المستخلص: |
Whilst the last 25 years have witnessed some efforts over how heritage assets might be accounted for?, and whether the heritage assets are sufficiently different to merit different treatment, there is no uniformity of accounting treatment for heritage assets among the countries that have already adopted full accrual accounting in their public sector (such as, New Zealand, UK, Australia, USA and Canada). In addition, even though the debate of accounting for heritage has proposed different accounting approaches for heritage assets, it did not consider the impact of adoption of these accounting approaches on Net Worth and Statement of Financial Performance. The paper aims to examine the currently existing accounting approaches for heritage assets and their impact on the Net Worth and Performance Statement and to suggest a practical accounting approach for heritage assets, by which the exaggeration of net worth and the distortion of performance statement can be overcome. The proposed practical accounting approach for heritage assets has been based on two sub-approaches: 1- Assets-Liabilities Matching Approach: Capitalize if the information on cost or value of heritage assets is available and heritage assets can be disposed, and hence they can be used to match the liabilities (Unrestricted Heritage Assets). 2- Non- Assets-Liabilities Matching Approach: Not-Capitalize if the information on cost or value is not available or available but heritage assets cannot be disposed, and hence they cannot be used to match the liabilities (Restricted Heritage Assets).
|