BIOLOGICAL ASSETS: AN ANALYSIS OF ADHERENCE TO CPC 29 BY THE COMPANIES LISTED ON THE BM&FBOVESPA FROM 2007 TO 2015
The process of convergence of the Brazilian Accounting Standards with International Accounting Standards affected the criteria for recognition, measurement and disclosure of various items, including biological assets, in accordance with CPC 29 as of 2010. Considering that adherence may Varying betwe...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2017 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
| Repositorio: | ConTexto |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:seer.ufrgs.br:article/71660 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/article/view/71660 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Ativos biológicos IFRS Evidenciação Contabilidade internacional Biological assets Disclosure International accounting |
| Sumario: | The process of convergence of the Brazilian Accounting Standards with International Accounting Standards affected the criteria for recognition, measurement and disclosure of various items, including biological assets, in accordance with CPC 29 as of 2010. Considering that adherence may Varying between companies and in the disclosure period, this study aims to verify adherence to the norm in force by Brazilian companies that have biological assets to identify their adoption in voluntary disclosure and mandatory disclosure. The degree of adherence to CPC 29 was analyzed by the 23 companies that have biological assets and were listed on BM&FBOVESPA in 2015. This is a qualitative, descriptive and documentary approach based on the explanatory notes and financial statements of the sample, evaluated through a research protocol with 14 items related to the criteria of recognition, measurement and disclosure in the period from 2007 to 2015. The results indicate that none of the companies in the sample shows full adherence to CPC 29 in relation to the accounting process of biological assets. From the results obtained, it can be inferred that there was a significant increase in the mandatory disclosure of the analyzed companies, evidencing different adherence levels, although adherence to CPC 29 in the disclosure is still considerably lower than in the recognition and measurement. It is possible to observe that, throughout the process of accounting for biological assets, the companies did not demonstrate adequate voluntary disclosure, only partially converging to international standards after the mandatory pronouncement. |
|---|