一种新的会计文化外文翻译与原文.doc

外文文献翻译
原文：
A New Accounting Culture
But no matter how small a minority caused the problems, all of us in the accounting profession are working to solve them. To begin with, we were “present at the creation” of many of the reform ideas that were recently embraced by law. We helped develop the proposal for a board to oversee auditors of public companies, an idea that evolved into the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. We called for a requirement that auditors be hired by the board’s audit committee, not management. We agreed with a prohibition on those who audit public companies from consulting in two key areas: financial systems design and implementation, and internal audit outsourcing. And we created a public-interest test against which all reforms could be measured:
Will it help investors make informed investment decisions?
Will it enhance audit quality and the quality of financial reporting?
Will it help restore confidence in the capital markets, our nation’s financial reporting system and the accounting profession?
Will it be good for America’s financial markets and economic growth?
But we’ve looked beyond legislation. We’ve engaged in a long and serious process of introspection at the AICPA over what went wrong and what must be done to make it right.
Let there be no doubt: Hundreds of thousands of members of the CPA profession say “no” every day. “No” means protecting the public interest by rejecting unsound corporate accounting practices. “No” means reducing the risk of deceit and fraud. “No” means ensuring that audited statements are not just accurate, but illuminating. “No” means questioning and challenging management. When justified, it means rejecting management’s accounting decisions. Saying “no” means saying “yes” to protecting the public interest. Only if auditors are fully prepared to say “no” will investors be fully prepared to say “yes.”
“No” is not always easy to say. But obscured by the recent focus on our profession is the fact that auditors say it every day. These stories rarely come to light because an auditor prevails on clients to do the right thing. Every day, an auditor is telling a corporate executive what must be disclosed, why an item can’t be treated in a certain manner or why a certain activity must be shown on the balance sheet.
Every year, members of the AICPA collectively conduct almost 17,000 audits of public companies that are unblemished by restatements or allegations of impropriety. That doesn’t even include hundreds of thousands of audits of privately held companies and government and not-for-profit institutions that exemplify the highest standards of integrity.
That’s the true spirit of the accounting profession, a spirit we must marshal in pursuit of a fair investment climate. We must strive for zero audit defects, knowing full well that a combination of factors will prevent us from ever achieving perfection. But when a failure occurs, we must be unrelenting in ensuring that its weaknesses are not repeated.
The president and Congress have taken a significant step. The accounting profession is determined to carry the cause forward. We realize that no single initiative will rebuild investor confidence, that no single magic bullet will put fraud or malfeasance to rest.
Months of introspection at the AICPA have brought us to the conclusion that we have six leadership roles to fulfill. All of them require cooperation with other important players, who have jurisdiction in many vital areas.
First, the AICPA has a role as a standard setter. While the new Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has broad responsibilities, CPAs have a responsibility to set standards for their own profession, just as professionals do in medicine, engineering and architecture.
To ensure that our standard-setting capacity is as robust as possible, the AICPA will make it a priority to obtain greater involvement of the users of financial statements in setting auditing standards.
We are developing new guidance regarding an auditor’s potential dependency on fees from large clients, including discussion with audit committees about potential dependency and expanded rotation requirements for key personnel. The guidance would also consider compensation policies that reward partners primarily based on auditing proficiencies and policies that prevent a firm from penalizing a partner who says “no” at the risk of losing a client.
Second, the AICPA has a role as a liaison between market institutions and corporations, jointly shaping programs and policies to guard the interests of investors. Reducing the incidence of financial fraud will require a partnership among auditors, corporate management and all financial professionals, with the goal of achieving an environment of fraud-free financial reporting.
We will design antifraud criteria and controls intended for public corporations, targeted for introduction next June. We invite corporate America to work with us. We are calling on the Auditing Standards Board to enhance our existing attestation standard for CPAs to test and report on client antifraud controls and programs and to develop ways to communicate the results to the public.
We will be sponsoring a summit, before the end of this year, of financial executives, corporate directors, audit committees, stock exchanges, analysts and regulators to identify new antifraud initiatives and collaborate in implementing them.
Third, the AICPA has a research role. Academic research can provide new insights into the who, what, when, where and why of corporate fraud. These insights will improve corporate-fraud-prevention controls, strengthen undergraduate education and enhance audit procedures to detect fraud.
Today, I am pleased to announce that the AICPA, the University of Texas at Austin and the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners are jointly establishing an Institute for Fraud Studies. We call upon leaders in corporate America and CPA firms to participate in this initiative. We are committed to incorporating the research results into the task of standard setting. One of the outcomes must be improved investor education. For that reason, one of the first research projects will be to study how investors can help protect themselves against fraud.
Fourth, the AICPA has an educational role. We are developing training programs aimed at combating fraud.
We will initiate discussions with the American Accounting Association, the Federation of Schools of Accountancy, chairpersons of university accounting programs and college textbook publishers aimed at promptly incorporating fraud prevention materials into the accounting curriculum and university textbooks. This will give students the knowledge and skills to understand the fundamental characteristics of fraud, identify factors that may indicate it exists and acquire enhanced interviewing techniques. The AICPA will work with academic institutions to develop appropriate materials, targeted for inclusion in college courses in the fall of next year.
We further believe all members of the AICPA should commit more time to continuing education in the area of fraud detection. While considerable ongoing professional education is required to maintain professional standards, we are calling on audit and finance professionals dealing with public companies to commit at least 10 percent of their continuing education to the area of fraud detection.
We are urging stock exchanges to mandate effective antifraud training for all members of management, boards of directors and audit committees. As a public service, by the end of this year, we will develop and make available, free of charge, training programs focusing on the roles and responsibilities of management and those in corporate governance.
Fifth, the AICPA has a role to play in advancing the level of financial reporting. Achieving more transparent financial reporting is central to ensuring fair markets and restoring investor confidence. We are eager to pursue this goal in concert with FASB and with leading corporate organizations. We seek to work with all interested parties, but we are prepared to move forward on our own if necessary.
One of our first steps is to initiate a debate within the accounting community on how to differentiate between the needs of widely held and privately held businesses, and how to reform GAAP to reflect this reality. Given the media focus on public companies, it’s easy to lose sight of both the importance of small business and its unique reporting needs. As a first step in addressing this, the AICPA is asking all of our committees and those of state societies that deal with small-company issues to put this high on their agendas. Feedback is due by the first quarter of next year.
We will work with FASB to ensure an improved reporting model is built that will provide investors with higher-quality information—addressing such issues as off-balance-sheet activity, liquidity, financial performance indicators and unreported intangibles.
In addition, we’re working with the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants to lead the way in updating the reporting model. We’ve jointly developed the Value Measurement and Reporting Collaborative, which brings together stakeholders in the financial reporting process from around the world to determine the best methodologies for value measurements and reporting. This will enable investors to see more information about what makes a company successful. It will also help boards of directors and senior management to make better strategic decisions.
We fully support the SEC’s current proposal to expand and enhance the disclosure of estimates and accounting policies. When the new rules are finalized, we will provide our members with tools to implement it. The additional disclosures should be included either as part of the financial statement disclosures or as part of management’s discussion and analysis (MD&A). And we fully support the auditor’s examination of MD&A. As well, the Auditing Standards Board is seeking input from users of financial information as to other types of information that should be communicated by the auditor.
Sixth, the AICPA has a role in promoting strong corporate governance and internal control systems. A public company’s ability to withstand pressures to provide false information to the public depends largely on those factors.
For that reason, we are calling on the Auditing Standards Board to revise existing internal controls and reporting standards so that the public will be put on notice when the auditor communicates internal control weaknesses to the audit committee. Situations that will be considered as constituting reportable conditions will include one individual holding the dual positions of chairman of the board and CEO or an audit committee that is not fulfilling its mission. It may include lack of mandatory antifraud education or lack of a code of conduct.
In fulfilling all of these roles, the AICPA has an overriding mission: to shape an accounting culture for the future that surpasses the legacy of our past.
Over the past few months, certainly one good thing has occurred: The importance of the audit has been reaffirmed loud and clear. Now, we must build on its core value.
The AICPA will be both a watchdog and a source of leadership. We pledge to be a force for raising new issues and examining issues that are raised by others. We will serve as common ground for all in the profession and those involved in the financial reporting process to bring their concerns and proposals.
To be certain, none of us—auditors, corporations or investors—will look back fondly on this year. But the 350,000 members of the AICPA are concentrating on looking forward. We’re looking forward to implementing the fundamental reforms enacted by Congress. We’re looking forward to working with lawmakers, corporations and the public to implement new reforms as necessary and to rebuilding the faith of investors in the audited financial statement as an open window into publicly traded companies. We’re looking forward to reclaiming our profession’s heritage as a bedrock of business integrity and continuing our historic role as trusted advisers to businesses of all sizes and protectors of the public interest.
It will not be easy. But we are committed to it. We are committed to moving forward. We will rebuild trust in our profession brick by brick.
Source: Barry C．Melancon．A New Accounting Culture[J]．Journal of Accountancy，2002.35-39.

译文：
一种新的会计文化
不管多么小的少数派所造成的问题，在会计行业的我们都正在努力解决这些问题。首先，最近我们许多在“创造方面的颁奖”的改革想法受到法律的保护。我们为董事会提出以监督上市公司的审计师的建议，这个建议是让上市公司会计监督委员会逐步形成。我们要求之一，审计人员按董事会的审计委员会的要求聘请，而不是按管理的要求。我们通过商议两个重要的领域来、同意禁止这些审计机构对公众公司的审计：金融系统设计和实施，以及内部审计外包。此外，针对所有的改革可以进行衡量，我们建立了公共利益测试：
1．它能否帮助投资者作出明智的投资决定？
2．它能否提高审计质量和财务报告的质量？
3．它能否帮助恢复对资本市场的信心，我们国家的财务报表制度和会计专业？
4．是不是有利于美国金融市场和经济的增长？
但我们已经超越我们所观察的法律。我们已经在美国注册会计师协会出问题的原因和弥补措施上进行了长期和认真的反省。
不要有任何疑问：成百上千的CPA成员每天都在说不。不意味着通过拒绝不健全的公司会计准则来保护大众利益；不意味着减少的欺骗和欺诈风险；“不”意味着确保经审计的报表不仅是准确的，但启发性；“不”意味着质疑和挑战性的管理。当合理的时候，它就意味着拒绝管理层的会计决策。说“不”意味着为了保护公众利益说“是”。只有当审计人员做好充分准备说“不”，那么投资者才会作好充分准备说“是的”。
“不”并不总是很容易地说。但是，在我们的行业近期重点是审计人员每天说“不”的这个事实被掩盖了。这些事情很少见光，因为一个审计员有高于顾客的权利去做正确的事情。每一天，审计人员都在告诉一个企业高管必须披露什么，为什么一个项目不能被视为以某种方式，或者为什么一个特定的活动必须在资产负债表所示。
每年美国注册会计师协会的成员要共同地处理17000 起那些被声称或者宣布有不正当行为的公司是清白的审计。这还不包括对私人持有的公司、政府和那些以诚信为最高标准的不以营利为目的的机构。
这是会计专业的真正精神，一种我们必须要以追求公平投资环境为目的的精神。我们一定要争取零的审计缺陷，并且充分认识到多种因素的结合将阻止我们不断实现完美。但是，当发生故障时，我们必须坚定不移，确保其缺点是不能重复。
布什总统和国会采取了重要的一步。会计界有决心将事业进行到底。我们认识到，没有一个单一的计划将重建投资者的信心，没有单一的魔术弹能够停止欺骗和不正当行为。
在美国注册会计师协反思的几个月中，他们会给我们带来了这样的结论：我们有六个领导职责需要去完成。他们都需要与那些在许多重要领域拥有管辖权的重要人员合作。
首先，美国注册会计师协会已成为一个作为标准制定者的角色。虽然新的上市公司会计监督委员会具有广泛的责任，注册会计师有责任为他们自己的行业建立标准，就像在专业人士做医疗、土木工程及建筑。
1．为了确保我们的标准制定的能力是强大的是有可能，美国注册会计师协会将使它在取得更大的审计准则制定的财务报表使用者的参与方面成为一个优势。
2．我们正在开发一个关于审计师从大客户身上得到的潜在费用的新的指导意见，这包括审计委员会讨论潜在的依赖和扩大对关键人员的轮换要求。该指南还将考虑补偿政策，主要是基于审计熟练程度和政策，公司应该奖励而不是惩罚一个为了控制风险拒绝业务，而导致失去客户的合作伙伴。
其次，美国注册会计师协会有作为一家市场机构和企业之间的联络作用，要共同塑造方案和政策，以保卫投资者的利益。在减少金融欺诈的发生方面，将需要在审计人员、企业管理及所有财务专业人士之间的建立伙伴关系，以实现一个无欺诈财务报告目标。
1．我们将设计标准和反欺诈准则并与明年六月有针对性的引进，用于控制公共机构。我们邀请美国公司与我们合作。我们呼吁审计准则委员会来加强我们对会计师事务所进行测试的现有的认证标准和对客户反欺诈控制的报告及方案，并且向社会公布沟通的结果。
2．在本年底，我们将赞助举行财务主管，公司董事，审计委员会，证券交易所，分析师和监管的首脑会议，以确定新的反欺诈行动和合作执行这些建议。
第三，美国注册会计师协会有一个研究的作用。学术研究可以在谁、何时、何地以及为什么进行企业欺诈行为方面提供新的见解。这些见解将改善公司欺诈的预防控制，加强本科教育，和加强审计程序以发现舞弊。
今天，我很高兴地宣布，美国注册会计师协会，在奥斯汀的得克萨斯大学和注册舞弊审计师协会共同建立一个欺诈研究所。我们呼吁美国企业和会计师事务所的领导人参加这一倡议。我们致力于将研究成果纳入标准工作的制定。其中的结果之一，必须是提高投资者的教育程度。出于这个原因，研究项目首先是要研究如何帮助保护投资者自己免受欺诈。
第四，美国注册会计师协会有教育作用。我们正在制定培训计划，旨在打击欺诈。
1．我们会主动与美国会计协会、会计学校联会讨论，大学会计课程的主要人员和学院的会计课程教科书出版商，旨在及时将欺诈预防材料纳入会计课程和大学教科书。这会给学生了解诈骗的基本特点，可能表明它的存在的确定因素的相关知识和获得提高面试技巧。美国注册会计师协会将与学术机构共同开发合适的材料，在明年秋天有针对性的列入大学课程中。
2．我们还相信美国注册会计师协会的所有成员会承诺花更多的时间在欺诈检测领域来进行继续教育。虽然相当持续的专业教育是需要保持专业水准，我们呼吁在审计和财务上与上市公司打交道的专业人员，承诺至少10%参加欺诈检测领域的继续教育。
3．我们正在鼓励所有职业经理人、董事会的董事们、和审计委员会用股票交易的方式来授权进行有效的防欺骗训练。作为一项公共服务，由今年年底，我们将开发和提供可用的，免费的，针对管理责任、角色和公司治理重点的培训方案。
第五，美国注册会计师协会有促进提高财务报告水平的作用。实现更透明的财