Proposed subsequent accounting for goodwill: Comparison of IASB and FASB

Yanshan Li and Junsheng Zhang

China Journal of Accounting Studies, 2024, vol. 12, issue 4, 861-907

Abstract: Since the release and implementation of SFAS No.141 and No.142, there has been a continuous controversy over whether to apply the impairment-only or the amortisation-and-impairment method for subsequent goodwill accounting. FASB and IASB solicited opinions on proposed revisions through the and around 2020, respectively. The comprehensive feedback analysis shows that the number of supportive opinions for amortisation’s comeback is interestingly higher than that for impairment’s retainment. However, it is inappropriate to take the opinions distribution as the sole criteria for standard setting because the preferred methods of the interest groups, based on their stances, mainly stem from their conceptual perceptions of goodwill and the economic consequences of these two methods. This paper provides a theoretical and practical reference for further revision of the standard on the subsequent accounting for goodwill by IASB and FASB.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21697213.2025.2465271 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:rcjaxx:v:12:y:2024:i:4:p:861-907

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/rcja20

DOI: 10.1080/21697213.2025.2465271

Access Statistics for this article

China Journal of Accounting Studies is currently edited by Xiaochen Dou

More articles in China Journal of Accounting Studies from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().