CAPITALIZATION OF INTEREST, MATERIALITY JUDGMENT DIVERGENCE AND USERS'INFORMATION NEEDS
回顾了关于重要性概念的国际文献，发现缺乏统一标准和共识。通过研究美国审计师对SFAS第34号的初始应用，发现资本化利息金额在重要与不重要判断之间存在重叠，建议披露编制者使用的重要性指南。
A review of the international literature surrounding the concept of materiality yields no existing standards, no consensus of opinions, and little consistency of judgments. This study examines the initial application by auditors in the United States of SFAS No. 34 to comparative financial statements. The study finds that, relative to net income or net plant, the amount of capitalized interest judged to be material covers the same range of values as the amount judged to be immaterial. Such overlap suggests that the basis for disclosure or nondisclosure is not at all clear and that comparison of one firm's results with another may be hampered. The suggestion is made that the most immediate solution to this problem is disclosure and communication of the materiality guidelines used by the preparer of the (inancia1 statements.