Company Financial Reporting: A Historical and Comparative Study of the Dutch Regulatory Process

First published in 1992. Prior to this work no thorough study had been made of the Dutch institutional environment and of the Dutch practice of regulating the process of financial accounting despite a number of unique and influential practices originating there. The book attempts to trace the conditions, the sources and the connections of the regulatory processes for financial statements - providing orientation for readers unfamiliar with the Dutch context and a chronological survey from the 19th century to the early 1990's. In addition to analysing the Dutch process, comparison is made with the standard-setting processes in the United States and UK. The title will be of interest to students of Business and Economics.

Table of Contents:
Foreword; Preface; Contents; Chapter 1. Introductory Notes; 1.1. Aspects of the economy and capital market; 1.1.1.The economy 1.1.2. The capital market; 1.2. National government and political parties; 1.3. Company organization; 1.4. A sketch of the auditing profession; 1.5. Universities, the NivRA and education for the auditing profession; 1.5.1. The universities 1.5.2. Education to enter the auditing profession 1.5.3. Limperg's influence on accounting and auditing education; 1.6. Professional journals and the financial press; 1.6.1. Professional journals 1.6.2. Financial press; 1.7. Some factors impinging on the framework of financial reporting; 1.7.1. Irrelevance of the tax law 1.7.2. "Comparability" not a governing consideration 1.7.3. Absence of a securities commission 1.7.4. Absence of a "standards" program 1.7.5. Managers' bonuses based on profit are not a pervasive practice; Chapter 2. From the Nineteenth Century to the Onset of World War II; 2.1. Introduction; 2.2. Developments leading to the enactment of the 1928 and 1929 revisions of the commercial code; 2.2.1. Provisions in the 1837 Commercial Code 2.2.2. Early attempts at reform; 2.3. Run-up to the 1928-29 legislation; 2.3.1. Minister Heemskerk's revised draft law - 1925 2.3.2. Reactions to the revised draft of 1925 2.3.3. Parliamentary course of the Nelissen-Heemskerk (1925) draft 2.3.4. The Visser Commission and the 1929 act; 2.4. Developments during the 1930's; 2.4.1. The state of financial reporting at the outset of the 1930's 2.4.2. Auditors' reports 2.4.3. Some improvements in financial reporting 2.4.4. Secret and undisclosed reserves 2.4.5. Phillip's not-so-secret reserves 2.4.6. General assessment of the 1930's; Appendix 2.1. Proposed reporting requirements in successive stages of the Commercial Code reform; Chapter 3. Developments from 1945 to 1959: Agitation for Improved Financial Reporting; 3.1. Post-World War II developments: 1945-1949; 3.2. Private-sector initiatives to improve financial reporting: 1950-1959; 3.2.1. The Stock Exchange Association takes a more aggressive tack 3.2.2. Independent audits 3.2.3. Comment in professional publications 3.2.4. Some evidence of improved reporting 3.2.5. Comment in the financial press 3.2.6. The Philips challenge 3.2.7 Philips, A.K.U. and Royal Dutch enter the New York securities market 3.2.8. The Rijkens Committee report 3.2.9. Press reactions to the Rijkens report 3.2.10. A personal view from Rijkens 3.2.11. Effect of the report on company practices 3.2.12 Commentary in professional publications 3.2.13 A NIvA committee draws on the Rijkens report 3.2.14 Sijthoff prize: Announcements of the norms of good financial reporting; 3.3. Review of the postwar period to 1959; Appendix 3.1. Companies surveyed; Chapter 4. Developments from 1959-1970: The Swift Political Current toward a New Company Law; 4.1. Introduction; 4.2. Further private-sector initiatives; 4.2.1. The Dr. Wiardi Beckman Stichting report on the restructuring of enterprise 4.2.2. Press reactions to the report 4.2.3. Commentary in professional publications 4.2.4. The Hamburger Committee report 4.2.5. Reactions to the Hamburger report 4.2.6. Reports by two NIvA subcommittees 4.2.7. The Teldersstichting report: The Liberals reply 4.2.8. Reactions to the report 4.2.9. Report of the Society for Investor Protection; 4.3. Public-sector initiatives; 4.3.1. The Verdam Commission report 4.3.2. The Commission's conclusions on financial reporting 4.3.3. The Commission's advocacy of an "Enterprise Chamber" 4.3.4. Other issues addressed by the Commission 4.3.5. Press reactions to the report 4.3.6. Commentary in the professional literature 4.3.7. Reaction from the Social and Economic Council 4.3.8. Advice from the NIvA and the VAGA 4.3.9. Drafting of the Act on Annual Financial Statements 4.3.10. Other laws resulting from the Verdam Commission report 4.3.11. Introduction of the BV 4.3.12. Stjthoff norms are changed to reflect the draft law 4.3.13. Concluding comment; Chapter 5. The Decade of the Tripartiete Overleg; 5.1. Origins and early work of the Tripartiete overleg; 5.1.1. Kraayenhof's early notice of the the minister's suggestion 5.1.2. The minister's prompting suggestion and the NivRA's response 5.1.3. Important players in the field of financial reporting 5.1.4. Organization and early work of the CAJ and TO; 5.2. The years 1972-75: Burggraaff as chairman; 5.2.1. Second exposure draft 5.2.2. Kluwer becomes publishers of the considered views 5.2.3. The norms for the Sijthoff Prize cite the considered views 5.2.4. The TO's reaction the work of the IASC 5.2.5. The TO's third exposure draft 5.2.6. The NivRA's initiatives on current cost 5.2.7. Fourth exposure draft; 5.3. Integration of the 1970 act into the New Civil Code; 5.4. The years 1976-81: Schoonderbeek's first six years as chairman; 5.4.1. Change in chairmanship 5.4.2. Comments received on the third exposure draft 5.4.3. Comments received on the fourth exposure draft 5.4.4. The fifth exposure draft 5.4.5. Origins of the movement for more authoritative statements 5.4.6. Comments received on the fifth exposure draft 5.4.7. The TO's deliberations from mid-1977 through 1981 5.4.8. Comparison with US and UK statements 5.4.9. Companies compliance with the considered views 5.4.10. Concluding remarks; Appendix 5.1. Membership of the TO and RJ; Appendix 5.2. Chronological list of the beschouwingen and richtlijen; Chapter 6. The First Decade of the Raad de Jaarverslaggeving; 6.1. Preview of the decade; 6.2. Adaptation of Dutch Law to the EEC's Fourth Directive; 6.2.1. Background 6.2.2. The initial draft law 6.2.3. Reactions to the draft law 6.2.4. Reaction of Parliament; 6.3. The Raad voor de Jaarverslaggeving; 6.3.1. Developments from 1982 to 1986 6.3.2. Timmer succeeds Schoonderbeek as chairman 6.3.3. Developments from 1987 to 1991 6.3.4. Review of the RJ's activities 6.3.5. Reprise from the Enterprise Chamber 6.3.6. A question for the 1990's; Chapter 7. Comparisons with Other Countries: National Culture, Capital Market and the Legal System and Regulatory Environment; 7.1. Differences in national culture; 7.2. Differences in capital markets; 7.3. Differences in legal systems and regulatory environments; 7.3.1. United States 7.3.2. United Kingdom 7.3.3. The Netherlands; 7.4. Consequences for the process of improving financial reporting; Chapter 8. Conclusions and Policy Recommendations; Name Index; Subject Index