So many speaking for a need for a conceptual framework in accounting. Something like a constitutional document, providing one with the first principles in accounting, from which others may be deduced or evaluated deductively. Needing the first principles in order to effect the deduction. The basis for an evaluation of a particular accounting principle as appropriate or inappropriate, as referenced to the broader boundaries.
Omitting to consider that accounting standard-setting is a delegated legislative activity. Perhaps more similar to according to an administrative tribunal the power to make regulations, where the residual power to make such regulations, similar to the residual power to establish accounting standards, rests with government. Therefore, no real need for a broad, conceptual framework, but rather a more modest definition section plus perhaps a preamble as to legislative intent. No entity other than a legislature can actually promulgate legislation, so accounting standard-setting rights are more closely associated with a subordinate role of regulation formulation, within a broader legislative framework.
Also means that definitions and terms can be changed within specific regulatory components, to more precisely reflect the regulatory intent. The “good” or “bad” evaluation through deduction is also perhaps unwarranted, since a legislative act may need not be deductively defensible, but rather assessed as “good” or “bad” in terms of effective implementation of regulatory intent. And where the ultimate justification is referenced to general public reaction, as balanced against effects on behaviours of the regulated.
Basic points: The ideal accounting standard is one that is viewed by financial statement users, including the general public, as addressing related interests or concerns, while equally viewed by those making financial disclosures as being a fair constraint or compulsion, in relation to such disclosure.