International accounting harmonization has always been a significant issue in accounting study at the recent time. With the development of international capital market and the growth of global economic, international accounting harmonization has become a mainstream trend all over the world (Senin,2012). Also, the hot issue drew a great attention with extensive debates. Goeltz (1991) stated that all of the harmonization of international accounting standard has not intrinsic value as well as practically abilities, and capital market has well-developed in the absence of international accounting standard with a number of relevant evidence.Therefore,the purpose of this essay will critically assess the related viewpoints and arguments in the article of Geoltz.
According to the relevant arguments of Goeltz (1991),due to a single standardization of accounting standard has a lack of practical feasibility. so the universal accounting standard with consistency is a quite tough objective. Taking a instance in that article, FASB in US has only notified a new intact standard during three years, and the rest of previous standard in that time period has not any substantial development as well, it just like the speculation problem can not be settled as the consequence of the lack of field test or completion for deferred tax asset of continual deferral over and over again,therefore, it may leads to taking a long time to setting a efficient accounting standard. In addition, another reason from Goeltz (1991) is that the harmonization can not exist without tremendous support and authorize,countries usually sustaining their own standards instead of focusing the globalization of accounting standard due to some restriction of factors, as Baker and Barbu (2007) demonstrated, there were vitally impediments to get accounting harmonization,which is caused by a lot of elements like historical,cultural or political issues.
Moreover, another significant opinion of Goeltz (1990) is that the capital market can be growing normally without international accounting harmonization, With respect of the related statistics, stock value was risen sharply in the international capital market without international accounting standard, financial derivatives just like swaps of currency or other oversea investments generate sustainable benefits, which make a strong capital market as well. But contrary to what different accounting principles have adversely affected to value of equities, because of accounting differences among countries. users of accounting information could have misleading for making a decision in capital market.After that,in Geoltz’s (1991) final argument concludes that the market can not affected by accounting standard.
Through the analysis of the Geoltz’s article, the author basically has a clear comment about the unnecessary and obstacles of global accounting harmonization and unworthiness or inapplicable of the international accounting standard in the market. It may be true that the viewpoints of Geoltz is proper to some extent in 1990s or the several years before,because this is exactly no doubt that Accounting international harmonization is a difficult process, which could not be solved overnight due to the differences in accounting or other factors, despite all this, my perspective is that the author should not deny all of the necessary functions of the global accounting standard harmonization.The reason is that with the continuous development of international accounting standard, it seems like more applicable in the modern world. Firstly, there are number of benefits about international accounting standard harmonization. Senin (2012) stated that Internationally recognized standards not only for the cost reduced but also for countries become a part of mainstream global accounting standards at once.Moreover,the global transaction and investment are increasing reliance on the applicable international accounting