Correct Accounting Principles in Connection with the Payment of Construction Costs on Federal Irrigation Projects

The Tokyo Metropolitan Government has planned future flood control for a rainfall intensity of 100 mm/hr, which corresponds to a return period of 70 years, and a runoff coefficient of 0.8. Considering that the realization of this plan requires a long construction period and high construction costs, the decision was made to proceed by stages. In the first stage, the improvement of the facilities will be based on a rainfall intensity of 75 mm/hr (presently 50 mm/hr), corresponding to a return period of 17 years, and a runoff coefficient of 0.8. In the next stage the facilities will be improved to accommodate a rainfall intensity of 100 mm/hr. In the Nakano and Suginami regions, which suffer frequently from flooding, the plan of improvement based on a rainfall intensity of 75 mm/hr is being implemented before other areas. This facility will be used as a storage sewer for the time being. The Wada-Yayoi Trunk Sewer, as a project of this plan, will have a diameter of 8 m and a 50 m earth cover. This trunk sewer will be constructed considering several constraints. To resolve these problems, hydraulic experiments as well as an inventory study have been carried out. A large drop shaft for the trunk sewer is under construction.

Download Full-text

FUNDS STATEMENTS: THE ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES BOARD WAS TWICE BEHIND THE CURVE

Accounting Historians Journal ◽

10.2308/0148-4184.42.2.91 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 42 (2) ◽

pp. 91-102 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Stephen A. Zeff

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Stock Exchange ◽

Securities And Exchange Commission ◽

New York Stock Exchange ◽

Accounting Principles ◽

York Stock Exchange

This paper discusses the circumstances in which the Accounting Principles Board (APB) issued Opinions 3 and 19, in 1963 and 1971, respectively, when the Board encouraged and then required companies to publish a statement of source and application of funds, known as the funds statement. In doing so, the Board both times lagged behind company practice and the views of influential organizations, including the New York Stock Exchange and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Download Full-text

THE WORK OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON RESEARCH PROGRAM

Accounting Historians Journal ◽

10.2308/0148-4184.28.2.141 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 28 (2) ◽

pp. 141-186 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Stephen A. Zeff

Keyword(s):

Research Program ◽

Special Committee ◽

Accounting Firms ◽

Accounting Research ◽

Research Division ◽

Accounting Principles ◽

The Creation ◽

Big Eight ◽

Accounting Procedure

This article begins by recounting the circumstances that led to the AICPA's decision in 1957 to appoint a special committee to recommend a stronger research program to support the process of establishing accounting principles. It then proceeds to examine in depth the committee's sometimes difficult deliberations that eventually led to a unanimous report, in which it recommended the creation of an Accounting Principles Board and an enlarged accounting research division within the Institute. In the course of the article, the author brings out the strong philosophical differences among several of the Big Eight accounting firms that had been impeding the work of the Committee on Accounting Procedure and that also intruded into the Special Committee's deliberations.

Download Full-text

SAMUEL J. BROADS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ACCOUNTING PROFESSION

Accounting Historians Journal ◽

10.2308/0148-4184.23.2.69 ◽

1996 ◽

Vol 23 (2) ◽

pp. 69-85 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Gary John Previts ◽

Thomas R. Robinson

Keyword(s):

Self Regulation ◽

Accounting Profession ◽

General Acceptance ◽

Accounting Principles ◽

The Individual ◽

Securities Laws ◽

Analogous Reasoning ◽

Independent Audit ◽

Selection Of

In the decade following the passage of the Federal Securities Laws of 1933 and 1934, the reform of accounting and auditing practices directed authority for selection of accounting principles and auditing procedures away from the discretion of the individual accountant and auditor. Instead, a self-regulatory peer driven process to establish general acceptance for a more limited set of principles and procedures was being initiated. Two events which occurred in 1938 indelibly affected this process, the SEC's decision to issue Accounting Series Release No. 4, which empowered non-governmental entities as potential sources of authoritative support, and the McKesson & Robbins fraud which called into question the value of the independent audit and the role of external auditing at the very time a momentum had been established for self-regulation by the nascent and recently reunified accounting profession. The contributions of Samuel J. Broad in both the initiatives for self-regulation of accounting principles and of auditing procedures is examined in this paper. Further, several examples of Broad's rhetorical technique of employing analogous reasoning to facilitate dissemination of complex economic and accounting issues are examined.

Download Full-text

THE SEC PREEMPTS THE ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES BOARD IN 1965: THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE DEFERRED TAX CREDIT RELATING TO INSTALLMENT SALES

Accounting Historians Journal ◽

10.2308/0148-4184.34.1.1 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 34 (1) ◽

pp. 1-23 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Stephen A. Zeff

Keyword(s):

Securities And Exchange Commission ◽

Accounting Practice ◽

Slow Pace ◽

Accounting Principles ◽

Private And Public ◽

Deferred Tax ◽

Accounting Procedure ◽

The U.S ◽

Do So

In 1959, the Accounting Principles Board (APB) replaced the Committee on Accounting Procedure because the latter was unable to deal forthrightly with a series of important issues. But during the APB's first half-dozen years, its record of achievement was no more impressive than its predecessor's. The chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Manuel F. Cohen, criticized the APB's slow pace and unwillingness to tackle difficult issues. This article discusses the circumstances attending the SEC's issuance of an Accounting Series Release in late 1965 to demonstrate forcefully to the APB that, when it is unable to carry out its responsibility to “narrow the areas of difference” in accounting practice, the SEC is prepared to step in and do so itself. In this sense, the article deals with the tensions between the private and public sectors in the establishment of accounting principles in the U.S. during the mid-1960s. The article makes extensive use of primary resource materials in the author's personal archive, which have not been used previously in published work.

Download Full-text