CAPITAL AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING: A COMMENTARY ON BRYER'S “A MARXIST CRITIQUE OF THE FASB'S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK”1

Abstract

Bryer (1999) reiterates criticisms of the “balance-sheet” approach underlying the FASB's conceptual framework as failing either to explain or guide the development of financial accounting practice, and aims to demonstrate how operational and objective principles of financial accounting can be derived from Marx's labour theory of “surplus-value”. However, the potentially conflicting objectives of “Marxist” accountings remain unresolved, and Bryer's attempted derivation of accounting rules for individual business enterprises appears to misunderstand the rationale of Marx's detailed examination of the circuits of capital in Parts One and Two of Volume II of @9pCapital@2p and to offer no critical foundation for Praxis. It is argued here that the focus of a critical Marxist accounting would more appropriately shift to recognising the extraction of surplus-value from labour and its addition to the value of inventory during the process of production (rather than reporting profit as the result of sale). However, the practical application of such a principle would still require the use of convention-based allocations at least as arbitrary as those of conventional financial accounting and, more fundamentally, such a change of accounting principle could not in itself be sufficient to “force the secret of profit making” under the capitalist mode of production. The accounting would still be consistent with both Marxist and neoclassical economic theories of the nature of capitalism. Bryer's approach to deriving Marxist accounting rules cannot help us to understand the problematic nature of the power of modern financial accounting.