Talk:Revenue recognition

Revenue recognition principle
Agreed, IFRS should factor in somewhere, but as an accounting student I have to say it was a pretty accurate and comprehensive summary - go over typical methods, etc. A bit of a focus on some typical revenue rec manipulations may be useful. --Ldipaolo (talk) 00:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

This article centres entirely on US GAAP but says nothing about international GAAP. (IAS 18)--lincs_geezer 20:48, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Revenue recognition is a basic accounting principal in any country. The article is worded in a way that makes it sound exclusive to the US. References to US GAAP should be replaced by IAS or removed altogether.


 * So why has it taken you guys more than a year to do something about it? JanCeuleers (talk) 13:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

The second statement on this page are not accurate. Revenue recognition, while important and a basic accounting principle, is different currently between US GAAP and IAS, namely IAS is much less detailed and gives less guidance. If the article is to talk about IAS, it would have to be separate from the US GAAP discussion of revenue recognition. Webdruid (talk) 07:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

To the users above...please do not remove references to US GAAP in the discussion over the four criteria for revenue recognition. We should add the criteria for revenue recognition under IFRS, but until US GAAP is eliminated in favor of IFRS (which, despite the headlines, could be a decade away) SAB 101 (US GAAP) is still the standard a large chunk of the world's biggest companies use to recognize revenue. Also, in a discussion of US GAAP, a discussion of EITF 00-21, SOP 81-1 and SOP 97-2 could be very useful. Rsokhi (talk) 17:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Realization account
Who created this topic 102.89.42.16 (talk) 15:14, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

IFRS15 CURRENT STATE
The version on Wikipedia is a bit outdated, revenue recognition under IFRS15 now uses the contract method to recognize revenue. Not sure if it's ok to clear out the section and put in the steps, it might also be too long and overly technical. ACasualEditor97 (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)