Wustemann and Wustemann (2010) have emphasized the importance of ensuring consistency amongst accounting principles in their article titled “Why consistency of accounting standards matters: a contribution to the Rules versus Principles debate in Financial Reporting”. Principles in financial reporting are regarded as prescriptions (Braithwaite, 2002) as they do not describe the particular course of action to be implemented, but limit the range of considerable actions which can be implemented (Raz, 1972). They provide guidelines, the implementation of which requires judgment on the part of the accounts’ preparer (DiPiazza, 2008). On the other hand, rules are described as specific, unambiguous guidelines that are highly detailed and limit the scope for subjectivity (Kivi et al, 2004).
This article is based on the subjective review approach to test its purpose. The authors have presented the three cases of US GAAP, IFRS and German GAAP to identify the inconsistencies that are present in these accounting standards. All these regimes strive continuously to focus on elimination of inconsistencies in the financial reporting process and stress on cross consistency across companies and internal consistency of the same.
Wustemann Wustemann（2010）强调确保会计原则之间的一致性，在他们的文章题为“为什么会计准则的一致性事项的贡献辩论中财务报告的规则与原则”的重要性。原则在财务报告中被视为处方（布雷斯韦特，2002年），因为他们不描述具体行动的实施过程中，但在限制范围内可以实现相当大的行动（拉兹，1972年）。他们提供的指引，在执行中需要作出判断的一部分，这些帐户的的报税（迪皮亚扎，2008年）。另一方面，规则被描述为具体的，明确的是高度详细的指导方针，主体（基维等人，2004年）和限制的范围。
这篇文章是基于主观的审查方法来测试它的目的。作者提出了三种情况，以确定在这些会计准则存在的不一致的美国公认会计准则，国际财务报告准则和德国会计准则。所有这些制度不断努力，把重点放在消除不一致的财务申报程序及跨公司之间的一致性和内部一致性相同的压力。
