Lade Inhalt...

Accounting for brands according to US-GAAP and IAS

Diplomarbeit 2003 66 Seiten




1 Introduction
1.1 Presentation of a problem
1.2 Objectives
1.3 Order of events
1.4 Literature

2 Task and requirements of accounting for brands

3 Disclosure of brands
3.1 Useful Terms
3.1.1 Definition of brands
3.1.2 Definition of assets
3.1.3 Definition of intangible assets US-GAAP IAS
3.1.4 Further explanation of useful terms Identifiability Goodwill Reliability Relevance Useful life Active market
3.2 Recognition
3.2.1 Process of capitalization
3.2.2 Separate acquisition of brands US-GAAP IAS
3.2.3 Internally developed brands US-GAAP IAS
3.2.4 Brands purchased in a business combination US-GAAP IAS
3.2.5 Criticism of recognition
3.3 Measurement of brands
3.3.1 Different measurement techniques
3.3.2 Initial measurement US-GAAP IAS
3.3.3 Subsequent measurement US-GAAP Amortization Impairment IAS Benchmark treatment Allowed alternative treatment
3.3.4 Criticism of measurements Cost-based measurements Fair value-based measurements Subsequent measurements

4 Efforts by private and government bodies
4.1 American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
4.2 Steering Committee Report
4.3 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
4.4 Garten Task Force
4.5 Brookings Institution
4.6 The Canadian Accounting Environment and the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA)

5 Conclusion



Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

1 Introduction

1.1 Presentation of a problem

In today’s economy wealth and growth are mainly driven by intangible assets. In a knowledge-based economy the success of an enterprise is driven by intangible factors, while control over physical resources becomes progressively unimportant. Intangible factors can include intellectual capital, research and development, human capital, brands, etc. Such assets represent nearly 70 percent of all corporate wealth today.[1] And in most successful companies, brands and other intangible assets outperform physical assets by a notable margin.[2] Brands, “the most valuable and sustainable corporate assets, […]”[3] and trademarks play an especially important role.

Branding is not only prevalent in consumer products and in the so-called new economy, as ”even old economy manufacturing companies have come to understand that brand and image may be as, or more, important to their ability to make profits as is the number of new machines they buy for their factories.”[4] Branding has become so paramount, that there is even an accelerating trend of naming children after the parents’ favourite brands such as Canon, Bentley, or even Xerox in ‘brand-driven’ America.[5]

The trademarks of the McDonald’s Company, which include McDonald’s, Big Mac and other related marks, “are of material importance to the Company’s business.”[6] Yahoo announced: “We consider the Yahoo! trademark to be one of our most valuable assets.”[7] For companies, the brand name has many functions, such as adding value to products.[8] This is because consumers are willing to pay a price premium for a famous product.[9]

Well-known brand names were established in companies more than a century ago.[10] Over the last few decades, there have been many mergers and acquisitions where the main assets traded were brands. While the importance of using superior brands is unquestioned among business people, the brands’ status on the balance sheet is controversial. The company’s real wealth creators are often hidden, because they are not disclosed on financial statements. Accounting policymakers have established standards for disclosure and measurement that prescribe which items have to be disclosed in financial reports. Brands are often excluded by these regulations, for various reasons. Thus, financial statements alone do not seem to provide investors with sufficient information on these valuable assets. An extreme example of the gap between book value and market value is the Microsoft Corp. In 2000, the company had only US$ 1,9 billion in property and equipment, but its market capitalization was approximately US$ 328 billion.[11] This is evidence that accounting information is becoming progressively less relevant.[12] For some reason, accounting rules do not provide investors and others with enough information about brands.[13] The lack of information about brands can have serious consequences as far as the erosion of “investor’s confidence in the integrity of capital markets.”[14]

The accounting world under which regulations brand assets are disclosed is dominated by two regulations, the US-GAAP and the IAS. The US-GAAP is required for companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange. This is the world’s biggest marketplace, with about 2,800 companies listed with the total global market capitalization of about $15 trillion.[15]

The IAS is an international accounting regulation. The IAS will gain more recognition from 2005 on, when all listed companies in the EU will be required to prepare their consolidated accounts in accordance with the IAS. This will directly concern around 7,000 listed EU companies.[16]

1.2 Objectives

This paper aims to show how to account for brand names in financial statements according to US-GAAP and IAS. The objectives of this paper are to present and discuss the disclosure of brands as intangible assets, in the balance sheet according to US-GAAP and IAS.

Therefore, the recognition criteria of both accounting regulations will be examined. The initial and subsequent measurement techniques will be discussed, and problems in this field will be exposed and criticized. The paper also aims to show criticisms of the current regulations and to discuss possible future developments.

1.3 Order of events

In Chapter two I will state the tasks and requirements of the accounting for brands in financial reporting. I will then present the multifaceted appearance of brands and state the precise meaning of the term ‘brand’ as it will be used it in this paper. As for national and international regulations, the two most prominent and influential standard-setting bodies in the world, the FASB and the IASB, as well as their regulations related to brands and brand accounting will be presented in Chapter three. Criticism of the accounting regulations will end this chapter. New ideas and solutions for the problems arising with the disclosure and measurement of intangible assets and brands will be presented and discussed in Chapter four. Chapter five will include a summary of the findings and a critical statement about the problems discussed in this paper.

1.4 Literature

An internet search for items such as brands or intangible assets results in a confusing array of studies and articles. Academics, standard setters, professional bodies, government agencies, and consultants are all discussing financial reporting problems. Many of the authors define the problem and propose a solution, which is often proprietary.[17] Publications of the standard-setting organisations IASB and FASB are usually used in addition to academic sources. There are some notable efforts that focus on the financial reporting problems and many address; at least partially, the problem that arises with the non recognition of internally developed brands.[18]

2 Task and requirements of accounting for brands

Business reporting is a procedure through which companies provide information that helps users with capital-allocation decisions. It includes a number of different elements, financial statements being one of them.[19] The objectives of financial reporting are described in the FASB Concept Statement No.1, “Objectives of Financial Reporting by Business Enterprises,” and in the IASB´s framework. Both the objectives and the elements of financial reporting are very similar in the two regulations. In the FASB Concept No.1, one objective is to provide useful information to help investors and others to make reasonable investment decisions. FASB requires that information about the “economic resources of an enterprise” is provided.[20] The Framework of the IASB identifies the central objective of financial statements as to provide information about the entity that is useful in making economic decisions.[21] The information presented should be in the interests of the users. The IAS framework and US-GAAP regulation both identify users as investors, potential investors, employees, lenders, suppliers, creditors, customers, governments, and the public at large.[22] Financial statements contribute to meeting the objectives of financial reporting. Financial statements record certain items such as assets, liabilities, income, or cash. The statement of financial position on the balance sheet is the financial statement that shows the entity’s assets at the end of a period: “A statement of financial position provides information about an entity’s assets.”[23] In order to appear in the statement, items have to be recognised as assets. Brands are an “increasingly important economic resource,”[24] so it is the objective of financial reporting to include information on brands. In order to appear in a financial statement, brands have to be recognised as assets as well. Financial statements are principally made for external users. Financial accounting also aids internal reporting, however.[25] The information provided by financial reporting is predominantly financial in nature, and it is generally quantified and expressed in units of money.[26]

3 Disclosure of brands

3.1 Useful Terms

3.1.1 Definition of brands

A popular definition of brands is: "[a] brand is a name, term, sign, symbol or design, or combination of them which is intended to identify the goods or services of one seller to differentiate them from those of competitors."[27] There is real confusion about the distinction between brands and other assets such as trademarks.[28] The terms brand and brand name are often used as synonyms for trademarks and trade names, according to the FASB.[29] In fact, many authors use the word brand and trademark in the same context. But there are other authors who detect a difference: “a brand has personality, […]”[30] or “Brand assets compromise more than just trademarks.”[31] It is common knowledge that famous brands create brand equity. Brand equity includes brand awareness, brand loyalty, and perceived quality of the brand, which are the drivers of brand value.[32] “Brand is the sum total of a customer’s experience with a single company, which includes call centres and help desks as well as advertising and promotion.”[33] Most business professionals agree that advertising gives rise to an intangible asset. Advertising impressions build up over time, until the customer is persuaded to make a purchase. Advertising may be instrumental in introducing a product to a consumer, who later develops brand loyalty. The customers may not immediately be in the market for the product, but will file away the memory of the advertising in the back of their mind until they are in the market for the product.[34]

These factors allow companies to increase profits through products more than by simply selling them as no-name products.[35] But these factors might also be ephemeral in nature and value. That is why when it comes to financial reporting, the brand is the “one intangible asset that has caused the greatest problem.”[36] Thus, the FASB describes brands as a group of complementary assets, like trademarks.[37]

Capturing the nature of trademarks is easier: “A trademark is either a word, phrase, symbol or design, or combination of words, which identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods or services of one party from those of others.”[38] Registered trademarks are protected by law against duplication or other misuses. In the United States, trademark rights last for 10 years and can be renewed in 10 year increments. The endurance of ten years for a trademark right is a common practice in most countries.[39] If a trademark is no longer exercised, the validity of the registration can be challenged after five years.[40]

Trademarks are recognised through law, but brands and their attributes such as brand loyalty and perceived quality are not. Hence, it is much easier to define and recognize trademarks than brands. Trademarks might therefore be able to “offer a vehicle for the acceptance by accountants of the recognition of brands […]”[41] and for their inclusion in financial reports. I will use the terms “brand” and “trademark” side by side, and I will stress the additional attributes of brands when necessary.

Brands can be developed internally, or they can be purchased. The development of brands includes the design of trademarks, product advertising, and brand promotion. Developing brands is cost-intensive and time-consuming. A once-established brand has to be nurtured or it might loose its level of awareness.[42] Massive marketing costs and exceptional marketing savvy are responsible for highly valuable brands.[43] For example, the cost to air a 30-second TV commercial just once in prime time tops $115,000.[44] The Deutsche Telekom, which is trying to build up a new brand, would have to pay an estimated $52.5 million for 80% of the American population to hear the T-Mobile name at least once.[45] The Walt Disney Company spent $2.3 billion on advertising in 2002.[46]

3.1.2 Definition of assets

In order to be recognised in financial statements a resource must first meet the definition of an asset. IASB and FASB have small differences in their definitions of assets. According to US-GAAP, “Assets are probable future economic benefits obtained or controlled by a particular entity as a result of past transaction or events.”[47] The definition of an asset according to IAS is “a resource an entity controls as a result of past events and from which future economic benefits are expected to flow to the entity.”[48] Thus, the US-GAAP asset definition and the IAS asset definition identify the same three essential characteristics of an asset.[49]

First, there must be future economic benefits resulting from a brand. This future economic benefit in form of a net cash flow can either result directly or indirectly. In most cases, well-known brand names work as sales promotion tools for specific products.[50] In this case, a brand contributes indirectly to future economic benefits. The future economic benefits may take the form of revenue from the sale of products or other benefits resulting from the use of the brand asset by the enterprise. Future economic benefits that can flow from a successful brand are numerous, as stressed above.[51]

Secondly, a company must be able to obtain the benefits and to control access to the asset.[52] This is because the “exclusive, physical (or constructive) control of property is a fundamental criterion for the recognition of an asset.”[53] Control can be described as the power to obtain future economic benefits from the asset as well as to restrict the access of others to the asset.[54]

Usually, enterprises register their trademarks to ensure control over an intangible asset and to deter others from using the brand name. Holders of trademarks can prevent their competitors and other third parties from using their registered marks without permission. In the absence of legal rights, it is more difficult to exert control. Thus, enterprises usually have insufficient control over such items as brand loyalty and brand awareness.[55]

The third criterion needed to meet the definition of an asset according to FASB is the need for an event such as a transaction in which the company gets control of the asset. If this event has already occurred, it has to have happened in the past.[56] Brands that are purchased separately or in a business combination are result of a past transaction and therefore meet this criterion. For internally developed brands, there is no transaction. Therefore, internally developed brands are often not recognised as assets or face hurdles to recognition.

An enterprise may possess brands that meet the definition of assets but not recognize those brands in financial statements. Meeting the definition of an asset does not lead to a disclosure of a brand, as illustrated in Fig. 3.1. There are still fundamental recognition criteria that have to be fulfilled. Namely, the future economic benefit has to be probable, and the cost or the value of the brand must be measurable with reliability.[57]

There is no general definition of probable future economic benefits provided in the regulations: “Probable is not an essential part of the definitions, its function is to acknowledge the presence of uncertainty, and to say, that the future economic benefits […] do not have to be certain to qualify the item in question as assets […].”[58] Future economic benefits are usually probable “when the probability of the event occurring is greater than the probability of its non-occurrence.”[59]

It must also be possible to estimate the cost of the asset reliably.[60] Even though there is no direct way to measure the cost, it can still be estimated, but the estimation of this certain asset must be possible in a faithful, verifiable, and neutral way. To be reliable, the information about the asset must be of the underlying resource, and the item must possess a relevant attribute such as cost or value which can be quantified in monetary units with sufficient reliability.[61]

For purchased brands, cost is a reliable estimate of the value of the asset. Accountants face measurement and valuation difficulties concerning internally developed brands, which again results in nondisclosure under the IAS and only partial recognition under the US-GAAP.[62]

Assets that meet all these criteria are recognised as such, which means that they have to be disclosed on the balance sheet as assets.

3.1.3 Definition of intangible assets US-GAAP

Several pronouncements touch on the question of intangible assets, but there is no comprehensive definition for intangible assets in the FASB regulation. Financial Accounting Standard 141 deals with intangible assets in a business combination, while Standard 142 deals with intangible assets generally. FAS 142 “carries forward without reconsideration the provisions in Opinion 17 related to internally developed intangible assets.”[63] The principles regulating accounting for intangible assets laid out in the Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 17 date back to 1970.

FAS 141 defines intangible assets as “assets (not including financial assets) that lack physical substance.”[64] The recognition of brands as assets can occur in three ways. It can be the result of a transaction for the purchase of a brand, as an extraction from goodwill in a business combination, and as the result of a managerial decision to include internally generated brand assets on the balance sheet.[65] IAS

Accounting for intangible assets is discussed in IAS 38. It became operative on 1 July 1999. IAS 38 applies to all intangible assets that are not specifically dealt with in other international accounting standards. IAS 22 is another standard that regulates business combinations and deals with intangible assets such as brands and trademarks acquired in a business combination. In December 2002, the IASB published an exposure draft of proposed amendments to IAS 36 and IAS 38. In 2002 it also published an exposure draft on business combinations called ED 3. IAS also gives a definition of intangible assets. An “identifiable non-monetary asset without physical substance”[66] is considered to be an intangible asset. There are three critical attributes of an intangible asset.[67] IAS demands future economic benefits, control, and identifiability as recognition criteria for intangible assets. As for tangible assets and intangible assets the future economic benefit has to be probable and the cost of the asset has to be measured reliably.

The different ways of brand recognition are presented in Section 3.2.

3.1.4 Further explanation of useful terms Identifiability

If a company can rent, sell, exchange, or distribute the future economic benefits from an asset, and if this is possible separately (that is, without also disposing of other assets), then the asset is identifiable. In the case of brands, identifiability is often demonstrated by the legal right over a brand, e.g. a registered trademark.[68] The only example for unidentifiable intangible assets in APB Op.17 is goodwill, because all intangible assets that cannot be identified will be added up as goodwill.[69] Goodwill

According to the FASB, goodwill is “the excess of the cost of the acquired company over the sum of the amounts assigned to identifiable assets acquired less liabilities […].”[70] Goodwill appears in business combinations when a company pays more for an acquired company than the sum of the assets of that company. There are several slightly different definitions of goodwill. The International Accounting Standard Committee states that “Any excess of the cost of the acquisition over the acquirer’s interest in the fair value of the identifiable assets and liabilities acquired as at the date of the exchange transaction should be described as goodwill […].”[71] The position of the Australian Accounting Standard Board shows the difference between intangible assets such as brands and goodwill: “Goodwill compromises the future economic benefits from unidentifiable assets which, because of their nature, are not normally individually recognised.”[72] The difference is that goodwill does not meet the recognition criteria for intangible assets because it is unidentifiable. Goodwill includes unrecognisable assets such as brands that are acquired in a business combination.[73] Goodwill only occurs after mergers or acquisition. Companies that have not acquired other businesses, which is often the fact for medium and small business can not record goodwill on their balance sheets. For example, Nokia acquired Amber Networks in 2001, for EUR408 million, and “The fair value of net assets acquired was EUR -13 million, giving rise to goodwill of EUR 421 million.”[74] Reliability

The accounting standards for brands in both regulations require brands to be measurable. Measurability is a criterion for asset recognition. This means that the cost or the value of the brand must be measurable with reliability. FASB Concept Statement No. 2, Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information, defines reliability as “the quality of information that assures that information is reasonably free from error and bias and faithfully represents what it purports to represent.”[75] A question that focuses on reliability is: “Is the Information Representationally Faithful, Verifiable, and Neutral?”[76] A brand is reliable if the information about it is representationally faithful, free of material errors, and neutral or free from biases.[77] Furthermore, the information must be sufficiently faithful in its representation of the underlying resource.[78] Relevance

A question that pinpoints relevance is: “Is the information about the asset capable of making a difference in user decision?”[79] Relevance is primary a qualitative characteristic of information. The information about a brand must have value for users, because users are interested in relevant information about brands. Relevance should be evaluated in the context of a full set of financial statements.[80] Useful life

Useful life is a measure of time over which an asset is expected to be used. Useful life is of great importance for amortization purposes.[81] Brands as intangible assets can have a finite useful life, or they can have an infinite useful life. Useful life can be described as the period over which an asset will be employed in a productive capacity. The FASB defines it as the “period over which the asset is expected to contribute directly or indirectly to the future cash flows of that entity.”[82]

The list of factors that designate the useful life includes, among others, the expected use of the brand, any legal provision that may limit useful life, effects such as demand or competition, and the level of expenditures required to obtain the expected future cash flows from the brand.[83] The decision can also be influenced by competition or other economic factors. It is expensive to maintain a brand, and without trademarking the brand will soon loose its level of awareness.[84] “Certainly, where a brand is trademarked the duration can be indefinite, […]”[85] as long as the owner renews the trademark registration. However, because renewal of a trademark registration is possible with little effort and “without substantial cost, […]”[86] trademark registration is not a hurdle and is convenient to ensure an indefinite useful life under US-GAAP and IAS.[87]

There are many examples of useful life involving very old brands such as Ferrari and Marlboro.[88] Coca Cola was registered as a trademark in 1887.[89] David Tweedie, the chairman of the IASB, joked that the brand name of his favourite Scotch whisky is older than the United States of America.[90] The expected use of a brand can be a very decisive factor for the determination of the useful life of a brand. As we see in the example of Oldsmobile, a decision for phasing out a brand can be taken by management. Oldsmobile executives announced in 2001 that they will phase out the Oldsmobile brand after its more than 100 years as the auto industry nameplate.[91] Thus, if brands are properly managed, they can very for a very long time. In the case of Oldsmobile, the life of the brand was very finite and determined by the company. Examples of brands that have vanished are Triumph, Simca, and Steinhäger.[92] Active market

The exposure draft for IAS 38 defines an active market as a market where the items traded are homogeneous, where willing buyers and sellers can normally be found at any time, and where prices are available to the public.[93] Markets have numerous economic functions. One of the functions is of special importance to accounting. Market prices provide information about values of goods and services. Fair value measurements use market prices to value assets.

An active market cannot exist for brands, because each brand is unique and because homogeneous brands cannot be found.[94] At present, there is no organized and competitive market for brands. However, there are a number of trademark brokers and other trades (for example in the form of licensing or franchising) that might change this situation.[95]

3.2 Recognition

3.2.1 Process of capitalization

Recognition is the process of formally incorporating an item into the financial statements of an entity as an asset.[96] Practically, for the capitalization of brands three questions can be raised: What kind of items go in financial statements? When do those items get reported in the statement? And how are those items quantified in the statements?[97] The asset definition has to be met. The brand has to be recognised, which would entitle the item to be disclosed. Recognition is the basis for measuring brand assets where value has to be assigned to the brand asset.[98] By and large, the process of disclosure for brands in financial statements includes three steps, as illustrated in Figure 3.1.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

3.2.2 Separate acquisition of brands US-GAAP

According to US-GAAP, purchased brands are to be capitalized. Brands acquired individually and brands acquired in groups of other assets are to be capitalized “regardless of their character.”[99] This means that whenever a company acquires a trademark separately, it must disclose it on the financial statement. Separately purchased brands are merely treated as tangible assets such as property, plants, and equipment, but are disclosed as intangible assets, brands, or trademarks.

Seen from the perspective of the selling company, when the asset is sold, and the receipt from the transaction is recorded as a gain on sale. However, there is no recognized reduction in balance sheet assets as the result of the sale.[100] An impressive example of a separate brand acquisition is the £40 million purchase of the Rolls-Royce brand name by BMW in 1998. BMW purchased the brand separately, without any production sites.[101]


[1] See McGavock, [Intangible Assets: A Ticking Time Bomb], p 22.

[2] See Anonymous, [Taking stock of a company’s most valuable assets], without page.

[3] Clifton, [Surviving Enron], without page.

[4] Blair, [Brookings Task Force], p 2.

[5] See Harlow, [Branded anything but Unique], p 13.

[6] McDonald’s Corporation, [McDonald’s Annual Report 2002], p 3.

[7] Yahoo, [Yahoo 2002 Annual Report], p 10.

[8] See Broniarczyk, [The importance of the brand], p 214.

[9] See Seetharaman, [A conceptual study on brand valuation], p 243.

[10] See The Coca-Cola Company, [Brand fact sheets], without page.

[11] See Blair, [Brookings Task Force], p 1.

[12] See Paulo, [pro forma isn’t the answer either], p 54.

[13] See Blair, [Brookings Task Force], p 3.

[14] Lev, [Intangibles], p 99.

[15] See NYSE, [press room], without page.

[16] See Anonymous, [Mandatory for listed companies by 2005], without page.

[17] See Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], vii.

[18] See Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], 7.

[19] See American Institute of Chartered Public Accountants, [AICPA Special Committee report], chapter 1a.

[20] See Financial Accounting Standard Board, [Concepts No. 1], chapter 10.

[21] See PriceWaterhouseCoopers, [IAS Framework], without page.

[22] See American Institute of Chartered Public Accountants, [AICPA Special Committee report], chapter 1a; See PriceWaterhouseCoopers, [IAS Framework], without page.

[23] Financial Accounting Standard Board, [Concepts No. 5], p viii.

[24] Lev, [Intangibles], p 2; See Blair, [Brookings Task Force], p 1; Interbrand, [A SPECIAL REPORT].

[25] See Financial Accounting Standard Board; [Concepts No. 5], p viii; Seetharaman, [Intellectual capital accounting and reporting], p 128.

[26] See Financial Accounting Standard Board, [Concepts No. 1], chapter 18.

[27] Kotler, [Marketing Management], p 358.

[28] See Seetharaman, [A conceptual study on brand valuation], p 246.

[29] See Financial Accounting Standards Board, [FASB 141], chapter A 16.

[30] Seetharaman, [A conceptual study on brand valuation], p 243.

[31] Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 96.

[32] See Seetharaman, [A conceptual study on brand valuation], p 244; also see Lev, [Intangibles], p 70.

[33] Belford, [Build your brand for best results] without page.

[34] See Flesher, [Accounting for advertising costs: the options are narrowing], without page.

[35] See Macintosh, [Accounting for brands], p14.

[36] Ong, [One ‘Happy’ Family], without page.

[37] See Financial Accounting Standards Board, [FASB 141], A 16.

[38] US Trademark and Patent Office, [The Law Of Trademarks].

[39] See International Trademark Association, [Maintenance and Renewal], without page.

[40] See Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 86.

[41] Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 96.

[42] See Kriegbaum, [Markencontrolling], p 9.

[43] See Lev, [Intangibles], p 6.

[44] See McEwen, [Brand Management: Is Advertising dead?], without page.

[45] See Kharif, [T-Mobile’s Confusing Message] without page.

[46] See The Walt Disney Company, [The Walt Disney Company Annual Report 2002], p 70.

[47] Financial Accounting Standards Board, [Concepts No.6], chapter 25.

[48] International Accounting Standard Committee, [Framework], chapter 49.

[49] See Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], p 60; also see KPMG, [Rechnungslegung nach US-amerikanischen Grundsätzen], p 18; See Epstein, [Wiley], chapter 9.

[50] See Kriegbaum, [Markencontrolling], p 45.

[51] See Kriegbaum, [Markencontrolling] p 45.

[52] See Financial Accounting Standards Board, [Concepts No. 6], chapter 26.

[53] Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 81.

[54] See Epstein, [Wiley], chapter 9.

[55] See Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], p 60.

[56] See Seetharaman, [A conceptual study on brand valuation], p 246; KPMG, [Rechnungslegung nach US-amerikanischen Grundsätzen], p 18.

[57] See KPMG, [Rechnungslegung nach US-amerikanischen Grundsätzen], p 75.

[58] Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], p 51.

[59] Epstein, [Wiley], chapter 12.

[60] See International Accounting Standard Committee, [Framework], chapter 85.

[61] See Financial Accounting Standards Board, [Concepts No. 5], chapter 73.

[62] See Lev, [Intangibles], p 123.

[63] Financial Accounting Standards Board, [FASB 142], chapter 2.

[64] Financial Accounting Standards Board, [FASB 141], chapter F1.

[65] See Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 60.

[66] International Accounting Standard Committee, [ED 38], chapter 7.

[67] See International Accounting Standard Committee, [IAS 38], chapter 7; See Epstein, [Wiley], chapter 9; See Seetharaman , [Intellectual capital accounting and reporting], p 134.

[68] See Epstein, [Wiley], chapter 9.

[69] See KPMG, [Rechnungslegung nach US-amerikanischen Grundsätzen], p 75.

[70] Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 76.

[71] International Accounting Standards Committee 1998 [IAS] IAS 22. 41.

[72] Australian Accounting Standards Board 1996 [AASB] AASB 1013, para 5.7.

[73] See Financial Accounting Standards Board, [FASB 142], chapter F1.

[74] Nokia, [Annual Accounts 2002], p 20.

[75] Financial Accounting Standards Board, [Present Value-Based Measurements in Accounting], 19.

[76] Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], 78.

[77] See Epstein, [Wiley], chapter 3.

[78] See Financial Accounting Standards Board, [Concepts No. 5], chapter 75.

[79] Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], 78.

[80] See Financial Accounting Standards Board, [Concepts No. 5], chapter 74.

[81] See Epstein, [Wiley], chapter 9.

[82] Financial Accounting Standards Board, [FASB 142], chapter 11.

[83] See Financial Accounting Standards Board, [FASB 142], chapter 9.

[84] See Kriegbaum, [Markencontrolling], p 9.

[85] Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 86.

[86] Financial Accounting Standards Board, [FASB 142], chapter 11d.

[87] See Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 86.

[88] See Seetharaman, [A conceptual study on brand valuation], p 247.

[89] See The Coca-Cola Company, [Brand fact sheets], without page.

[90] See Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], 71.

[91] See Gordon, [Oldsmobile], p 12.

[92] See Stolowy, [International accounting disharmony: The case of intangibles], 493.

[93] See International Accounting Standard Committee, [ED 38], chapter 7.

[94] See International Accounting Standard Committee, [ED 38], chapter 73; also see Brockington, [Accounting for intangible assets: a new perspective on the true and fair view], p 117.

[95] See Lev, [Intangibles], p 42; see also or

[96] Financial Accounting Standard Board, [Concepts No. 5], p vii.

[97] See Upton, Jr, [FASB Special Report], 23.

[98] See Haigh, [Brand Assets foreword], without page.

[99] Jennings, [Accounting for Intangibles in the United States], p 492.

[100] See Blair, [Brookings Task Force], p 53.

[101] See Tollington, [Brand Assets] p 38.


ISBN (eBook)
ISBN (Buch)
489 KB
Institution / Hochschule
Helmut-Schmidt-Universität - Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg – Wirtschafts- und Organisationswissenschaften
2004 (November)
rechnungslegung markenwert vermögensgüter us-gaap



Titel: Accounting for brands according to US-GAAP and IAS