Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
106
O‘ZBEKISTONDA BUXGALTERIYA HISOBINING XALQARO MOLIYAVIY
HISOBOT STANDARTLARI (nomoddiy aktivlar misolida)
I.f.d., prof.
Rizaev Nurbek Kadirovich
O‘zbekiston
Respublikasi Bank-moliya akademiyasi
Annotatsiya.
Maqola globallashuv jarayonida yuzaga keladigan muammolarni ko'rib
chiqishga bag'ishlangan va O'zbekistonda Milliy Buxgalteriya Hisobi Standartlarini (MBS), shu
jumladan nomoddiy aktivlar bilan bog'liq standartni Xalqaro Moliyaviy Hisobot Standartlariga
(IFRS) muvofiq ravishda tuzatish tajribasiga bag'ishlangan, shuningdek, yechimlar taklif
qilingan. Bu bilan muallif xalqaro standartlarga muvofiq nomoddiy aktivlarni tan olish, balans
qiymatini baholash, amortizatsiyani hisoblash usuli, qayta baholash modeli, moliyaviy hisobotda
nomoddiy aktivlar to‘g‘risidagi ma’lumotlarni oshkor qilish tartibi bo‘yicha ishlab chiqilgan
tavsiyalarni taklif etadi (38-IFRS). Bundan tashqari, nomoddiy aktivlarning boshlang'ich qiymati,
amortizatsiyasi, uzoq muddatli va ja
’
mi aktivlarga ta'sirini baholash uchun ularni qayta baholash
modeli bo'yicha ba'zi fikrlar mavjud.
Kalit so'zlar:
aktiv, balans qiymati, nomoddiy aktiv, tadqiqot, ishlanma, amortizatsiya,
moliyaviy hisobot, qayta baholash, foydali iqtisodiy xizmat muddati, adolatli qiymat,
korrelyatsiya, regressiya, tahlil.
БУХГАЛТЕРСКИЙ УЧЕТ В УЗБЕКИСТАНЕ ПО МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫМ СТАНДАРТАМ
ФИНАНСОВОЙ ОТЧЕТНОСТИ
(на примере нематериальных активов)
Д
.
э
.
н
.
, проф
.
Ризаев Нурбек Кадирович
Банковско
-
финансовая академия
Республики Узбекистан
Аннотация
.
Статья посвящена рассмотрению проблем, возникающих в процессе
глобализации и опыта корректировки Национальных Стандартов Бухгалтерского
Учета (НСБУ)
в Узбекистане, в том числе стандарт по нематериальным активам в
соответствии с Международными стандартами финансовой отчетности (МСФО), а
также предлагаемые им решения.
При этом автор предлагает разработанные
рекомендации по признанию нематериальных активов, оценке балансовой стоимости,
методу расчета амортизации, модели переоценки, порядку раскрытия информации
о
нематериальных активах в финансовой отчетности в соответствии с
международными стандартами (МСФО 38). Кроме того, существуют некоторые
соображения по модели переоценки нематериальных активов для оценки их влияния на
первоначальную стоимость, амортизацию, долгосрочные и общие активы.
Ключевые слова:
актив, балансовая стоимость, нематериальный актив,
исследование, разработка, амортизация, финансовая отчетность, переоценка, срок
полезного использования, справедливая стоимость, корреляция, регрессия, анализ.
I SON - YANVAR, 2024
UO‘K:
657.1.012.1
106-125
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
107
ACCOUNTING IN UZBEKISTAN BASED ON INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL
REPORTING STANDARDS (as exemplified by intangible assets)
Professor
Rizaev Nurbek Kadirovich
Banking and finance academy
of the Republic of Uzbekistan
Abstract.
The article is devoted to the consideration of the problems arising in the process
of globalization and experienced in adjusting the National Accounting Standards (NAS) in
Uzbekistan, including the standard related to intangible assets, in compliance with the
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), as well as the solutions proposed thereof.
Herewith the author proposes the recommendations worked out for recognition of intangible
assets, assessment of book value, the method of calculating amortization, revaluation model, the
order of disclosure of information on intangible assets in the financial statements in accordance
with international standards (IFRS 38). Moreover, there some considerations on the revaluation
model of intangible assets to assess their impact on initial value, amortization, long-term and total
assets.
Key words:
asset, book value, intangible asset, research, development, amortization,
financial reporting, revaluation, useful economic life, fair value, correlation, regression, analysis.
Introduction.
Currently ongoing the process of globalization requires particular attention to the
creation of intangible assets based on new knowledge and technologies, their targeted and
efficient use.
Nowadays
the growth rates of the intangible asset market account for over 10
percent per year (in China – 23 percent, in the USA and Russia – 5 percent and in France – 2
percent). For example, as a result of the issuance of more than 1 billion patented objects, which
constitute the basis of intangible assets, digital platforms and services for the efficient
management of intangible assets have been introduced. According to statistics, the total assets
of companies in developed economies amounted to more than 90.0 trillion USD and out of this
amount 47.8 trillion USD (52.6 percent) are represented by tangible assets and 42.2 trillion USD
(47.4 percent) of intellectual property falls on the share of intellectual property rights.
Therefore, it is crucially important to make effective use of the experience of international
accounting practices in the national economy in the assessment of intangible assets created in
all countries, organization of their accounting, calculation of their depreciation and the
disclosure of information in financial statements.
According to the Resolution of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan №
PR-4611
“On
additional measures for transit
ion to international financial reporting standards”dated
February 24, 2020, starting from January 1, 2021, joint stock companies, commercial banks,
insurance companies and enterprises included in the category of large taxpayers, must handle
accounting and preparation of financial statements for 2021 on the IFRS basis. According to this
resolution, a special “Roadmap” has been worked out on
the gradual introduction of the
international standards with the account of advanced foreign experience. Thus, there is the
need to improve national accounting standards by adjusting them in compliance with the IFRS.
To achieve this aim, the following primary objectives have been set:
first,
preparing comprehensive information on essential differences between national
accounting standards and the IFRS with the involvement of international experts;
second,
developing new national accounting standards and making amandments to
existing national standards.
Thus, one of the most urgent issues is introduction of modifications to existing national
accounting standards or development of new standards in accordance with the IFRS
requirements. As a result, in accordance with the Roadmap developed on the basis of
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
108
Resolution
№
PR-4611, in cooperation with the Ministry of Finance, two existing standards are
being adjusted in compliance with IAS 38
“
Intangible Assets
”
32
. In this regard, what is the
reason for amending or updating the existing NAS, is it actually necessary? The following brief
answer to this question is that the rules (principles) of accounting for experimental design with
intangible assets are consolidated in a single international standard (IFRS 38). However, in our
practice, these are reflected in two standards (NAS 7 and NAS 11). As a result, there is a need
to generalize both standards, to adjust the concepts, terms and methodology presented in them
in compliance with the international standards and to introduce a single national standard. In
this regard the article focuses on aligning intangible asset revaluation procedures with the
international standards, as well as relevant ideas and solutions.
Literature review.
Some considerations of economists, scholars and experts on the concept of intangible
assets and their accounting, as well as disclosure of information in the financial statements are
discussed.
Tomac, Carlin (1998) describes intangible assets as the most obscure and qualitatively
insignificant item of the balance sheet. He emphasizes significance of valuing intangible assets.
In our view, if intangible assets were to be used more efficiently, it would be possible for the
balance sheet assets to become the most profitable item, even the whole activity of the
enterprise may depend on a single patent or trademark that seems to be neglected.
From the point of view of Sveiby (1998), in its model the company divides intangible
assets into three groups: external structure (trademark, corporate image and product
recognition), employee competency (knowledge, intellectual knowledge, work experience and
skills), internal structure (patent, copyright, management) systems, databases and scientific
developments). Leontyev (2002) includes intangible assets in intellectual capital and, in
addition, shows that the value of all assets available in the enterprise consists of a database of
intellectual news, knowledge, skills, aggregate knowledge. Dontsova (2008) evaluates
intangible assets in terms of economic analysis as depreciable assets of the enterprise and
considers that they consist of exclusive rights to various scientific developments, computer
programs, patents, copyrights, films, trademarks and service marks. Moreover, she emphasizes
significance of focusing on revenue or reducing the costs of the enterprise in determining the
economic benefits (income) of intangible assets, and focuses on the methodology of analysis to
evaluate them as long-term assets of the enterprise. Ivanov (2008) considers the person
creating intangible assets as an absolute right to the results of intellectual activity and
emphasizes that their composition consists of a trademark, company name, place of origin,
service mark. Summarizing his views, he assesses intellectual property as a part of these
intangible assets. In the opinion of Pokrovsky
(1894)
, the use of intangible assets, including the
use of the achievements and technical inventions of each inconvenient intellectual property
owner (author), may be published and reproduced without his consent. Lytneva
(2006)
proposes to divide intangible assets into the following groups: objects of industrial property,
objects of copyright and means of goods individualization. This grouping is almost close to
international practice and is grouped according to the intellectual property objects used in the
majority of companies.
Dusmuratov (2003) believes that intangible assets, by their nature, are referred to the
income-bearing funds, which do not possess any physical nature, but included in the other
assets used in the performance of the enterprise. In addition, Dusmuratov (2003) particularly
notes that the concept of intangible assets is a complex and diverse at the international level,
and that there are no uniform standards for their accounting resulting. Ochilov (2007):
27, 2005). National Accounting Stand
Expenditures on research and development
(registered by the Ministry of Justice
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
109
Intangible assets are the assets of non-tangible nature intended for long-term use in economic
activities.
According to Sotivoldiev (2007), intangible assets are the assets of the enterprise that can
be appreciated. From the point of view of Rakhimbekova (2003), intangible assets are the assets
that do not have a physical appearance and will generate income in the future. In the opinion of
Isroilov (2006), intangible assets are included in the structure of goods and chattels in the
classification of property tax objects. According to this scholar, in the conditions of market
relations, the result of the human intellectual labour, that is, intangible benefits,are also
recognized as property. Gulomova (2000) supposes that intangible assets include objects that
do not have a physical appearance and provide an opportunity to generate additional income.
Ismanov (2009) considered the issues of transforming some peculiarities of recognizing objects
of intangible assets and reflecting in the accounting into the international financial reporting.
In the opinion of Ilkhamov (2005), patents, licenses, know-how, trademarks, industrial
samples, software, the rights to use land and natural resources, organizational costs, linking the
value of intangible assets with the minimum wage to a minimum service economic life of more
than one year, franchisees, copyrights and other assets. Pulatov (2017) investigated intellectual
property, which he considered the main component of intangible assets and according to the
model proposed by Brooking (1996), intangible assets represent a structural component of the
intellectual capital of the enterprise. According to this model:
Intellectual capital of the enterprise > intellectual property>patent,
copyright, trade mark, know-how and service mark.
As can be seen from the model, intellectual property is part of intellectual capital in terms
of its objects.
IAS 38 “Intangible Assets” sets out the criteria for recognizing and measuring intangible
assets and requires disclosures about them. An intangible asset is an identifiable non-monetary
asset without physical substance. Such an asset is identifiable when it is separable, or when it
arises from contractual or other legal rights. Separable assets can be sold, transferred, licensed,
etc. Examples of intangible assets include computer software, licenses, trademarks, patents,
films, copyrights and import quotas
33
.
According to NAS 7 “Intangible assets”: “
Intangible assets - identifiable objects of property
that do not have a material content, which the enterprise contains in order to use them in the
process of manufacturing products, performing work, providing services or selling goods, or
for performing administrative and other functions for a long period
”
34
.
“Accounting of intangible assets” (Regulation on accounting 14/2007): “Intangible assets
include, for example, works of science, literature and art; software for electronic computers;
inventions; utility models; selection achievements; production secrets (know-how);
trademarks and service marks”
.
Analyzing the content of legal and regulatory documents on the organization and
maintenance of the accounting of intangible assets at the level of foreign countries, we can see
that these countries apply several regulations.
For example, in accordance with USGAAP requirements in the US accounting system, such
rules and regulations as FAS 142-
3 “Determining the useful
economic
life of intangible assets”,
EITF 08-
7 “Protected intangible assets”, 141R “Business Consolidation” are developed by the
Bureau of Accounting Standards (FASB)
35
.
33
Order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation dated 27.12.2007
№ 153 (edition dated Ma
y 16, 2016) (Regulation
(Registered in the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Uzbekistan
34
National Accounting Standard of t
he Republic of Uzbekistan “Intangible Assets” (NAS 7), paragraph 4.
35
FSP FAS 142-3 (AS ISSUED)/https://www.fasb.org/pdf/fsp_fas142-3.pdf/
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
110
Summarizing the considerations, specified above, the following approach is applied to the
category of intellectual property, which is an essential component of intangible assets:
“Intangi
ble asset (intellectual property) is knowledge that arises due to the human mental
capacity, which requires legal protection as an object or asset (funds)
”
(Rizaev, 2019).
Research Methodology.
In this paper, based on the revaluation model of the value of intangible assets, in order to
assess the impact of their increase on the initial, depreciation and residual values,correlation -
statistical relationship (variable) of two or more random variables has been widely used. Two
main random variables have been selected: the revaluation value of intangible assets and their
initial or depreciable or long-term or total asset value. The ten largest joint-stock companies
with intangible assets in the balance sheet have been selected to perform these analyses.
The correlation coefficients for revaluation of intangible assets in the taken objects are
expressed at different levels, which resulted in the development of positive and negative
conclusions. The implied forecasts whether intangible assets depreciated to their initial value
or depreciable cost.
In our research, the revaluation of intangible assets had a correlation coefficient relative
to their initial value: r = 0.996. This has demonstrated that there is a very strong and correct
relationship between the factor and the outcome, and that the factor
’
s effect on the outcome is
that the coefficient of determination is r2 = 0.992 (positive correlation). In the second case,
when the value of intangible assets after revaluation relative to the value of total assets is
estimated, the correlation coefficient is r = 0.22, and the relationship between factor and
outcome is very weak, which can be considered insignificant. The reason is that the effect of the
factor on the result on the revaluation indicator accounted for 4.8% (negative correlation).
In addition, the article presents the results of a descriptive statistical analysis, in which
the standard deviation of output and long-term assets from the sale of selected objects has been
much higher than other variables (this is due to the fact that the selected objects are operating
in different fields). In the analysis, the minimum and maximum values among the objects in
terms of the minimum values have been taken.The mutual correlation of these variables
constitutes an important part of the empirical analysis, and the following table presents the
correlation matrix of the variables. The main goal of the regression analysis of intangible assets
is to estimate how much increase in total revenue would occur from the increase in output, and
in this regard there are 3 models calculated by means of least square method. According to the
results of various model of regression analysis, the positive effect of intangible assets on
product revenue has been empirically proven. It has been revealed that the effect of intangible
assets on output is positive and of high statistical significance in the properties of all models.
Analysis and results.
In reliance upon the financial statements, the share of intangible assets in long-term
assets and total assets of enterprises is considered on the basis of the following analytical data.
Large tax-paying joint-stock companies with intangible assets have been selected to analyze the
status of intangible assets.
“
Uztransgaz
”
(the share of intangible assets accounted for 64375
million UZS at the beginning of the year and 64375 million UZS at the end of the year) and
“
Navoiazot
”
(the share of intangible assets amounted to 133220 million UZS at the beginning of
the year and 143478 million UZS at the end of the year) can be referred to enterprises with a
small share of intangible assets.
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
111
Table 1.
Estimation of the share of intangible assets in relation to long-term
assets and total assets
36
№
Joint-stock
companies
Intangible assets at
the beginning of the
period
Intangible assets at
the end of the
period
Differen
ce of
share in
relation
to long-
term
assets
Differen
ce of
share in
relation
to total
assets
in relation
to long-term
assets, %
in
relation
to total,
%
in relation
to long-
term
assets, %
in
relation
to total,
%
1.
“
Maxam
–
Chirchi
k”
0,03
0,01
0,008
0,003
-0,022
-0,011
2.
“Uzbekistan
Metallurgical Combine”
0,12
0,04
0,10
0,03
-0,02
-0,01
3.
“Uzbekistan railways”
0,009
0,006
0,009
0,006
0
0
4.
“
Navoiyazot
”
0,001
0,001
0,001
0,01
0
0,009
5.
“Uzhimprom”
0,004
0,004
0,004
0,004
0
0
6.
“Almalyk
Mining and
Metallurgical
Combine”
0,22
0,14
0,16
0,12
-0,06
-0,02
7.
“Uz
donmahsulot
”
0,08
0,01
0,08
0,01
0
0
8.
“
UzAuto Motors
”
4,32
0,95
2,15
0,46
-2,17
-0,49
9.
“Uz
transgaz
”
0,019
0,0002
0,001
0,002
-0,018
0
10.
“
Kvarts
”
0,046
0,019
0,04
0,009
-0,006
-0,01
These data show that the share of intangible assets in the selected objects is long and
varies in terms of total assets. The best performance indicator belongs to
“
UzAuto Motors
”
,
which accounts for 4.32% (!) compared to the beginning of the reporting period. This can be
assessed as a record level among enterprises in sectors of the economy. This is due to the fact
that the share of intangible assets is not only higher than we expected in our country, but also
in developed countries. Below is one reason why intangible assets have a lower share than
enterprise assets.
Figure 1. Comparison of the level of return on intangible assets in
relation to other assets
36
Reporting information on the financial condition of joint-stock companies. As of January 1, 2022. https://openinfo.uz/ru/
Intangible
assets
Fixed
assets
Borrowers
(debtors)
Materials
Cash
funds
Low
High
Low
High
Liquidity
level
Rate of return
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
112
Intangible assets have the least liquidity in the long-term assets of the enterprise (or may
not be liquid at all). On the other hand, intangible assets appear to be the most profitable asset.
There are interrelationships and differences between the International Financial
Reporting Standard (IFRS 38) and the National Accounting Standard (NAS 7) used in the
accounting for intangible assets:
Aim of IFRS 38:
Aim of NAS 7:
focuses on defining an accounting
approach for intangible assets
determining the methodology of accounting and
financial reporting of intangible assets belonging to
enterprises
Moreover, international standard requires an entity to recognize an intangible asset only
when it meets certain criteria and determines how the book value of the intangible asset is
evaluated and discloses specific information about the intangible asset.
The aim of both standards is almost identical, focusing on the formation of complete
information about intangible assets based on the definition of the approach or methodology in
accounting. The main difference of NAS 7 from IFRS 38 is that it fully covers the processes from
the recognition of intangible assets to their write-off the balance. One of the important aspects
of standards is in which cases the rules of this standard apply, i.e. which standards are covered
by the scope or activity.
It should be noted that the definitions and terms given in the national standard (NAS 7)
do not use terms such as fair value, non-monetary asset, research, experimental design (for
these terms, separate rules of IFRS 11 apply). In our opinion, it is expedient to unify NAS 7 and
NAS 11.This will improve the standard for intangible assets, which is unique, and adjust it in
compliance with the rules of the international standard. The following table illustrates
acomparison of the rules of the international standard for recognizing and revealing intangible
assets.
Table 2.
Interrelationships and differences between international and national
standards in the recognition of intangible assets
37
Intangible assets
(NAS 7)
Intangible assets
(NAS 38)
The patent owner
’
s exclusive right to inventions,
industrialsamples and utility models
Patents
Absolute right to computer software and databases
Software
Absolute right to topologies of integrated circuits
The exclusive right to a trademark and service mark, as well
as the right to use the name of the place of origin of the goods
Trade brands, marketing rights,
import quotas
Absolute right to selection achievements
Right of authorship (copyright)
The right to use natural recources
Licenses and franchises
The right to use property
Other intangible assets (products, works, services, other
rights)
IFRS 38 requires the following aspects when recognizing an asset as an intangible asset:
first, the definition of an intangible asset;
second, recognition criteria.
These requirements apply to the cost of purchasing or creating an intangible asset and
the cost of adding, replacing or servicing the part. In addition, herewith application of
37
Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. https://lex.uz/docs/180552
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
113
recognition criteria for separately acquired intangible assets, initial valuation of intangible
assets acquired through government grants, conversion of intangible assets, accounting for
internally generated goodwill and initial recognition of internally created intangible assets are
covered and evaluated.
The peculiarity of an intangible asset in compliance with an international standard is that,
in most cases, there is no asset or replacement part to be added. Consequently, most of the
deferred costs may retain the expected future economic benefits embodied in the current
intangible asset instead of meeting the definition and recognition criterion of the intangible
asset in this standard.
However, it is usually more difficult to determine whether deferred costs are directly
attributable to a particular intangible asset relative to the entire business. Regardless of
whether the purchase is internally created, subsequent costs on bends, title titles, publication
names, customer lists, and essentially similar items are always recognized in profit or loss. The
reason is that such costs are no different from the costs directed to the development of the
whole business.
An intangible asset is recognized in accordance with IFRS 38 in the following cases:
-
there is a possibility that the entity will receive future economic benefits associated with
the intangible asset;
-
the cost of the asset can be measured in the reliable manner.
The entity should estimate the probability of future economic benefits expected using
reasonable and well-thought assumptions that reflect management
’
s best estimate of the set of
economic conditions that will operate during the useful economic life of the intangible asset.
The entity uses competent consideration in assessing the degree of accuracy of future economic
benefits obtained from the use of the intangible asset, based on the evidence available at the
time of initial recognition, rather than external evidence. The initial evaluation of an intangible
asset is disclosed in an international standard separately. IFRS 7 states that the original cost of
all types of intangible assets should be the initial cost and that they are accounted for at that
cost.
Table 3.
Differences between IFRS and NAS in the recognition and evaluation
of intangible assets
Recognition and evaluation of intangible assets
IFRS 38
NAS 7
-
separate purchase;
-
purchase as part of a business unit;
-
current costs for the purchased research and
development projects on progress;
-
purchase of assets with the help of a state grant;
-
exchange of assets;
-
internally created goodwill;
-
internally developed intangible assets.
-
delivery and acceptance of the created object
after completion of development;
-
purchase of the object under the contract of
sale;
-
receipt in the charter capital in the form of the
founders’ contribution
;
-
accounting for government subsidies;
-
exchange;
-
identification of surplus intangible assets.
The concept of subsequent evaluation of intangible assets basically means that they are
revalued. In the international standard, the object is accounted in the following two cases:
-
accounting model by prime-cost;
-
revaluation model.
Both of these models should be selected in the ent
ity’s accounting policies. If an intangible
asset is accounted for using the revaluation model, all other assets in its category must be
accounted for using the same model. Herein there is no active market for these assets.
A category of intangible assets is a grouping of assets in terms of the same property and
use in the entity’s operation
s. Items in the category of intangible assets are revalued at the same
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
114
time, avoiding the selective revaluation of assets and the presentation in the financial
statements of amounts that reflect the combination of cost and value at different dates.
Accounting model by
prime-cost:
after initial recognition in accordance with the model, the
intangible asset takes into account any accumulated
depreciation and any accumulated impairment loss, which
is less than its prime-cost.
Revaluation model:
under the revaluation model, an asset is carried at its fair
value (i.e. revalued amount) less any accumulated
and any accumulated
losses.
Revaluations should be made with sufficient
regularity to ensure that the carrying amount does not
differ materially from fair value at the end of the reporting
period.
Therefore, regardless of the order of recognition of intangible assets in the accounting and
their reflection in the accounts, the most important thing is to pay close attention to the order
of their valuation.
After an initial recognition of an intangible asset, it shall be carried at an amount that is
revalued. It is a revalued amount being its fair value at the date of revaluation less than any
subsequently accumulated amortization and any other subsequent accumulated impairment
losses. Revaluations shall be carried out with a regularity that at the end of the period to report,
the carrying amount of the intangible asset does not differ according to material from its fair
value.
In terms of intangible asset revaluation model, the standard does not allow the following:
first,
a revaluation of an intangible asset that has not been previously recognized as an
asset;
second,
the recognition of intangible assets at values other than prime-cost.
In addition, the standard notes that the periodicity of revaluation depends on the
variability in the fair value of the revalued intangible assets. If the fair value of the revalued
item differs significantly from its book value, a revaluation is required. In some cases, the
requirement is not required for intangible assets that do not have large fluctuations in fair
value.
The purpose of the valuation of an intangible asset after it has been recognized as an item
of intangible assets is to obtain the income from the item being valued. In most cases, the
valuation of items is used when writing-off or selling intangible assets.
Figure 2. Stages of intangible assets valuation
• Initial
recogniti
on of
intangibl
e assets
Recognition
in the
accounting
Use of
intangible
assets
Revaluation
after
recognition
Write-off
or sale of
intangible
assets
Selecting
evaluation
methods
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
115
The following wording is stated in paragraph 28 of NAS 7 used in our republic: “An entity
may revaluate based on evidence of fair value at the date of the revaluation, provided that the
fair value can be reliably determined from an active market. Revaluations must be carried out
with sufficient regularity so that the carrying (replacement) value does not differ from the
market value at the date of t
he balance sheet”.
However, nowadays there is no annual normative
order in terms of the revaluation of intellectual property objects. That is, while the required
guidelines are set out in the National Accounting Standards for the revaluation of intangible
assets, no indices have been developed for each group of intangible assets.
In this regard, Davletov (2018)
states the following: “While the regulatory framework for
revaluation of intangible assets has been created, their revaluation is not carried out at current
market prices.As a result, it is possible to provide users with reliable and accurate information
from this financial report”.
The following is stated about revaluation of intangible assets in the national standards of
accounting: “...
revaluations must be carried out with sufficient regularity so that the carrying
(replacement) value does not differ from the market value at the balance sheet date. When
revaluing an intangible asset, the entire group of homogeneous intangible assets to which this
revalued asset belongs should also be revalued, unless there is no active market for such assets.
Intangible assets as a result of revaluation are reflected in accounting and financial statements
at their current (replacement) cost
”. The applicable national
standard rules specify the use of
an indexingmethod. At this point, the present value of the intangible asset is accounted for in
relation to its initial value.This situation is reflected in foreign experience, in the practice of the
Russian Federation, in which the market value of intangible assets is determined in relation to
their residual value in the balance sheet (Regulation, 2007). It is also clear from these
regulatory documents that there is no a single annual index for revaluation of intangible assets.
This indicates that different coefficients may be used in their reassessment or that
reassessment may not be carried out in practice in general.
It is also advisable to publish annual revaluation indices for intangible assets (for facilities
where the useful economic life is expected to increase).For this purpose, intangible asset
revaluation indices are proposed.
Table 4.
Proposed annual indices of revaluation of intangible assets
№
Intangible assets grouping
Revaluation index
(in coefficient)
I.1.
Patents (inventions, utility models and industrial samples)
1.20
I.2.
Franchising and licenses
1.25
II.1.
Trademarks
1.25
II.2.
Country of origin of the goods manufactured
1.20
II.3.
Company names
1.20
III.1. Software
1.25
III.2. Database
1.20
IV.1. Rights to use property and natural resource
1.20
IV.2. Selection achievements
1.25
V.1.
Authorship rights (copyrights)
1.15
These proposed revaluation indices provide an opportunity to bring the value of
intangible assets closer to the current market value. On the other hand, it will be possible to
reduce the costs (other operating expenses) paid to appraisal organizations in determining
their market value each year. The choice of intangible asset revaluation indices is strictly
determined by the accounting policy of the enterprise (unless there are changes in the
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
116
legislation). The accounting policies of the enterprises selected for the study include the
following information on the revaluation index of intangible assets:
Table 5.
Indices selected in the accounting policies of enterprises for revaluation
of intangible assets
№
Joint-stock companies
Selected valuation indices for intangible
assets (in coefficients)
1.
“
Maxam
–
Chirchi
k”
1,20
2.
“Uzbekistan Metallurgica
l
Combine”
1.20
3.
“Uzbekistan railways”
1,20
4.
“
Navoiyazot
”
1,20
5.
“Uzhimprom”
1,20
6.
“Almalyk Mining and Metallurgical Combine”
1,20
7.
“Uz
donmahsulot
”
1,20
8.
“
UzAuto Motors
”
1,20
9.
“Uz
transgaz
”
1,20
10.
“
Kvarts
”
1,20
In the data, illustrated in the table below, it is obvious, that the amounts increased as a
result of revaluation of intangible assets in 10 objects selected for the research(enterprises with
intangible assets on the balance sheet).
Table 6.
Introduction and changes in the revaluation index of intangible assets in relation to
their residual value
№
Joint-stock companies
Residual value of intangible assets
Beginning
of the
period
Change from
revaluation*
End of the
period
Change from
revaluation*
1.
“
Maxam
–
Chirchi
k”
31502.00
+6300.4
27642.00
+5528.4
2.
“Uzbekistan Metallurgical
Combine”
650627.00
+130125.4
424654.74
+84890.94
3.
“Uzbekistan railways”
441575.00
+88315.00
170156.00
+34031.1
4.
“
Navoiyazot
”
76570.00
+15314.00
81266.00
+16253.2
5.
“Uzhimprom”
67200.00
+13440.00
50400.00
+10080.00
6.
“Almalyk Mining and
Metallurgical Combine”
19319098.
00
+3863819.6
16591696.0
0
+3318339.2
7.
“Uz
donmahsulot
”
172086.00
+34417.2
61731.00
+123462.00
8.
“
UzAuto Motors
”
56862435.
93
+11372487.18
51388831.7
1
+10277766.43
9.
“Uz
transgaz
”
21995.00
+4399.00
12338.00
+24676.00
10.
“
Kvarts
”
36743.00
+73486.00
25214.00
+50428.00
*
The residual value of intangible assets increased by 1.20.
When revaluing the initial (replacement) cost of an intangible asset, its accumulated
depreciation at the revaluation date is adjusted to the relevant indices of the change in the
initial (replacement) value of the intangible asset and subsequently amortized from the
revalued (replacement) value.The revaluation index is determined by dividing the present
value of an intangible asset by its initial value. The amount of increase in the value of intangible
assets as a result of revaluation is transferred to the reserve capital account “Adjustments for
revaluation of long-
term assets”.
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
117
The amount of decrease in the value of intangible assets as a result of revaluation is
performed to reduce the reserve capital on the account
“
Adjustments for revaluation of long-
term assets
”
within the limits of the amount of decrease in the value of this object in previous
reporting periods.The results of the revaluation of intangible assets are reflected in the financial
statements in the current period in which the revaluation of intangible assets is performed.
Selection of intangible asset revaluation indices should be strictly defined in the
accounting policy of the enterprise (unless there are changes in the legislation).The revaluation
index is considered in the following example:
“
UzAuto Motors
”
has intangible assets in the
amount of 111719829.33 thousand UZS as of January 1, 2022 (amortization - 54857393.40
UZS).
The revaluation index is considered in the following example: as of January 1, 2022,
“
UzAuto Motors
”
has intangible assets of 111719829.33 thousand UZS (amortization -
54857393.40 UZS). As a result of revaluation of intangible assets at the enterprise (coefficient
of 1.20 has been applied) in relation to their residual value increased by +12372487.18 UZS
(69234923.11 - 56862435.93). Or as a result of the effect of amortization, the residual value of
intangible assets increased by 115.7 percent (69234923.11/56862435.93 x 100) compared to
the beginning of the period.
Table 7.
Revaluation of intangible assets in
accounting policy of“
UzAuto Motors
”
№
Indicator name
Cost (thousand UZS)
I.
The situation before the revaluation:
1.
Intellectual property objects:
- initial value
111719829.33
-
amortization value
54857393.40
- residual value
56862435.93
2.
Revaluation index (coefficient)
1.20
II.
The situation after revaluation:
3.
Intellectual property objects:
- initial value
134063795.19
-
amortization value
65828872.08
- residual value
69234923.11
It is formalized in the accounting as follows. Initial value:
Debit
of “
Intangible assets
”
account - 12372487.18 thousand UZS,
Credit ofAdjustments for revaluation of long-
term assets”
account - 12372487.18 thousand
UZS,
Amortization value:
Debit of “Adjustments for revaluation of long
-
term assets” account
- 10971478.68 thousand
UZS;
Credit of “
Depreciator of intangible assets
” account
- 10971478.68 thousand UZS.
One of the problems to be solved here is to ensure the uniformity of the terms related to
the accounting. The name of the account that covers the revaluation is interpreted differently
in the regulations. For example, NAS refers to the adjustment to the revaluation account for
long-term assets, while another standard states that the revaluation of intangible assets is
transferred to the revaluation reserve account as part of the revalued reserve capital.
International financial reporting standards, including IFRS 38 “Intangible Assets”, state that the
revaluation value of an asset is included in the “Reserve capital” account.
The name of the revaluation account in NAS differs from the concepts or accounts in IFRS
38. It is therefore advisable to make amendments in the relevant paragraphs of this standard
as follows and to change the name of the account.
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
118
Table 8.
Revealing intangible assets by the revaluation model
NAS 7
IFRS 38
1. Debit
of “
Adjustments for revaluation of property
”
account - 220857 thousand UZS.
Credit of
“Profi
ts of previous year
” account –
220857
thousand UZS.
Debit
of
“
Adjustments
for
revaluation of property
” account
- 220857
thousand UZS.
Credit
of
“Retained
profit
(uncovered loss)”
account
–
220857
thousand UZS.
2. Debit of
“Profits
of previous year
” acco
unt
–
220857 thousand UZS.
Credit of “
Final financial outcome
”
account
–
220857
thousand UZS.
3. Debit of
“
Final financial outcome
”
account
–
220857 thousand UZS.
Credit of “Retained profit (uncovered loss)”–
220857
thousand UZS.
As it is obvious from the table, our republic requires to adjust the concepts and terms used
in the statutory acts, namely in the field of accounting, in compliance with the international
financial reporting standards.The revaluation model of intangible assets is based on the
following table data in assessing their impact on initial, depreciable and residual values and
long-term assets and total assets of the balance sheet.
The second part of the article is devoted to the correlation analysis, which has been made
to assess the impact of the revaluation of intangible assets on their initial, depreciable and
residual value.In turn, the impact of revaluation of intangible assets on long-term assets and
total assets of enterprises has been analyzed as well. For this purpose, the following two tables
are used as a source of data based on the balance sheets of a total of 10 objects selected for the
research.
Table 9.
State of intangible assets in the balance sheet of joint stock companies
(first source)
№
Joint-stock
companies
Intangible assets (thousand UZS)
Initial value
Amortization value
Residual value
Beginning
of the
period
End of the
period
Beginnin
g of the
period
End of
the
period
Beginnin
g of the
period
End of
the
period
1.
“
Maxam
–
Chirchi
k”
129203.00
34553.00
97701.00
6911.00
31502.00
27642.00
2.
“Uzbekistan
Metallurgical
Combine”
1718669.00
1718669.32
1068042.00
1294014.58
650627.00
424654.74
3.
“Uzbekistan
railways”
2197836.00
2187570.00
1756261.00
2017414.00
441575.00
170156.00
4.
“
Navoiyazot
”
133220.00
143478.00
56650.00
62212.00
76570.00
81266.00
5.
“Uzhimprom”
84000.00
84000.00
16800.00
33600.00
67200.00
50400.00
6.
“Almalyk
Mining and
Metallurgical
Combine”
27274021.00
27274021.00
7954923.00
10682325.00
19319098.00
16591696.00
7.
“Uz
donmahsulo
t
”
551776.00
551776.00
379690.00
490045.00
172086.00
61731.00
8.
“
UzAuto
Motors
”
111719829.33
111309001.72
54857393.40
59920170.01
56862435.93
51388831.71
9.
“Uz
transgaz
”
64375.00
64375.00
42380.00
52037.00
21995.00
12338.00
10.
“
Kvarts
”
82305.00
82305.00
45562.00
57091.00
36743.00
25214.00
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
119
Table 10.
State of long-term and total assets in the balance sheet of joint-stock companies
(second source)
№
Joint-stock
companies
Long-term assets
(thousand UZS)
Total assets
(thousand UZS)
Beginning of
the period
End of the
period
Beginning of
the period
End of the
period
1.
“
Maxam
–
Chirchi
k”
386077830.00
431167915.00
894280559.00
1034098809.00
2.
“Uzbekistan
Metallurgical
Combine”
1350810868.00
1678071529.29
3832943155.00
4426106008.00
3.
“Uzbekistan railways”
24263525866.00
23639636266.00
36250088159.00
36794808596.00
4.
“
Navoiyazot
”
11319403873.00
13102673275.00
12445738625.00
14012074762.00
5.
“Uzhimprom”
1949462441.10
1996579152.20
2032691476.50
2134011167.40
6.
“Almalyk
Mining
and
Metallurgical
Combin
e”
12193229275.00
16714169648.00
20002933034.00
23604911149.00
7.
“Uz
donmahsulot
”
678451378.00
678290635.00
5564737348.00
5488845400.00
8.
“
UzAuto Motors
”
2582709049.99
5186994807.87
11694092781.73
23983887691.09
9.
“Uz
transgaz
”
3334280942.00
4787648057.00
26640244249.00
29622051550.00
10.
“
Kvarts
”
178858028.00
223542807.00
439727241.00
914358452.00
1.
Assessing the impact of revaluation of intangible assets on initial their cost
(at the beginning of the reporting period).
A factor analysis has been performed to assess the effect of the revaluation model on
intangible assets on their initial and residual values when applying the revaluation model in
compliance with the requirements of international financial reporting standards. As a result,
the following scientific conclusions can be drawn from the data at the beginning and end of the
reporting period, i.e., the analytical data show that the correlation coefficient accounts for: r =
0.996.This means that there is a very strong and correct relationship between the factor and
the outcome, and that the factor
’
s effect on the outcome is that the coefficient of determination
is r2 = 0.992.
It is also important to note that the structured model is statistically significant: F = 6,
66428E-10.
Regression statistics
Several R
0,996046162
R- squared
0,992107956
Normalized R-squared
0,880996845
Standard error
3406497,832
Observation
10
F significance
6,66428E-10
It is possible to make a general conclusion, that an increase in the value of an intangible
asset as a result of a revaluation raises its effect on its initial value and can be considered a
positive situation.
2.
Assessing the impact of revaluation of intangible assets on their cost
3.
(at the end of the reporting period).
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
120
The rate of revaluation of intangible assets relative to the initial value at the end of the
reporting period, i.e. the correlation coefficient accounted for r = 0.997. This means that there
is a very strong direct correlation between factor and outcome. In addition, it ispossible to
observe that the resulting effect of the revaluation factor is statistically significant for a
structured model with 99.4%.
Regression statistics
Several R
0,99725
R- squared
0,994508
Normalized R-squared
0,883397
Standard error
2831746
Observation
10
F significance
1,55942E-10
Significance level in this analytical data amounts to: F = 1,55942E-10, the model is
statistically significant.
3.
Assessing the impact of revaluation of intangible assets on their depreciable amount (at
the beginning of the reporting period)
When assessing its impact on the amortization value of the intangible asset revaluation
model, the correlation coefficient at the beginning of the period constituted r = 0.78.This shows
the average and correct relationship between the cost of revaluation of intangible assets and
the depreciable amount.
Regression statistics
Several R
0,786681301
R- squared
0,618867469
Normalized R-squared
0,507756358
Standard error
2034689,659
Observation
10
F significance
0,005069476
The impact of the factor on the result accounts for 61.88%. We can see that this model is
statistically significant.The coefficient, achieved as a result, shows that it is smaller than the
norm: significance: F = 0,005069476 or<0.005.
4.
Assessing the impact of revaluation of intangible assets on their depreciable amount (at the
end of the reporting period).
If we assess the value of intangible assets after revaluation, we see that there is a strong
correlation between the factor and the result, with a correlation coefficient r = 0.99.
Regression statistics
Several R
0,990227357
R- squared
0,980550219
Normalized R-squared
0,869439108
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
121
Standard error
2831746,276
Observation
10
F significance
2,4814E-08
This constitutes the basis for our conclusion that proves a direct connection. This is
because the effect of the factor on the outcome amounts to 98%. Hence, the model is
statistically significant.
5.
Assessing the long-term impact of revaluation of intangible assets
(at the beginning of the reporting period).
The analytical data examined the impact of revaluation of intangible assets on the long-
term assets of enterprises as well. In this case, the correlation coefficient accounts for r = 0.22,
and the relationship between the factor and the result is very weak, which can be considered
insignificant, i.e. almost none. This is due to the fact that the impact of the factor on the outcome
of the revaluation indicator accounts for 4.8%.
Regression statistics
Several R
0,220628488
R- squared
0,04867693
Normalized R-squared
-0,062434181
Standard error
9696934348
Observation
10
F significance
0,516532493
In general, this model, i.e., the model for assessing the impact of intangible assets on long-
term assets, is considered statistically insignificant (significance level: F = 0.516532493).The
fact that the coefficient is higher than 0.005 indicates that this model should be abandoned in
the overall conclusion, in fact, the increase in the revalued amount of intangible assets relative
to the long-term or total assets of enterprises or its effectiveness can not be assessed.
6.
Assessing the long-term impact of revaluation of intangible assets
(at the end of the reporting period).
Assessing the impact of intangible assets on long-term assets at the end of the period it
can be concluded that the correlation coefficient is higher than at the beginning of the period,
but this is not enough for a positive outcome.
Regression statistics
Several R
0,311698261
R- squared
0,097155806
Normalized R-squared
-0,013955305
Standard error
10346850718
Observation
10
Significance F
0,353878559
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
122
That is, it has a low indicator: r = 0.31, which, in turn, makes an impact of 9.7% on the
result of the factor (significance level: F = 0.353878559). As a result, the fact that this figure is
also higher than 0.05 proves our conclusion.
7.
Assessing the impact of revaluation of intangible assets on their total assets (beginning and
end of the reporting period).
Now we consider the impact of revaluation of intangible assets on the total assets of the
balance sheet. We see that these figures are also lower than for long-term assets.At the
beginning of the reporting period, this correlation coefficient was r = 0.33 and the impact
between factor and outcome amounted to 11.52% (significance level: F = 0.310388331). As a
result, this figure is also higher than 0.05
Regression statistics
Several R
0,339538078
R- squared
0,115286107
Normalized R-squared
0,004174995
Standard error
16490406323
Observation
10
Significance F
0,353878559
At the end of the period, the coefficient constituted r = 0.50. Herein the coefficient between
the result and the factor amounted to 25.3%
Regression statistics
Several R
0,503248366
R- squared
0,253258918
Normalized R-squared
0,142147807
Standard error
17321818172
Observation
10
Significance F
0,118754885
As a result, there is the conclusion, that the model of the impact of revaluation of
intangible assets on long-term assets is insignificant. The reason is that the result of revaluation
of intangible assets accounted for aound 0.0001% of total assets.
Another important issue is that the increase in the value of intangible assets from practical
activities affects the company
’
s revenue from sales as well. With this aim, the impact of the
increase in the value of intangible assets on sales revenue has been examined and the following
results have been obtained (descriptive statistician of variables in the production of enterprise
assets).
Table 11.
Descriptive statistical analysis of intangible assets
Indicators
Revenues from
sales
Intellectual property
objects
Long-term
assets
Current
assets
Average
2312060501
14971664.64
1768873084
1029396462
Standard
deviation
3477179347
31022214.4
3019015268
2050982284
Minimum
47098879
14000
6934845
1372562709
Maximum
10261781347
102822702
10222335009 6291970206
Number of objects
10
10
10
10
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
123
Descriptive statistical analysis illustrates that the standard deviation of revenue and long-
term assets from revenues from product sales is larger than other variables, which is due to the
fact that enterprises operate in different industries. According to the minimum values, the
company with the lowest intangible assets is “Kvarts”with the amount of 178858028.00
thousand UZS, the company with the largest amount of intangible assets is
“
UzAuto Motors
”
with the amount of 111719829.33 thousand UZS. The mutual correlation of these variables is
an essential part of the empirical analysis, and the following table presents the correlation
matrix of the variables.
According to the correlation matrix data, there is a positive correlation between the
revenues from the product sales and other variables. It should be noted, that the correlation
between revenue from product sales and intellectual property objects has a higher difference
than correlation with other variables.
Table 12.
Mutual correlation matrix of variables
.
Indicators
Revenue from the
product sale
Intangible
assets
Long-tem
assets
Current
assets
1. Revenue from the
product sale
1.00
2. Intangible assets
0.68
1.00
3. Long-term assets
0.44
0.08
1.00
4. Current assets
0.57
0.83
0.42
1.00
The correlation of asset types is of a positive nature as well, while the correlation of
intangible assets and current assets is rather high.This in turn requires a careful approach to
the result when incorporating these two variables into the regression model.This is because
such a high correlation of free variables can result in a multicollinearity problem. Drawing
correlational relationships enables to witness more precise formal relationship. Therefore, the
correlation of some naturally logarithmic variables is given below.
As can be seen from the following figure, there is a strong positive correlation between
the revenue of the product sale and other variables.
In that case, the empirical model is written as follows:
j
i
i
i
i
VCT
NA
X
= a + b
+ g
+ e
(1)
here,
𝑉𝐶𝑇
𝑖
–
i
–
revenues from the product sale,
𝑁𝐴
𝑖
–
i
- intangible assets,
𝑋
𝑖
𝑗
–
other assets
included in the model,
𝜀
𝑖𝑗𝑡
–
error.
Figure 3. Diagram of variables.
y = 0,6579x + 0,7348
R² = 0,1957
In
tan
g
ib
le
ass
ets
Revenues from the product sale
y = 1,222x - 5,1715
R² = 0,8932
L
o
n
g
-ter
m
ass
ets
Revenues from the product sale
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
124
The main objective of making regression analysis of intangible assets is to estimate how
much their increase in 1 UZS will raise the revenues from the product sale. The following table
lists 3 models calculated with method of the least squares.
According to the results of various models of regression analysis, the positive impact of
intangible assets on the revenue from the product sale has been empirically proven.In the case
of all models, the impact of intangible assets on the revenue from the product sale was positive
and had statistical significance.According to the models, the increase in the intangible assets of
one of the above enterprises by an average of 1000 UZS resulted in an increase in its revenue
from the product sale by an average of 98000 UZS.
Table 13.
Regression model results
Model [1]
Model [2]
Model [3]
Intangible assets
76.67**
(27.25)
73.02**
(24.67)
143.95**
(48.29)
Long-term assets
0.44
(0.25)
0.76**
(0.30)
Current assets
-1.33
(0.80)
Constant value
1164125369
(903486969)
433932776
(915439957)
171611221
(844394064)
R-square
0.47
0.62
0.72
has *** 1 percent statistical significance, ** 5 percent statistical significanceand * 10 percent
statistical significance
In conclusion, the revaluation of intangible assets in enterprises can provide a positive
assessment of the indicators of their condition and their performance. This will enable in the
future to further raise the size of enterprises and formation and development of innovative
economies in the country as a result of the introduction of new technologies.
Conclusion and proposals
The following conclusions can be made in reliance upon the results of research made on
the basis of the model of adjustment and revaluation of intangible assets accounting, in
particular, adjusting national accounting standard in compliance with with the requirements
of International Financial Reporting Standards:
first,
the aim of National Accounting S
tandard 7 “Intangible Assets” and its composition
should be adjusted in compliance with the requirements of international standards, namely,
IFRS 38;
second,
it is recommended to consolidate (join) NAS
“Intangible Assets” and
NAS 11
“Expenditures on research and development”
, currently acting in our country, and bring them
into a single standard in accordance with international standards
;
third,
in order to obtain accurate information on intangible assets, annual revaluation
indices should be published (for facilities which useful economic life is expected to increase);
forth
, according to the revaluation model, the results of revaluation of intangible assets
should be reflected directly in the capital of enterprises, i.e. in the account
“
Retained earnings
”
;
fith
, correlation and regression analysis of the results of revaluating intangible assets
enables to assess their initial value, amortization, long-term assets and the degree of
dependence on total assets.
Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil, 2024-yil yanvar
www.e-itt.uz
125
Reference:
Brooking A., Motta E.A (1996) Taxonomy of Intellectual Capital and Methodology for
Auditing It/17th Annual National Business Conference, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario,
Canada. January 24-26.
Davletov I. (2018) “Improvement of accounting and audit of intellectual property in
a
griculture”. Dissertation claiming for the scientific degree of the PhD in economics.
Dontsova L. (2008) Analysis of financial statements: textbook/6th edition. Updated and
revised - Publishing House
“
Business and Service
”
, -368 p.
Dusmuratov R.D. (2003) Basics of audit. Textbook.
–Т.:
p. 612.
Gulya
mova F.G. (2000) “Guide to
independent study of a
ccounting”. T.: “World of Economy
and Law, p.229.
IAS 38
“
Intangible assets. Paragraph 8.
Ilkhamov Sh.I. (2005
) “Accounting and audit of investment activities”
Abstracts of the
dissertation claiming for the scientific degree of the PhD in economics, p.24.
Ismanov I.I. (2009) Improving the methodology of accounting and auditing of long-term
assets. Abstracts of the dissertation claiming for the scientific degree of the Doctor of Sciences.
p.37.
Isroilov B.I. (2006)
“
Tax accounting and analysis: problems and their solutions.
”
T.:
“Uzbekistan”, p. 92.
Ivanov I.V. et al. (2008) Financial management: Cost-based approach: Manual: Alpina
Business Books, -504.
Leontyev B.B. (2002) The price of intelligence. Intellectual capital in Russian business. - M.:
“Aktsioner”
.
Lytneva L. (2006) Accounting. Tutorial: M-Forum: INFRA-
M: ИНФРА
-
М,
-p. 496
Ochilov I. Qurbonboev J. (2007) “Financial accounting”/Manual. Т.: «IQTISOD
-
MOLIYA»,
p.
265.
Pokrovsky I.A. (1894) The role of Roman law in the legal history of mankind and in modern
jurisprudence. // Scientific notes of Yuryev University. -V. 3. - p. 1-30
Polatov M.E. (2017
) “Improvement of intellectual capital accounting and auditing
me
thodology”, 08.00.08
-
“Accounting, Economic Analysis and Auditing”,
Abstracts of the
dissertation claiming for the scientific degree of the Doctor of Sciences.
Rakhimbekova R.M. (2003)
“
Financial Accounting in the Enterprise
”
. Almaty.
“
Economy
”
Publishing House. p.94.
Regulation (2007) Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation. Order № 153n “On
approving accounting regulations.
“
Accounting for intangible assets
”
dated December 27,
(Regulation on accounting 14/2007). http://www.consultant.ru.
Resolution of the Presid
ent of the Republic of Uzbekistan №
PR-4611
“On additional
measures to transition to International Financial Reporting Standards
”
dated February 24, 2020.
Rizaev N.K. (2019)
“
Methodology of organizing accounting and financial analysis of
intellectual property
”, dissertation claiming for the scientific degree of the Doctor of Sciences
.
Sotivoldiev A.S. (2007)
“
Modern accounting
”
/Manual
. Т.:
B
АМА.
Volume 2.
Sveiby K.E. (1998) Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management. -213 p.
Thomas P. Carlin. Albert R. Macmin, (1998) III. Analysis of financial statements (based on
GAAP). Textbook. Translation of the fourth English edition. M.: IFRA-M. -p. 448.
