ACCT6002_02PM_Group6_Topic4_Week5 by 陈贝佳

Q1

2387187709 — 2025-09-01 14:58:32 UTC

Do you think prudence should be a core principle in the IFRS Conceptual Framework, or should neutrality always come first?

Q2

2387187709 — 2025-09-01 14:58:41 UTC

In our Week 4 slides, we learned that IFRS often allows multiple options and uses a mixed measurement model. Gebhardt criticizes this as lacking coherence, Barker shows that practice is still conservative, and Hughes documents the IASB’s cautious reintroduction of prudence.

Do you think bringing prudence back into the Conceptual Framework actually helps improve comparability and transparency, or does it just add another layer of ambiguity? Why?

Q3

2387187709 — 2025-09-01 14:59:45 UTC

Why do you think IFRS allows different options, like cost or fair value? Do you see it as flexibility or inconsistency?

Q4

2387187709 — 2025-09-01 14:59:49 UTC

From the perspective of investors and regulators, does prudence provide more useful information for decision-making, or does neutrality better serve their needs? Why?