Accrual accounting

---

The cash basis of accounting has been traditionally used across the public sector. In the last five years in particular there have been discussions over the benefits of a change to the accrual basis.

The move to accrual accounting is part of the process of adopting private-sector-style financial statements for use in the public sector. This includes the production of the equivalent of a profit and loss account, a balance sheet and a cash-flow statement. In the process all major capital assets are valued (in some cases each year) and the costs of these assets are charged to the expenditure account over their useful lives through the use of some form of depreciation.

Private-sector-style financial statements may provide additional information, especially on the value of capital assets, and may allow increased comparability of relative efficiency between organisations. They may not, however, provide useful and relevant information on, for example, the extent to which public sector buildings are being adequately maintained. In addition, the costs of producing such financial statements may be significant. The decision on whether to publish such accounts should, however, be taken after undertaking a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis.

The benefits of accruals accounting have been summarised by Evans (Resource accounting and budgeting, 1995):

• better measurement of costs and revenues, including comparisons between years
  
• greater focus on outputs rather than inputs
  
• more efficient and effective use of resources, eg, through charges for fixed assets
  
• full cost of providing a service can be compared with outside suppliers
  
• a better indication of the sustainability of government policy
  
• improved accountability
  
• better financial management
  
  and
  
• greater comparability of management performance results.

Accrual accounting should not be considered in isolation, but as part of a package of reforms which have come to be known as New Public Management. Accrual accounting is not an end in itself, but rather, a means of shifting the emphasis of the budgetary process away from cash inputs, towards outputs and outcomes, in the hope that this will result in greater management efficiencies, and hence, better outcomes for governments and the communities they serve. The move to accrual accounting is primarily aimed at facilitating contestability in the provision of public-sector services. Thus, it aims to allow comparisons of the current cost of providing the service with potential alternative providers of these services from the public, not-for-profit, or private sectors.

International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) argues strongly that all governments should adopt the accrual basis. Even in the introduction to its cash-basis accounting standard (2003) it states that the 'Committee encourages governments to progress to the accrual basis of accounting'. In many of its other publications it puts the case for transferring from the cash to the accrual basis, but it only provides the presumed benefits of this transfer.

This is because no cost-benefit study has ever been undertaken of this move, despite the significant costs involved. These include, for example, the increasing number of qualified accountants employed by the UK central Government from nearly 600 in 1989 to 2200 in 2003. Whether accrual-based accounting will deliver its promises remains an open question. As Sir Andrew Likierman FCCA puts it (Changes to Managerial Decision-Taking in UK Central Government, Management Accounting Research, 2000,11(2) pp 253–261), 'A full analysis will only be possible once the new systems have been working for a number of years'. By 2004 however, Likierman accepted that he never had any figure on how much, as a discrete figure, the introduction of accrual accounting in the UK central Government cost (Minutes of evidence of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), 7 January 2004).

The move to the accrual basis for public-sector financial reporting has not gained universal acceptance. In Europe, for example, the governments of Germany and Italy have yet to make any definite plans to make the transition and the Dutch Government has decided that it will not proceed with its plans for the financial statements of its ministries to be produced on the accrual basis. Whilst in Asia, China, Japan, Malaysia and Singapore have all considered the options and have decided not to move to accrual accounting. Many organisations which work in transitional and developing countries, for example SIGMA and the Department for International Development (DFID) (UK), question the priority, for these countries at least, of moving from the cash to the accrual basis of accounting.

Any move to the introduction of private-style financial statements and changing the basis of these accounts to the accrual basis should only be introduced as part of an overall reform strategy for public-sector financial management. In many cases such changes, even if considered necessary, will not have a particularly high relative importance.

There are increasing doubts over whether the move to accrual accounting is worth the costs and the additional risks involved. ACCA, for example, has called for a different set of principles for public-sector financial reporting from those developed for the private sector.

A National Audit Office (NAO) (UK) report issued in December 2003 said that:

'In most cases it is too soon to identify any discernible benefits from better resource management in terms of contributing to improved public services from, for example, enhanced efficiency.'

Thus, many ACCA members believe that where the introduction of private-sector-style accrual-based financial statements is being considered, this reform should be informed by a rigorous comparison of the likely costs and benefits. We appreciate that accurate figures may not always be available, but in all cases, the specific benefits to the entities concerned should be compared with a reasonable estimate of the likely costs. This will allow a review to be undertaken at a future date, comparing estimates of the actual costs and benefits with those which were expected.

In January 2006, research funded by ACCA on the costs of benefits of introducing accrual accounting in Northern Ireland (a region of the UK) was published. This research found that whilst “the costs were perceived as being substantial”, “there was little evidence that [the accrual accounting] information was extensively used in decision making”. A summary of this research and the full report are available from the research section: here.