Implications for the Conceptual Framework Arising From Accounting for Financial Instruments


  • Michael E. Bradbury

  • Michael Bradbury is a Professor of Accounting at UNITEC Institute of Technology, Auckland. He is a member of the New Zealand Financial Reporting Standards Board. The views expressed in this article are those of the author. The official positions of the Financial Reporting Standards Board are only determined after due process and deliberation.

    The author gratefully acknowledges the comments from Ian Hague and Janice Loftus on an earlier draft.

  • 1

    Most of the G4+1 representatives (Australia, Canada, IASC, New Zealand, U.K. and U.S.) have similar conceptual frameworks.


This article describes some of the issues faced by standard setters in developing guidance on accounting for financial instruments and the implications these issues have for the conceptual framework (CF). The objective is to outline issues, not necessarily to resolve them, and to consider the implications they have for further developing the conceptual framework.

Given the current trend of harmonization and convergence of accounting practice towards international standards, it seems reasonable to assume that any policy implications will be most relevant to the CF inherited by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB).1 Unless otherwise stated, references will be made to International Accounting Standards (IAS).