do both discussions please

User Generated

Inabhfuvt

Writing

Description

do both discussions and respond to two of the student's discussions( your answer should be a unique one different than other discussions i have posted with different colors thanks

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Discussion 1: There are advantages and disadvantages to using wireless networking. Considering the problems with security, should wireless networking be a sole transmission source in the workplace? Why or why not? Discussion 2: Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) allow companies to choose any inventory costing method. GAAP also requires that companies consistently stick to one method. However, companies do switch back and forth from FIFO to LIFO to Weighted Average and vice versa. International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) value inventory in a similar method as GAAP. Companies can use FIFO or average costs, but LIFO is not an option. Access and review the following article from the CSU-Global Library: Krishnan, S. (2012). Inventory Valuation Under IFRS and GAAP. Strategic Finance, 98(9), 51-58. Select one item from the article that you found interesting and briefly share your views on valuating inventory under GAAP versus IFRS. What ethical responsibilities, if any, do you have with the issues presented? Your selection from the article should be different from your classmates. Some of the discussions already done by the classmates are: Jeffers and Askew (2010) found that the adoption of IFRS inventory valuation standards will allow for more standardized financial reporting that will facilitate the comparison of financial statements of competing companies. For instance, Krishnan (2012) provided excerpts of Exxon Mobile Corporation’ & Royal Dutch Shell’s balance sheets. While both companies are both giants in the same industry, the inventories reported are remarkably different because Exxon Mobile Corporation uses LIFO while Royal Dutch Shell uses FIFO. Krishnan (2012) explained that comparison of the two company’s inventories is only possible when Exxon’s LIFO reserve is added to their ending inventory. This makes it difficult to compare the companies at a glance. Under IFRS inventory valuation, both companies will be forced to use similar inventory methods which will result in financial statements that will allow stakeholders to better compare financial statements. For this reason, I like the idea of valuating inventory under IFRS versus GAAP. The portion of the article that interested me the most was the section that discussed IFRS allows companies to increase the value of their inventory to original cost if the company had already decreased the value to the net realizable value in a previous period should the fair market value in the current period justify the increase (Krishnan, 2012). To accomplish this, a debit entry to Inventory and a credit entry to Cost of Goods Sold would be needed. The credit entry would reduce the cost of goods sold account and therefore increase net income and gross margin. However, the inventory is unsold. Essentially revenue is being recognized without being prompted by a sale as Hermanson, Edwards & Maher pointed out (as cited in Colorado State University-Global Campus, 2018). There is the chance that the fair value could fall again before the end of the next accounting period and the asset will be sold at a lower price than anticipated. Because this possibility exists, I feel it would be better not to increase the value of inventory after already reducing it in a previous period should the market value rise. Instead, this additional revenue should be recognized at the time of sale should the asset be sold at the higher price. The role I have at work requires me to report revenue on the construction projects our teams are building. My supervisor has advised me that I should be conservative and that if there is the potential of a loss, we have to recognize it as soon as we are aware of it. It is extremely important that we do not overstate net income. But it is a fine line – we do not want to sandbag revenue either and we have to support the decisions we make when posting revenues over the life of these construction projects. In the same way, I think that companies should be conservative when reporting inventory values, especially if it means recognizing revenue without a sale even if the increase can be supported by current market conditions. If inventory value was reduced in a previous period, I think it is best not to raise the value later when market conditions are better even though this increase is capped by the amount of the original deduction. What I find most interesting is the simple fact that the Last-In, First-Out (LIFO) method is not accepted under the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), even though the other three inventory costing methods accepted under the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) are accepted under IFRS. With some of the advantages of LIFO including showing actual profit available for distribution while still replenishing inventory and reporting sales revenue and cost of goods sold in current dollars, LIFO provides the benefit of not overestimating your profit (Colorado State University, 2018). Not recognizing paper profit would be helpful for realizing profit available for distribution at a quick glance, instead of additional research being needed. According to Thiha Tun (2015), LIFO is barred under IFRS due to the “potential distortions it may have on a company’s profitability and financial statements”. He notes that with the IFRS rules being principle-based, LIFO cannot be accepted under the principle that it may create a misrepresentation to net income during periods of inflation. Under LIFO, inventory amounts are reported based upon “outdated and obsolete numbers” (Thiha Tun, 2015) and opportunity for income manipulation is present. Inventory valuation seems less confusing under GAAP than under IFRS, but that may be due in part to the quantity of reading I have completed on GAAP versus IFRS. If I were to spend more time researching IFRS, it is possible some of the nuances would become clearer. Referencing Table 1 in Inventory Valuation Under IFRS and GAAP, the fact that there is a lack of explicit guidance for consistency of measurement was surprising (Krishnan, 2012). IFRS seems to be more detailed as it allows for deferred taxes to be recognized, requires far more specific detailed disclosures, and permits reversals of write-downs. Because IFRS requires companies to switch away from LIFO, tax revenues would increase greatly. Initially, that does not appear to be a major consequence for the general population because increased tax revenue equates to increased government funding. However, if companies begin experiencing a large increase in taxes, a resulting consequence could be higher unemployment rates. If business expenses increase in the form of higher taxes owed, money available for other expenses such as salaries would decrease. Ethical responsibilities in regards to inventory costing methods involve a dedication to accuracy and avoiding income manipulation. Inaccuracy may be the result of an honest mistake during the physical count, but income manipulation comes from carefully timed purchases, or lack thereof, of inventory. Both of these examples would result in inaccurate portrayals of a business’s financial standing on the various financial statements, including overstating or understating net income. Additionally, internal controls should be in place to attempt prevention of either situation. In regards to my current career, I do not deal with inventory costing. After reading the article, I found a few differences between GAAP and IFRS that were pretty interesting. First, GAAP bases the value of their assets at the historical cost and IFRS can reverse write down’s as the selling prices rise and market price goes above the cost and values assets above the historical costs(Krishnan & Lin, 2012). IFRS also allows the addition of interest to be added to the cost of inventory should a company expect delays in sales of the inventory or if they purchase the inventory on deferred settlement terms (Krishnan & Lin, 2012). These differences alone can be significant to a company’s earnings. A significantdrawback in transitioning to the acceptance of IFRS is that companies that use LIFO as a means to value their inventory will no longer be able to do so and the reserves they have will become taxable as a result and taxes will increase largely due to eliminating LIFO. In the article, it mentions how SEC has allowed major companies to use IFRS but was apprehensive initially because it gave companies an unfair advantage in discovering which method they wanted to use (Krishnan & Lin, 2012). I agree with this as other companies won’t know going forward once the transition happens. A positive to adopting IFRS is that it will provide a more uniform way of using accounting methods. The IFRS has a stricter policy on disclosures which in turn will provide a transparent way to access comparisons of financial information between companies which will contribute to investors having the ability to make better decisions as well. The ethical issues that come to mind are that in IFRS’s method of inventory assessment there would be room to make mistakes as the market fluctuates since it allows for reversals. Also, I would be interested to see how they monitor the interest added to the cost of inventory. It seems to me that this could be a rule that essentially could be taken advantage of. The one item that stood out to me when I read this article is that when and if the switch occurs to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) from Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), the companies who have been using the LIFO method to value inventory for years will have a lot of work to do to change methods (Krishnan, 2012). A company that has been using the LIFO method would need to anticipate a paying more in taxes, potentially changing their inventory system in its entirety, as well as training employees on the new method of valuating inventory (Krishnan, 2012). The article also mentions that the SEC would require three years of statements for comparison, which means that companies would have to switch from the LIFO method 3 years prior to the conversion to IFRS (Krishnan, 2012). This is essentially forcing companies who use the LIFO method, to switch as soon as possible in order to comply with the SEC requirements. Personally, if I had my own company I wouldn’t chose to use the LIFO method as it doesn’t seem as accurate as the other methods. The change to IFRS seems to be reasonable in an attempt at standardizing inventory valuations yet still allowing for variations. I believe that companies should be accurately reporting inventory and subsequently accurately paying taxes. While many companies are forced to use the FIFO (produce, food, etc) method, it doesn’t seem fair to have other companies receive tax breaks because their products don’t expire or spoil and they are able to use the LIFO method. The ethical issue that I foresee in the switch from GAAP to IFRS, is the lack of consistent financial reporting that the companies using LIFO would face. As a current requirement of GAAP, the valuation of inventory within a company is to be consistent year after year (Krishnan, 2012). Companies who use LIFO would be switching the method of valuation of inventory, and there could be ethical loop holes in financial reporting during the transition. Since companies using LIFO, usually pay less in taxes, I would be worried that these companies would try to find fraudulent ways of reporting inventory in order to keep their taxes at a lower amount. Different colors are different students , mine should be different than the ones already discussed by different students and after you are done with the discussion please respond to two of the students with something interesting feedback. thanks
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Hey buddy!Attached is the complete assignment.Please have a look at it and feel free to seek any further clarification. If
there's no further work to be done. I'd really appreciate if you could
leave a 5 star⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ feedback for me on Studypool. This would be so helpful in
me securing further work and continue to tutor.Thanks. 😉

Discussion 2

There are numerous differences between America’s GAAP and IFRS which is accepted
internationally. From the article, the thing that I found most interesting was disclosure
requirements according to the two financial reporting systems. As noted in the article by
Krishnan (2012), the GAAP disclosure requirements as stipulated by the SEC permits for LIFO
accounting method and requires that LIFO reserve should be disclosed if LIFO is used. On the
other hand, IFR...


Anonymous
Great! 10/10 would recommend using Studypool to help you study.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags