Response to the following problem:
1. Do you agree with Cairns's assertion that classifications of accounting are simplistic and of little relevance in today's world? Are attempts to classify accounting futile and outmoded? Why or why not?
2. Some observers contend that financial reporting is becoming more and more alike among "world-class" companies-the world's largest multinational corporations-and especially those listed on the major stock exchanges, such as London, New York, and Tokyo. What is the relevance of this contention for classifications of accounting, and what are the factors that would cause this to happen?
CASE:
When we look at the way that countries or companies account for particular transactions and events, it is increasingly difficult to distinguish in a systematic way so-called Anglo-American accounting from Continental European accounting or American accounting from, say, German accounting. I am increasingly persuaded . . . that the distinction between Anglo-American accounting and Continental European accounting is becoming less and less relevant and more and more confused. In reaching this conclusion, I do not dispute that different economic, social and legal considerations have influenced the development of accounting in different countries. I also do not dispute the fact that there have been, and still are, differences in the means by which different countries determine accounting requirements and the form of the resulting requirements. I do believe, however, that those who continue to favour these classifications are ignoring what is happening in the world and how companies actually account for transactions and events.