澳洲论文查重：金融工具
多年来，标准制定者一直在处理与金融工具会计相关的问题。关于采用何种估值方法的决定涉及各种困难，在许多情况下，这被认为是有争议的(Deegan, 2013)。最近，全球市场开始出现大幅波动和流动性不足，这进一步为公允价值评估创造了条件，使其更具争议性。当前时代复杂的金融创新工具，如抵押贷款支持证券、衍生品等金融结构性产品的价值具有主观性，具有市场的波动性和非流动性(Dechow, 2010)。虽然许多人都同意公允价值在产生与历史成本相比更重要的衡量标准方面是有用的，但它不能被认为是完美的。围绕公允价值计量，研究人员发现了两个关键的争议:1)何时以及如何必须使用建模作为公允价值的确定方法;2)公允价值会计在非流动性市场平台上的适用性(Yuan-yuan & Jun, 2009)。
澳洲论文查重：金融工具
通过对公允价值在财务会计中的运用的启示，本文将对公允价值会计的文献进行梳理，找出公允价值会计的主要优势和不足。在2001年年底，全球会计准则的制定者发布了一份关于金融工具和类似项目的咨询文件，提出了在公司账目中报告金融工具的基本趋势。如上所述,许多研究人员如bie(2005)和电子(2001),根据银行业,这种类型的一种方法不能考虑适合银行,和一定的限制,有弱点的参与有关的方式有问责银行目前的金融工具。相反,根据金融工具的联合工作组,以下建议了(Deegan, 2013):所有类别的实体应该测量所有的金融工具的公允价值,应立即认识到每一个变化,在声明中公允价值的损益账户。对于任何工具，公允价值必须是估计市场的退出价格。在套期安排中使用金融工具不应存在例外范围，这意味着金融工具不得有套期账户。
澳洲论文查重：金融工具
Since a number of years, standard setters have dealt with issues in association with the accounting for financial instruments. Decisions regarding what method of valuation can be applied involve various difficulties, and in a number of cases, it is seen as controversial (Deegan, 2013). Recently, the global market has started to experience significant volatility and illiquidity that further creates conditions in making the assessments of fair value become more controversial. The value of complex financial and innovative instruments in the current era, like mortgage- backed securities, derivatives and other structured products of finance have subjectivity with volatility and illiquidity of market (Dechow, 2010). While it is agreed by many that fair value is useful in yielding a more significant measure in comparison with historical cost, it cannot be considered as perfect. Two key controversies identified by researchers surrounding the measurements of fair value are: 1) When and how there must be use of modelling as the method for determination of fair value, and 2) The applicability for accounting of fair value in illiquid market platforms (Yuan-yuan & Jun, 2009).
澳洲论文查重：金融工具
Enlightened with the use of fair value in financial accounting, the paper will be reviewing the literature of fair value accounting to identify its key advantages and disadvantages. In the year ending 2001, the setters of accounting standard across the globe issued a consultation paper for financial instruments and similar items, proposing fundamental trends to the way in which there is reporting of financial instruments in the accounts of companies. As stated by a number of researchers such as Bies (2005) and Ebling (2001), according to the banking sector, this type of an approach cannot be considered appropriate for banks, and to a certain limit, there is an involvement of weaknesses regarding the ways in which there is accountability of financial instruments at banks currently. On the contrary, according to the Financial Instruments Joint Working Party, the following proposals had been made (Deegan, 2013):All categories of entity should be measuring all of the financial instruments in terms of fair value, and should be recognizing each and every change immediately in those fair values in the statement of Profits and Losses Account.For any instrument, the fair value has to be the exit price of estimated market.There should be no scope of exception for the use of financial instrument in the arrangements of hedging that means that has to be no accounts of hedging for the instruments of finance.