Harmonising public sector accounting laws and regulations of the European Union member states: powers and competences

2021 ◽  
pp. 002085232110600
Author(s):  
Karoline Helldorff ◽  
Johan Christiaens
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Public ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
Will Force ◽  
The One ◽  
Rules Set ◽  
The Eu

This paper analyses the powers and competences of the EU to standardise public sector accounting of the member states and to take other EU action in the field of public sector accounting. We argue that public sector accounting forms part of the administrative organisation of the member states that is not a core EU competence. EU initiatives such as the European Public Sector Accounting Standards project, which aim to increase transparency and comparability, therefore need to follow the rules set out for administrative matters in general. The study reveals on the one hand that EU actions are essentially limited to voluntary cooperation and influences of other policy areas. But on the other hand, it shows that they do not need to be limited to the initiatives currently driven by Eurostat. Points for practitioners The future of the European Public Sector Accounting Standards project is uncertain. However, it is very unlikely that it will take the shape of a top-down set of readymade EU accounting standards that will force public administrations to adjust their inner workings. Public sector accounting is not (yet) a (typical) European policy, but simply a national one that the EU can support. The EU initiative can be considered as an opportunity for collaboration and knowledge sharing on how to increase transparency of public sector accounting.

Pension Obligations in the European Union: A Case Study for Accounting Policy

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuri Biondi ◽  
Marion Boisseau-Sierra
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Sector ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Critical Issue ◽  
Financial Supervision ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Member States ◽  
Public Sector Accounting

AbstractPension obligations constitute a critical issue for public finances and budgets. This is especially true for the European Union whose institutional mechanism aims to supervise Member States’ spending through centralised budgetary rules based upon financial covenants. In this context, accounting methods of recognition and measurement of pension obligations become an integral and critical aspect of Europe’s transnational budgetary and financial supervision. Drawing upon a comprehensive overview of pension management and regulation, this article aims to analyse the ongoing debate on accounting for pension obligations with a specific attention to the harmonization of European Public Sector Accounting Standards (EPSAS). While the European Commission has been favouring the ‘indisputable reference’ to the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS), European Member States’ practices and views remain inconsistent with the normative solution imposed by the IPSAS 25, which favours and facilitates Definite Contribution pension schemes. In this context, we do summarise the IPSAS position mimicking the IFRS, review the pension’s accounting in national statistics and EPSAS debate, and provide some building blocks for a comprehensive model of accounting for pension obligations that admits and enables several viable modes of pension management.

scholarly journals IPSAS for European Union member states as starting points for EPSAS

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2/3) ◽  
pp. 247-264
Author(s):  
Tobias Polzer ◽  
Christoph Reichard
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Sector ◽  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Accounts ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
Institutional Contexts

Purpose The European Commission is pursuing an initiative to establish European Public Sector Accounting Standards (EPSAS) as a common mandatory set of rules for financial reporting of all member states of the European Union (EU). As a basis for developing EPSAS, the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) are being used. The purpose of this paper is to structure and analyze the discussion around EPSAS, with particular emphasis on the arguments that were brought forward by governments and other stakeholders of various EU countries regarding the suitability of IPSAS. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on several schools of thought in new institutional theory, how the prevailing institutional contexts in countries influence the debates is explored. Empirically, this research investigates the responses to a consultation on the suitability of IPSAS for EU member states and takes a closer look, via document analysis, at France and Germany as two critical cases. Findings It is found that, first, the majority of arguments from respondents are framed in a rational choice way. Second, skeptics of IPSAS tend to make arguments rather from positions closer to historical and/or sociological institutionalism. Research limitations/implications The paper illustrates that while technical matters around EPSAS seem solvable, political, historical and cultural differences go deeper, and need to be addressed by change agents. Regarding limitations of the research, first, the analysis concentrates on financial reporting and does not deal with the implications for more reliable and comparable national accounts in the context of the European System of Accounts (ESA, 2010). Second, it is focused on debates in the context of the EPSAS proposal, and there is a need for an evaluation after the changes have gone live. Originality/value The study looks at a text genre that has so far received less attention in public sector accounting research: responses to consultations. The paper contributes to the literature by showing how institutional contexts matter in settings characterized by contestation of reform contents.

scholarly journals Harmonising European Public Sector Accounting Standards (EPSAS): Issues and Perspectives

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuri Biondi
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Specific Context ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Public ◽  
Reform Project ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
Net Assets ◽  
Pattern Of Implementation ◽  
Cash Basis

Abstract An important reform project is ongoing concerning harmonising Europe’s public sector accounting standards (EPSAS). The European Commission appears willing to mimic and take the international private sector accounting as frame of reference, following the same pattern of implementation for international public sector accounting standards (IPSAS) that was enacted for the IAS-IFRS. But the Member States did react in a different way, this time, showing alert, raising questions, and providing resistance in some cases. Public sector accounting shall be considered in the specific context provided by public finances in general, and by a monetary union in particular. This paper takes perspective on these specificities while raising issues (i) on the EPSAS-making governance; (ii) relationship between cash-basis and accrual-basis of accounting; (iii) accounting for governmental liabilities by Member States; and (iv) evidence of net assets under accruals-basis.

scholarly journals A Perspective on the Proposal for European Public Sector Accounting Standards, in the Context of Accruals in UK Government Accounting

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rowan Jones ◽  
Josette Caruana
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Accounting System ◽  
Monetary Policies ◽  
Government Accounting ◽  
European Public ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis paper offers a UK perspective on the proposal to develop European Public Sector Accounting Standards (EPSAS). It offers the fundamentals of the UK government’s system of budgeting and accounting, which is the responsibility of the UK Treasury, being one part of its responsibilities for the UK’s fiscal and monetary policies. In the light of this, the EPSAS proposal remains a puzzle and a peripheral one at that. The paper ponders on the forces underlying the EPSAS proposal and notes that for the government practitioner in an EU member state, rules emanating from the EU would naturally have a macro-level focus. Consequently, any potential advantages of an accrual accounting system at micro-level may not be fully appreciated.

scholarly journals Accounting Rules for the European Communities: A Theoretical Analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuri Biondi ◽  
Michela Soverchia
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Balance Sheet ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Accounting System ◽  
Member States ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
Accounting Rules ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIn the last decade, the European Union (EU) has reformed its accounting system, issuing its own conceptual framework and 18 accounting standards that draw upon the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) issued by the IPSAS Board. The aim of this article is to analyse this renewed EU accounting system that frames and shapes financial accounting and reporting of the European Communities (EC), in order to assess its capacity to “truly and fairly” represent EC economic activity as a non-business entity.The EU accounting rules are analysed from a theoretical perspective that disentangles three different accrual-based accounting representations focusing respectively on wealth (static accounting), cash flow and economic flow (dynamic accounting). Our analysis retains a modified dynamic accounting representation that fits the specific economy of public administration. This modified dynamic accounting representation is then applied to assess the representational quality of the EU accounting system. This legal-economic, normative analysis of consistency with our theoretical model is complemented and somehow corroborated by documental analysis, financial analysis and few semi-structured interviews with EU officials.Generally speaking, our analysis shows that the EU accounting system provides a consistent representation of the EC economic and financial activities, although the reference to the IPSAS has somewhat involved the application of a balance sheet accounting approach that is inconsistent with this representation. In particular, the new EU accounting system has improved on some objectives of financial accounting and reporting, such as: the economic function of redistribution related to the economic solidarity between its constituencies (Member States); the prevention of frauds concerned with transfers and financial operations; the accomplishment of intergenerational and transnational equity, through the recovery of incurred expenditures by constituencies (Member States and, indirectly, taxpayers) located in different places at different times.These findings seem relevant not only to assess the quality of accounting representation provided by the EU accounting system but also in the view of its possible influence on the European Public Sector Accounting Standards – making process launched since 2013. This process is expected to reframe and reshape EU Member States’ accounting systems in the near future.

scholarly journals The European Union's policy on human rights and Chinese sovereignism: The case of Xinjiang

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-86
Author(s):  
Dragan Trailovic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
The Other ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The One ◽  
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region ◽  
Rights Issues ◽  
The Eu

The article explores the European Union's approach to human rights issues in China through the processes of bilateral and multilateral dialogue on human rights between the EU and the People's Republic of China, on the one hand. On the other hand, the paper deals with the analysis of the EU's human rights policy in the specific case of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, which is examined through normative and political activities of the EU, its institutions and individual member states. Besides, the paper examines China's response to the European Union's human rights approaches, in general, but also when it comes to the specific case of UAR Xinjiang. ?his is done through a review of China's discourse and behaviour within the EU-China Human Rights Dialogue framework, but also at the UN level and within the framework of bilateral relations with individual member states. The paper aims to show whether and how the characteristics of the EU's general approach to human rights in China are reflected in the individual case of Xinjiang. Particular attention shall be given to the differentiation of member states in terms of their approach to human rights issues in China, which is conditioned by the discrepancy between their political values, normative interests and ideational factors, on the one hand, and material factors and economic interests, on the other. Also, the paper aims to show the important features of the different views of the European Union and the Chinese state on the very role of Human Rights Dialogue, as well as their different understandings of the concept of human rights itself. The study concluded that the characteristics of the Union's general approach to human rights in China, as well as the different perceptions of human rights issues between China and the EU, were manifested in the same way in the case of UAR Xinjiang.

Towards the Modernisation of EU Public Sector Accounting Standards

2018 ◽  
pp. 40-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincenzo Sforza ◽  
Alessandro Mechelli ◽  
Riccardo Cimini
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
State Government ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Governmental Accounting ◽  
National Regulation ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
Security Funds ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Eu

In the field of comparative international governmental accounting research, this chapter participates to the growing debate around the EPSAS-project that according to the EU Commission has a political priority. In this vein, it demonstrates that considering all the governmental subsectors of public administration (central government, state government, local government, social security funds) of the 28 EU Member States, proximity of national regulation to the IPSAS affects the magnitude of total adjustments. These are a proxy of fiscal fragility and are the difference between the non-harmonized data of governmental accounting and the harmonized ESA-2010 national accounting. Findings show that adjustments are significant in magnitude in countries whose regulation has low proximity to IPSAS; opposite, their magnitude is low in countries with high proximity to the IPSAS. Even if they have not provided the anticipated level of harmonisation, the process of modernising the EU public sector accounting standards cannot ignore that the future EPSAS should not diverge much from the IPSAS.

scholarly journals Open Debate on Accounting for the European Public Sector

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-163
Author(s):  
Imke Graeff
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
International Workshop ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Accounting Regulation ◽  
European Public ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
Open Debate

Abstract This article contains the proceedings of the open debate that followed the plenary panel on ‘Accounting for the European Public Sector: The Ongoing Reform of European Public Sector Accounting Standards’ at the international workshop on ‘Which accounting regulation for Europe’s economy and society?’ organised under the auspices of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, on 20 May 2015.

Caught Between National and Supranational Values: Limitations to Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters as Part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice within the European Union

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-72
Author(s):  
Olivia den Hollander
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
The One ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

AbstractCurrently, the European Union is based on both supranational (first pillar) and international (second and third pillar) law. The third pillar signifies police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and although formally based on international law, it has been under increasing "supranational pressure" by the developments in the "Area of Freedom, Security and Justice". This Area is focused on a set of common values and principles closely tied to those of the single market and its four "freedoms". The main argument of this article is that the legal framework of the third pillar is an impediment to judicial cooperation in criminal matters in general, and to the coordination of conflicts of jurisdiction and the principle of ne bis in idem in particular. The legal framework of the third pillar finds itself in the middle of an identity crisis, since it can neither be identified as a traditional intergovernmental, nor as a supranational institutional framework. Criminal law is a politically sensitive matter, which on the one hand explains why the EU member states are reluctant to submit their powers over the issue to the European level and on the other hand, it implies that if the EU member states really want to cooperate on such an intensive level, they will have to submit some of their powers in order to strengthen EU constitutional law. The article suggests a reform of the third pillar through the method of "communitization", which is exactly what will happen in case the EU Reform Treaty will enter into force. This would offer the ingredients for a true international community in which the ambitious agenda of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice can realise its aim of a common set of values and principles which supersedes those of each of the member states individually.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document