currency. Nonmonetary assets and liabilities are not so fixed.The current-noncurrent method, however, prevailed as the only acceptable method until October 1965 when the Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 6, in substance, permitted the use of the monetary-nonmonetary method. The Opinion stated that it might often be appropriate to translate long-term receivables and long-term payables, which are essentially monetary assets and liabilities, at current exchange rates (APB, 1965). At this time, both methods were used in practice and accepted by the authoritative bodies.The exchange rate effects of the Vietnam WarThe problems with the Bretton Woods system became more acute in the 1960s owing to an acceleration of inflation in the USA, relative to the inflation rates of other countries because of the heavy spending by the US government on the Vietnam War and an easy monetary policy. This change in relative inflation rates caused a decline in US exports and an increase in US imports (Gordon, 1987, p. 545). This change in trade structure made it impossible to maintain a system of fixed exchange rates between the USA and other countries. By 1971, it was clear that a more equitable system had to be devised. That year, the Smithsonian Agreement was made which essentially put the world in a flexible exchange rate system by 1973 (Gordon, 1987, p. 546).Accounting Research Study No. 12In June 1972, the Accounting Research Division issued Accounting Research Study No. 12, “Reporting foreign operations of US companies in US dollars”, by Leonard Lorensen. This ARS reviewed the current-noncurrent and monetary-nonmonetary methods then in practice in the USA, as well as the current rate method which had been recommended by standard setting bodies in England and Scotland (Lorensen, 1972, p. 8). This latter method translates all assets and liabilities at the exchange rate effective on the balance sheet date.The FASBs efforts to standardize accounting for foreign currency translationThe FASB Statement No. 8 was one of the most heavily criticized pronouncements issued by the FASB. The chief objection to the statement was the required recognition of all exchange gains and losses, whether realized or not, in the income statement. Hence, in 1981, FASB Statement No. 52, “Foreign currency translation”, replaced the controversial Statement No. 8. It was adopted by a four to three vote. The primary changes relate to translation of foreign currency statements.The major objectives of Statement No. 52 are to: provide information that is generally compatible with the expected economic effects of a rate change on an enterprises cash flows and equity; and Reflect in consolidated statements the financial results and relationships of the individual consolidated entities as measured in their functional currencies in conformity with USA generally accepted accounting principles (FASB, 1981). ConclusionProblems in accounting for the translation of foreign currencies are as old as money itself, but in the USA these problems have been of primary concern in the twentieth century. Interest in accounting for foreign currency translation seems to have varied directly with the instability of exchange rates, Of particular notability is the interest created by the unsettling economic effects of the major wars this century including the First and Second world Wars, and the Vietnam War.The CAP, the APB, and particularly the FASB have devoted significant efforts to the development of accounting principles in this area. Although no pronouncement has been without criticism, Statement No. 52 appears to be have weathered the storm quite well since its issuance in 1981.Source: Journal of Management History ,Todd Jackson, Doris M. Cook譯文：外幣折算會計簡史外幣折算會計在本世紀(jì)受到了各類會計準(zhǔn)則委員會的關(guān)注。這一關(guān)注的產(chǎn)生來源于當(dāng)今國際貿(mào)易的興起。跨國交易的歷史可追溯到古時候。腓尼基人是史上有名的大商人。在中世紀(jì)的后半葉，商人們意識到在國外建立企業(yè)分支可促進(jìn)國際貿(mào)易，自那時起，國際貿(mào)易對于國民經(jīng)濟(jì)的重要性與日俱增。外幣折算會計在歷史上經(jīng)歷了多種形式的轉(zhuǎn)變。本文主要闡述二十世紀(jì)以來美國的外幣折算會計的演變過程。但在此之前會先討論從古希臘人到殖民地美國人時期的外幣折算會計實踐。一些早期的外幣折算會計外幣交易的產(chǎn)生最早可追溯到古希臘人開始使用鑄幣的時候。鑄幣發(fā)明于公元前630年，但是鑄幣的傳播相當(dāng)緩慢，古希臘的一些城邦發(fā)行了自己的鑄幣。這些古希臘城邦彼此之間有貿(mào)易往來，因此形成了最早的國際貿(mào)易。古希臘人也會在交易時用外國貨幣直接兌換成本地貨幣，但這一現(xiàn)象并不常見，他們更傾向于在帳面上記錄通過交易收到的外國貨幣數(shù)量和商品數(shù)。在中世紀(jì)，隨著十字軍遠(yuǎn)征至歐洲并大大刺激了歐洲的貨物需求，國際貿(mào)易得到大力發(fā)展。直至世紀(jì)末，國際貿(mào)易得到普及并自然帶來了很多跨國組織。在Datini 檔案館保存有1399年1月31日一家企業(yè)設(shè)在巴塞羅那的分公司的資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表，以及1397年6月31日至1399年1月31日的利潤表。這份利潤表很有意思，它包括了一個名為Pro di Cambio（國外交易利潤）的帳目。這家巴塞羅那分公司一直記錄著有關(guān)外幣和本幣交易的往來賬，其匯兌差額由外幣期末余額和本幣期末余額的換算差異產(chǎn)生。在1795年到 1805年的十五年間，美國殖民地時期的商人也使用該方法來記錄美元和英鎊的交易。這些商人往往會用兩種貨幣進(jìn)行記賬。二十世紀(jì)初的外幣折算會計在喬治賴爾（一位英國注冊會計師）于1900年編寫的一本書中，他描述了英國當(dāng)時的外幣折算會計。喬治寫道：那些在國外擁有分支機構(gòu)的本國公司，以總公司報表的角度來說，應(yīng)當(dāng)將所有用各種貨幣進(jìn)行的交易最終轉(zhuǎn)換成以英鎊為計量單位入賬，并在年報中進(jìn)行確認(rèn)，最終上交給企業(yè)的所有者。他提到當(dāng)時的企業(yè)在進(jìn)行外幣交易折算時使用了一些錯誤的準(zhǔn)則。根據(jù)喬治的說法，當(dāng)一家在國外的分公司將他的交易記錄傳回本部時，首先應(yīng)進(jìn)行的步驟是將外幣項目全部折算成英鎊。他認(rèn)為不同的項目應(yīng)使用不同的匯率進(jìn)行折算，這在后來演變成為了“貨幣項目-非貨幣項目法”。第一次世界大戰(zhàn)對外幣折算會計的影響在第一次世界大戰(zhàn)以前，各國貨幣匯率基本保持穩(wěn)定，并且英美兩國的貿(mào)易量并沒有龐大到使外幣折算成為美國會計界的一大問題。許多在喬治賴爾之后出版的會計教材中并沒有對外幣折算進(jìn)行討論。一戰(zhàn)前的穩(wěn)定匯率很大程度上取決于各國已經(jīng)建立了平衡的貨幣-金本位制關(guān)系。但是穩(wěn)定的匯率同時也依賴于穩(wěn)定的貿(mào)易關(guān)系。第一次世界大戰(zhàn)打破了這種穩(wěn)定關(guān)系。歐洲的工業(yè)陷入混亂并且急需只能在美國才能獲取的原材料。羅伯特描述道：我們眼見著英鎊匯率一個月接一個月地下降。匯率的不穩(wěn)定引發(fā)了美國對于外幣折算會計的新興趣。1921年，H.A芬尼寫道：現(xiàn)在的會計師不得不去學(xué)習(xí)和理解有關(guān)外幣折算和國外貿(mào)易平衡的準(zhǔn)則知識。在談到用適當(dāng)?shù)姆椒▽夥种C構(gòu)的賬戶進(jìn)行折算處理時，芬尼提倡的是賴爾在1900年提出的“貨幣項目-非貨幣項目”法。但是他認(rèn)為在損益類賬戶的折算匯率選擇上，選擇期末匯率比期間平均匯率更優(yōu)。大蕭條的影響到了1925年，大部分國家回歸到金本位制度，外匯匯率也逐漸穩(wěn)定下來。但1930年代發(fā)生的大蕭條說明金本位制度實行過了頭。各國均擔(dān)心由于國際收支逆差會帶來資金外流和緊縮影響會阻礙本國的經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇。為了促進(jìn)出口抑制進(jìn)口，一些國家開始通過黃金貶值從而令本國貨幣貶值。這一系列的貶值最終導(dǎo)致了金本位制度的崩潰。在這一時期，有關(guān)外幣折算會計的著作大量涌現(xiàn)。西塞爾S的早期文章中提出了流動性項目-非流動性項目法。最著名的是1931年由美國會計準(zhǔn)則特別委員會所出版的一份有關(guān)使用流動性項目-非流動性項目法的建議信。這是美國首次關(guān)于外幣折算方法提出官方闡述。該方法主要包括以下內(nèi)容：流動資產(chǎn)和流動負(fù)債項目以期末即期匯率進(jìn)行折算。非流動性資產(chǎn)和非流動性負(fù)債項目以歷史匯率進(jìn)行折算。損益類項目以會計期期間的平均匯率進(jìn)行折算（這點與貨幣性項目-非貨幣性項目法相同）委員會在1934年發(fā)布的公告中重申了這一方法。ARB 4有關(guān)外幣的規(guī)定特別委員會于1938年解散，取而代之的是新的會計準(zhǔn)則委員會（CAP）。1939年12月，CAP發(fā)布了第四號會計研究公告（ARB 4）標(biāo)題為“國外經(jīng)營與外匯”。1953年，ARB 4被并入ARB43中的第十二章。這一公告基本上重申了特別委員會提出的流動性項目-非流動性項目法并強調(diào)了在合并國外分支機構(gòu)交易事項時的保守風(fēng)格。ARB4還提出企業(yè)應(yīng)承擔(dān)實現(xiàn)和未實現(xiàn)的損失，并承認(rèn)已實現(xiàn)的收益。第二次世界大戰(zhàn)的影響隨著第二次世界大戰(zhàn)帶來的額外的經(jīng)濟(jì)危機，幾大工業(yè)國的政府開始建立一個能夠抵抗另一場大蕭條的經(jīng)濟(jì)體系。其中一個重要成果是在1944年布雷頓森林會議通過的固定匯率制。其后的幾年中，固定匯率制度運行得很好，但隨后經(jīng)濟(jì)壓力劇增的各國開始針對美元對本國貨幣進(jìn)行貶值，從而慢慢脫離該體系。該結(jié)果產(chǎn)生的經(jīng)濟(jì)動蕩開始引發(fā)對于外幣折算會計的新思考。1948年，AB赫克將當(dāng)時的情況描述如下：外匯匯率與日俱增的混亂使得外幣報表折算的統(tǒng)一準(zhǔn)則成為一大難題。這樣的經(jīng)濟(jì)形勢使得流動性項目-非流動性項目法的合理性產(chǎn)生了許多問題。其中一個批評來自薩繆爾森，他一直提倡貨幣性項目-非貨幣性項目法。貨幣性的資產(chǎn)與負(fù)債能夠以外幣固定計量，非貨幣性項目則不能。在1965年十月APB發(fā)布第六號意見稿承認(rèn)貨幣性項目-非貨幣性項目法以前，流動性項目-非流動性項目法是唯一受到認(rèn)可的方法，意見稿指出長期應(yīng)收款與長期應(yīng)付款，通常被認(rèn)定為貨幣性項目，可以由現(xiàn)行匯率進(jìn)行折算。這一次，兩種方法均受官方認(rèn)可并被廣泛運用到實踐中。越南戰(zhàn)爭對匯率的影響由于1960年代美國的通貨膨脹，布雷頓森林體系的問題越發(fā)尖銳。美國的通貨膨脹是由美國在越南戰(zhàn)爭中的過度花費以及輕率的貨幣政策引起的。這一情況引起美國的進(jìn)口大增而出口減弱。同時也讓美國與其他國家的固定匯率制度成為泡影，更適合的制度需要被建立起來。1973年，史密森協(xié)定使得世界各國進(jìn)入了浮動匯率制度時代。第十二號會計研究1972年六月，會計研究機構(gòu)發(fā)布了第十二號會計研究，由李納德寫的“美國企業(yè)以美元為計量單位的國外交易”。該會計研究闡述了流動性項目和非流動性項目法和貨幣性項目和非貨幣性項目法并在美國的實踐，還有剛被提出的現(xiàn)行匯率法?，F(xiàn)行匯率法提倡將所有資產(chǎn)負(fù)債類項目用期末現(xiàn)行匯率進(jìn)行折算。美國財務(wù)會計準(zhǔn)則對于外幣折算會計準(zhǔn)則的貢獻(xiàn)美國財務(wù)會計準(zhǔn)則委員會發(fā)布的第八號準(zhǔn)則是其發(fā)布的最受人們批評的聲明。該聲明的主要目的就是將所有的匯兌損益，無論實現(xiàn)與否，都計入利潤表。因此，在1981年，美國財務(wù)會計準(zhǔn)則委員會又發(fā)布了第五十二號準(zhǔn)則，“外幣折算”，以此替換了廣受爭議的第八號準(zhǔn)則。第五十二號準(zhǔn)則的主要內(nèi)容如下：由于匯率變動使企業(yè)現(xiàn)金流與權(quán)益發(fā)生變動而造成的預(yù)期經(jīng)濟(jì)影響，需提供相關(guān)的信息。國外分支機構(gòu)的合并財務(wù)報表應(yīng)采用功能貨幣并遵循美國公認(rèn)會計準(zhǔn)則，體現(xiàn)與母公司的關(guān)系?？偨Y(jié)外幣折算會計問題如同貨幣本身一樣古老，但是在二十世紀(jì)的美國，它主要體現(xiàn)在三個方面。該問題是隨著匯率的穩(wěn)定與否而變化的。尤其是每當(dāng)戰(zhàn)爭導(dǎo)致的經(jīng)濟(jì)動蕩和匯率動蕩總會引起新的討論點，比如第一次，第二次世界大戰(zhàn)和越南戰(zhàn)爭。CAP,APB，F(xiàn)ASB等組織對于外幣折算會計問題做出了巨大的貢獻(xiàn)，盡管至今沒有哪一種準(zhǔn)則的公布是能免于人們批評的，F(xiàn)ASB1981年發(fā)布的第五十二號準(zhǔn)則仍是占有重要分量的。外文出處：管理史期刊，泰德杰森，多蘿絲M庫克13