ACCRUAL ACCOUNTING & FINANCIAL REPORTING IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR TO ENHANCE ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY (REFRAMING IMPLEMENTATION IN INDONESIA)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24034/j25485024.y2010.v14.i1.198Keywords:
Cash Base, Accrual Accounting, Financial ReportingAbstract
Implementation modified cash basis at public sector in Indonesia have adopted to implement accrual accounting and financial reporting as the basis for their reformed accounting policy. Public administration in Indonesia has changed dramatically since 1999. The country has gone through one of the fastest and most comprehensive devolution reforms ever seen. Managerial and financial responsibilities have been decentralized from central government, mostly to local government at the district level. Under accrual accounting, government reports financial flows in terms of an operating statement equivalent to a business profit and loss statement. If the budget operating balance is zero, then this year's operating expenses are being fully covered by this year's revenue. Expenses are not the same as outlays so expenses measure this year's costs of production, whereas outlays does not. Prior to the introduction of accrual accounting, the Indonesian government have fiscal policy indicator which underlying cash balance. It was the cash budget balance which the local government. With the arrival of accrual accounting, however, the cash budget balance has been supplanted in this context. This helps us to compare the cash budget balance with fiscal balance. This phenomenon has been widely debated in public management circles, and within the academic literature. Many of these debates however, have been arid and narrowly technically focused. This paper reviews the harmonization process of Indonesian local public sector accounting suppose some main adjustments regarding and prepared exposures draft to harmonize this problem
References
Aiken, M. and Capitanio. 1995. “Accrual Accounting Valuations and Accountability in Government: A Potentially Pernicious Union”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 564 – 575.
Barton, A. 2002b. “Public Sector Accounting: A Common Reporting Framework? A Rejoinder”, Australian Accounting Review, Vol. 12, No.3, pp. 41 – 45.
Brorstrom. 1998. “Accrual Accounting, Politics and Politicians”, Financial Accountability & Management, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 319 – 333 . Carlin, T. 2002. “Linkage and Legitimization – A Decade of Public Sector Financial Management Reforms in Australia”, Proceedings of 7th Annual Asia Pacific Decision Sciences Institute Conference, Bangkok, July. Carlin, T. 2003. “Unraveling the Capital Charging Riddle – Some Empirical Evidence From Victoria”, Financial Accountability & Management, Vol 19, No. 1, pp. 73 – 92.
Carnegie, G. and Wolnizer P. 1995. “The Financial Value of Cultural, Heritage and Scientific Collections: An Accounting Fiction”, Australian Accounting Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 31 – 47.
Christensen, M. 2002. “Public Sector Accrual Accounting: An Early Adopter’s History”, Proceedings of the 9th World Congress of Accounting Historians, Melbourne, July.
English, L., Guthrie, J. and Carlin, T. 2000. “Transformation of Public Sector Financial Management: Reflection on the Victorian Experience Downunder”, EAA 23rd Annual Congress, Munich, Germany.
McGregor, W. 1999. “The Pivotal Role of Accounting Concepts in the Development of Public Sector Accounting Standards”, Australian Accounting Review, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 3 – 8.
OECD. 2002. Accrual Accounting and Budgeting – Key Issues and Recent Developments, OECD, Paris.
Pallot, J. 1990. “The Nature of Public Assets: A Response to Mautz”, Accounting Horizons, June, pp. 79 – 85.
Pallot, J. 1994. “The Development of Accrual-Based Accounts for the Government of New Zealand”, Advances in International Accounting, Vol. 7, pp. 289 – 310.
Pallot, J. 2001. “A Decade in Review: New Zealand’s Experience With Resource Accounting and Budgeting”, Financial Accountability & Management, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 383 – 400.
Parker, L. and Guthrie, J. 1990. “Public Sector Accounting and the Challenge of Managerialism”, in Forster, J. and Wanna, J., (eds.), Budgetary Management and Control: The Public Sector in Australasia, MacMillan, Melbourne, pp. 114 – 127.
Potter, B. 1999. “The Power of Words: Explaining Recent Accounting Reforms in the Australian Public Sector”, Accounting History, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 43 – 72.
Rezaee, Z. 2002. Financial Statement Fraud: Prevention & Detection, Wiley, New York.
Richardson, R. 1994. “Opening and Balancing the Books: The New Zealand Experience”, The Parliamentarian, October, pp. 244 – 246.
RNSWGA (1977), Review of New South Wales Government Administration, Directions for Change: An Interim Report, Chairman, P. Willenski, NSW Government Printer, Sydney.
Robinson, M. 1998a. “Accrual Accounting and the Efficiency of the Core Public Sector”, Financial Accountability & Management, Vol 14, No. 1, pp. 21 – 37. Robinson, M. 1998b. “Capital Charges and Capital Expenditure Decisions in Core Government”, Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 354 – 74. Rowles, T. 1991. “Infrastructure and Heritage Asset Accounting”, Australian Accountant, July, pp. 69 – 73. Rowles, T. 1992. Financial Reporting of Infrastructure and Heritage Assets by Public Sector Entities, Discussion Paper No. 17, Australian Accounting Research Foundation, Melbourne, AARF. Rowles, T. 1993. “Comment: In Defence of AAS 27”, Australian Accounting Review, Vol.3, No. 2, pp. 61 – 64. Rowles, T. 2002. “Defending Accrual Accounting in the Public Sector – Its Usefulness in Economic Decision Making”, International Conference on Accounting, Auditing & Management in Public Sector Reforms, Dublin, September, pp. 358 – 369. Salinas, F. 2002 “Accrual Budgeting and Fiscal Consolidation in the EMU”, Contemporary Economic Policy, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 193 – 206.
