Sadly I am not allowed to say too much about today’s meeting as the board was in executive session but the gist of the other accountant’s opinion is that economic reality doesn’t matter only the legal form of a transaction.
When pressed about how that could possibly be the case since contractors obviously have earned a certain amount of revenue based upon an economic theory, the reply was, “Well you can’t confuse for profit with non-profit.”
When asked how, when a contract shows the total amount due or, if you elect you can pay a sum each month over XXX number of months and it includes interest at Y%, this someone does not create a sum certain for accounting purposes, there is not somehow some understanding that the sum certain is a receivable, the replay was, “The contract says it is revenue only upon the payment of the monthly amount.”
The board naturally is confused. Rightly so. Two professionals, two different opinions, one type of transaction.
Except that one professional has a position backed up by research on the application of GAAP and how the Accounting Standards Codifications call for the transactions to be recorded. The other is an opinion based upon his 30+ years of experience so he doesn’t need to know GAAP.
Honestly, if I were the board I would fire us both. Me for yelling at a dumbass accountant who thinks that if he appeases his fired client he will continue to reap referrals and the other accountant for being a dumbass and trying to provide accounting 101 lessons.
I was wrong to lose my temper. At the end of the day the treatment we selected is appropriate and consistent with GAAP. But there was almost $2,500 of billing listening to a lecture of how debits are on the left and credits are on the right. I was infuriated not for myself but the fact that these board members have owned and run businesses, sat on boards and really do understand the basics of accounting theory. They paid $2,500 to listen to a self-proclaimed expert prattle on how form matters over substance.
Each person in the room understands that Enron happened. That WorldCom cost them and their friends dearly. When no matter how you cut it, you can’t incur an expense without the expectation that there exists a pool of resources to pay the attendant liability. And one expects their financial statements to reflect the reality of that situation.
GAAP exists for a reason. GAAP doesn’t reflect – or rather should not reflect – the mere form of a transaction. GAAP reflects economic reality. And it does matter. Because the next time you go to buy a home and you look at the books and it shows zero receivable from the owners and a bank liability of any amount, please understand, you are likely facing a special assessment only no one wants you to know. And, had those books been properly kept on GAAP, you would have known the problem exists. You probably still would have bought but at least you won’t be able to say (with a straight face) that you weren’t warned. Which is the whole point of a financial statement anyways – to help you make better investing decisions.
So, GAAP is GAAP. If you are bothered by the fact that your accounting is complex, look to the reality of your transaction as it is likely complex. The further you get from doing work and billing for it, the more complex you make accounting in addressing your transactions. Don’t blame the accountants… We are simply the messengers.