English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In 2010, the U.S. accounting rulemaker (FASB) updated its longstanding constitution to eliminate “reliability” as a fundamental accounting property. FASB argued that “reliability” was misunderstood in practice and that this amendment clarified its original intent. Drawing on primary archival resources and field interviews with regulators, I provide evidence that the change also sought to legitimize the rise of fair-value accounting. By eliminating the need for accounting to be “reliable,” the change attempted to neutralize concerns about the subjectivity in fair-value estimates. Such subjectivity can facilitate accounting manipulation, and some fair-value rules can be attributed to lobbying by managers who stand to benefit. The change illustrates “conceptual veiling,” wherein regulators, seeking to diffuse criticism, including suspicions of capture, manufacture costly conceptual narratives for justifying their actions.

Unreliable Accounts: How Regulators Fabricate Conceptual Narratives to Diffuse Criticism