外文翻譯--稅法應如何遵從會計制度

1、<p>　　1000單詞，5300英文字符,2070漢字</p><p>　　出處：Karen Andrea D. Torres: ”How tax follows accounting”, <Business World>, May ,2008</p><p>　　How tax follows accounting</p><p>　　It

2、 has been a common misconception that tax and accounting are worlds apart. Whereas present accounting standards are already leaning towards valuation at fair market values, tax, on the other hand, is generally construed

3、to be at cash and historical cost basis.</p><p>　　The confusion seems to have stemmed from the fact that, once upon a time, cash-basis accounting was generally accepted and assets were valued at their acquis

4、ition cost, without any reference to their markets. </p><p>　　Despite the introduction of accounting standards limiting the usage of cash- basis accounting to small entities, and historical cost accounting t

5、o assets without any active market, the view on taxation vis-a-vis accounting has not changed.</p><p>　　Perhaps what should be made clear is that tax generally follows accounting.</p><p>　　1. Ge

6、neral differences between accounting and tax</p><p>　　Though accounting standards are principles-based, meaning there is leeway for judgment, and tax is embodied in laws wherein strict adherence is required,

7、 the Tax Code itself states that, generally, the taxable income of an entity shall be computed upon the basis of the taxpayer's method of accounting it regularly employs in keeping its books.</p><p>　　Wh

8、at the law only requires is that this method of accounting should clearly reflect and represent the true income of the taxpayer, and that this method is consistently applied. Only in such circumstances when the method em

9、ployed is unfaithful to the taxpayer's veritable income that the tax regulations step-in and impose what they deem to be more appropriate.</p><p>　　As early as Revenue Regulations No. 2, it has been laid

10、 down that income and expenditure need not be in the form of cash. It is sufficient that these items can be appraised in terms of money and are actually realized in a close and completed transaction.</p><p>

11、　　The same rule was adopted under the present Philippine Financial Reporting Standards (PFRS) which require that items of income/expenditure must (1) have been actually earned/ incurred, i.e., economic benefits are proba

12、ble to flow in/out of the entity; and (2) are capable of reasonable estimate.</p><p>　　2. Some cases</p><p>　　Let me cite a few examples of common areas of confusion for better a understanding o

13、f our readers.</p><p>　　One is how assets that are marked-to-market for accounting purposes are treated for tax purposes, e.g., investment securities that are held with the intention of short-term profiteeri

14、ng, and are carried in the books at their fair value.</p><p>　　From an accounting perspective, fluctuations in the value of these assets are treated as other gains and losses.</p><p>　　On the ot

15、her hand, Section 34(4)(b) of the Tax Code provides that loss resulting from securities (that are capital assets) becoming worthless during the year shall be considered deducible upon the sale or exchange of the capital

16、assets.</p><p>　　Another source of perplexity for taxpayers is the tax treatment of changes in the valuation of property, plant and equipment (PPE). Under the 2005 PFRS, companies have the option to carry th

17、eir PPE either at cost or at revalued amount.</p><p>　　While revaluation is not allowed for tax purposes, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) has issued a controversial ruling allowing a company to use and

18、reflect in their books the appraisal fair market values of their PPE used in business as determined and reported by an independent appraiser and to depreciate the same based on their remaining useful life as re- estimate

19、d in the light of the changes in the business and economic conditions surrounding the PPE.</p><p>　　As to impairment of PPE, for accounting purposes, the same is recognized as a loss item in the income state

20、ment even without actual disposal.</p><p>　　However, for tax purposes, impairment of PPE is generally allowed as a deductible loss provided there is actual sale or any form of disposal of the asset. In the c

21、ase of building and machinery, impairment in value is deductible only if there is actual removal, demolition or scrapping of the building or machinery.</p><p>　　An exception to the close and completed rule i

22、s the deductibility of a loss arising from the decline in value of capital goods due to obsolescence.</p><p>　　Loss is deductible even if there is no actual sale or disposition if there are changes in busine

23、ss conditions such that the taxpayer discontinues the business or discards such assets permanently from use in the business. In such instances, decline in the value of the building is allowed as deduction if it is perman

24、ently abandoned or devoted to a radically different use, and in the case of machinery, if permanently abandoned.</p><p>　　A last example would be in regard to impairment in the valuation of inventories, such

25、 as when the inventories become unsalable at normal prices or unusable in the normal way because of damage, imperfections, shop wear, changes of style, or other similar causes.</p><p>　　For accounting purpos

26、es impairment of inventories under these circumstances is already a recognizable loss. The same rule applies for tax provided the inventories are valued at their "bona fide" selling prices. However, a temporary

27、 decline in the market value of inventories shall only be allowed as a deductible expense upon actual sale/disposal of the inventories.</p><p>　　Notwithstanding the general rule that deductions shall be reco

28、gnized only upon a completed and settled transaction, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled in one case that accruals are allowed as taxable items as long as they meet the "all-events test," consistent with accounti

29、ng principles. </p><p>　　The SC explained that the "all-events test" requires that the liability to pay be fixed, and the amount due can be determined with reasonable accuracy.</p><p>

30、　　The test, however, does not demand that the amount of liability be known absolutely. It is sufficient that the taxpayer has the information necessary to compute the amount with reasonable accuracy and that its basis is

31、 unchangeable.</p><p>　　3. Suggestions</p><p>　　Given the differences in the accounting and tax treatments of certain transactions, securing a clarificatory ruling from the BIR might seem to be

32、a prudent approach on the part of the taxpayer.</p><p>　　Although there is no guarantee that all confusion will be resolved, much less eliminated - for there have been several rulings issued by the BIR that

33、are questionable, if not controversial - a ruling can give the taxpayer a certain level of comfort in the tax treatment of its transactions.</p><p>　　稅法應如何遵從會計制度</p><p>　　有一個普遍錯誤的概念認為“稅”與“會”是存在于

34、兩個不同的世界的。因為現(xiàn)行的會計準則已經(jīng)傾向于用公允價值作為計量基礎(chǔ)，而另一方面，稅法通常是用現(xiàn)金收付制和歷史成本作為為計量基礎(chǔ)的。這種混淆似乎是源于這樣一種事實，曾經(jīng)，以現(xiàn)金收付制為計量原則的會計是被廣泛接受的，資產(chǎn)以它獲得時的成本作為入賬價值，并沒有涉及公允價值對它的影響。</p><p>　　盡管會計準則的引進限制了小企業(yè)現(xiàn)金收付制的應用，并且資產(chǎn)用歷史成本作為計量基礎(chǔ)無法確定其公允價值，但是稅收相對于會計

35、的觀點并沒有改變。</p><p>　　也許，應該明確的是稅法通常是遵從會計制度的。</p><p>　　一、會計制度與稅法總體差異</p><p>　　盡管會計準則是以原則為基礎(chǔ)的，也就是說為職業(yè)判斷留有余地，但是稅收制度是在法律中體現(xiàn)的，要求嚴格遵守。稅法表明，通常情況下，一個企業(yè)的應稅收入應該在納稅人所選擇的用于記賬的會計方法的基礎(chǔ)上計算出來的，即根據(jù)企業(yè)納稅

36、人的選擇挑選出適合企業(yè)實際情況的會計基礎(chǔ)來記賬，根據(jù)最終的營業(yè)利潤作為應稅收入求出應繳所得稅。法律唯一要求的就是會計記賬方法應該非常清楚的反映和呈現(xiàn)納稅人的真實收入，并且這種方法是一貫地應用的，也就是滿足一貫性原則。只有在這種情況下，當企業(yè)所選擇的記賬方法不忠實于納稅人的真實收入時，稅收法規(guī)就會介入，從而能夠在稅法的監(jiān)督指引下征收到更合適的稅款。</p><p>　　早在第2號收入準則中，它就已經(jīng)指出收入與支出是

37、不需要以現(xiàn)金的形式存在的。只要這些項目能夠以現(xiàn)金的形式估價，并且能夠在一個完整的交易中確確實實地實現(xiàn)，這就足夠了。</p><p>　　在現(xiàn)行的菲律賓財務報告準則（PFRS）下，這個法則依然被采納。它要求這些收支項目必須：</p><p>　?。?）已經(jīng)實際賺得或發(fā)生，例如，經(jīng)濟利益很可能流入或流出企業(yè)；</p><p>　　（2）能夠合理估計數(shù)額。</p&g

38、t;<p><b>　　二、實際案例</b></p><p>　　讓我來引用一些有關(guān)這方面普遍被混淆的例子吧，以便于讀者更好地理解。</p><p>　　第一個例子是關(guān)于在會計目的下，以公允價值計量的資產(chǎn)如何在征稅目的下得到妥善處理，例如，以短期盈利為目的持有的投資性證券就是以公允價值入賬的。從會計角度來講，資產(chǎn)的價值波動是被列為其他損益的。另一方面，稅

39、法第34節(jié)（4）b指出，在一個年度里由于證券（這是一種資本資產(chǎn)）變得不值錢而產(chǎn)生的損失應該被考慮為資本資產(chǎn)銷售或交易的抵減項。</p><p>　　對于納稅人來說，另一個困惑來源于如何進行因固定資產(chǎn)價值改變所產(chǎn)生的納稅處理。在2005年的PFRS下，對于固定資產(chǎn)，企業(yè)可以選擇以成本入賬或以重估價格入賬。然而，在稅收目的下，重估價是不被允許的。國家稅收局（BIR）最近頒布了一個頗受爭議的法規(guī)，允許企業(yè)在入賬的時候，

40、用重估的公允價值對在商務活動中所用到的固定資產(chǎn)進行定價，同時反映在賬簿上，并且由一個獨立的估價師出具估價報告。再用相同的辦法估計資產(chǎn)的可使用年限，根據(jù)該年限對資產(chǎn)進行折舊攤銷。如果該固定資產(chǎn)的商業(yè)環(huán)境或經(jīng)濟環(huán)境發(fā)生變化，仍然要讓獨立估價師進行重新估價。</p><p>　　對于固定資產(chǎn)的減值的事項，在會計目的下，是被確認為損益表的損失項目的，即使實際并沒有被處置。然而，在稅收目的下，固定資產(chǎn)的減值通常被允許作為可

41、抵減損失處理的，就好比該項資產(chǎn)確實被銷售或者以任何形式處置。對于房屋和機器設(shè)備而言，減值可以抵減當且僅當這些房屋和機器設(shè)備被實際清理掉、拆除掉或者拆解掉。</p><p>　　對于這個完整的法規(guī)來說，有一個例外就是資本產(chǎn)品由于過時造成價值下降，所產(chǎn)生的損失的可抵減性。</p><p>　　如果商業(yè)環(huán)境發(fā)生改變，以至于納稅人不能繼續(xù)這份事業(yè)或者要永久性銷毀在商業(yè)中使用的過的資產(chǎn)，那么所產(chǎn)生的

42、損失就是可以抵減的，即使并沒有出現(xiàn)實際的銷售或者處置。在這種情況下，房屋和機器設(shè)備如果永久性被拆除，或者根本上改變了用途，因此而產(chǎn)生的價值的下降是允許被抵減的。</p><p>　　最后一個例子是關(guān)于存貨的減值的，例如，當存貨不能按照正常價值出售，或者因為損毀，有次品，商場倒閉，類型改變或其他類似原因而導致的存貨不能按照正常渠道銷售。在會計目的下，這種情形下的存貨減值是可確認損失的。同樣的規(guī)則運用到稅法上就是假設(shè)

43、存貨是用“善意”銷售價格確定價值的。然而，一個暫時性的存貨市場價值下跌只有在它實際銷售或者報廢的時候才允許作為可抵減費用。</p><p>　　盡管普遍的規(guī)則是抵減項只能在一個完整的交易結(jié)束之后才可以確認，但是最高法院（SC）曾經(jīng)在一個案例中這樣認定過：應計項目是允許作為應稅項目的，只要符合“完全事件測試”，與會計準則保持一致。</p><p>　　最高法院解釋說，“完全事件測試”要求需要

44、支付負債的數(shù)額是固定的，并且這個數(shù)額是可以被合理地準確地確定的。然而，這個測試并不要求負債的數(shù)額是絕對可知的。只要納稅人有足夠的信息合理準確的計算這個數(shù)字，并且計算基礎(chǔ)是不容易改變的那就足夠了。</p><p><b>　　三、對策建議</b></p><p>　　由于在一些交易上，會計處理與稅務處理存在著差異，由國家稅務總局出臺一部清晰的法律法規(guī)，對于一部分的納稅人