{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03512396694214876, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01652892561983471, 'mean_word_length': 5.417218543046357, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
“Trading Places”: A UK (and IFRS) Comment

Abstract This paper is based on my presentation given as part of a panel discussion at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Accounting Association in August 2012 in Washington DC. To the other panellists’ papers (Glover, 2013; Zeff, 2013b) I add a contrasting perspective from other countries (primarily the UK and the rest of Europe) that incorporates a variety of other actors and differing uses (or ‘objectives’) of financial accounting and reporting. I consider briefly in turn: the major actors; major external uses of financial reports; the ‘rational institutional myths’ that sustain the role of accounting standards; and the potential contributions both of research and of university accounting education. I argue that ‘positive’ and ‘normative’ research, reflecting a deep understanding of accounting’s history, must continue to be complementary in the social engineering of better accounting standards and rules.