Author Description

The author has dealt with one of the biggest innovations of the German Bilanzrechtsmodernisierungsgesetz (BilMoG): the hedge accounting in accordance with the German commercial code (HGB). He has succeeded in picking out as a central theme the essential questions of this innovation under orientation towards an economic argumentation and in comparing in particular to the legal state before the BilMoG came into force. Because up to the conversion hedge accounting was standardised by the German principles of proper accountancy (GoB). With the conversion of the BilMoG the hedge accounting requirements were regulated explicitly in § 254 HGB. From this first-time legal standardisation arise a row of open questions which were not discussed up to now in the literature or at least not satisfyingly: Are hedging relationships accounted for adequately to illustrate the financial situation and profit situation appropriately? In which relation stands § 254 HGB and the GoB, especially this itself could have been changed by the BilMoG? Is hedge accounting defined more narrowly or further than up to now after the GoB? Are highly probable forecasted transactions from a purely conceptual view really balanceable in accordance with the GoB, although forecasted transactions were expressly codified in § 254 HGB? If economic hedging relations exist, are these to be accounted for mandatory or is there an accounting option in general? Which meaning do effectiveness tests have, how are the different measuring methods to be judged from the perspective of the German commercial code and where can it come to interface problems between the risk management and the accounting? The presented work follows these and other questions. Besides, the processing of the subject occurs purely normative on the basis of the existing German principles of proper accountancy. As an essential result can be held that the softening of single principles might have effects on the whole system of the German...