From Mesopotamian Ledgers to IFRS 3: A Critical Inquiry into Historical Evolution, Theoretical Paradigms and Emerging Hybrid Models in Goodwill Accounting and Technological Impact
Main Article Content
Abstract
Goodwill has travelled a long conceptual and regulatory journey—from a loosely understood commercial custom in nineteenth-century legal practice to a highly codified but still controversial element of contemporary financial reporting. The movement from cost-based amortization regimes to the impairment-only model under IFRS 3 is not merely a technical change in measurement; it reflects deeper philosophical negotiations about what financial statements are meant to do, whom they are designed to serve, and how uncertain future-oriented benefits should be represented. This paper examines the historical evolution of goodwill accounting, the theoretical paradigms that underpin competing treatments, the practical consequences of the current impairment-only regime and the technological impact. Drawing on historical analysis, interpretive reading of standards, and conceptual synthesis, the paper argues that goodwill accounting embodies a persistent tension between stewardship-oriented prudence and neo liberal valuation logic grounded in investor decision-usefulness. Neither pure amortization nor pure impairment adequately resolves this tension. The paper therefore proposes an emerging hybrid paradigm that combines disciplined amortization with trigger-based impairment, supported by enhanced technological disclosure and governance oversight. This hybrid model is presented as a more conceptually coherent, ethically defensible, and decision-useful way of representing goodwill.
Article Details
Section

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
1. Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. University of Chicago Press.
2. Barker, R., & Schulte, S. (2017). Representing the economic substance of goodwill. Abacus, 53(1), 29–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12105
3. Beatty, A., & Weber, J. (2006). Accounting discretion in fair value estimates: An examination of SFAS 142 goodwill impairments. Journal of Accounting Research, 44(2), 257–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2006.00200.x
4. Carlin, T. M., & Finch, N. (2009). Discount rates in disarray: Evidence on flawed goodwill impairment testing. Australian Accounting Review, 19(4), 326–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2009.00063.x
5. Comiskey, E. E., & Mulford, C. W. (2010). Goodwill, triggering events, and impairment accounting. Journal of Applied Research in Accounting and Finance, 5(3), 3–20.
6. Degos, J. G., & Mattessich, R. (2016). Accounting research in the past and future: A critical review. Accounting Perspectives, 15(2), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12109
7. Financial Accounting Standards Board. (2001). SFAS 142: Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. FASB.
8. Hamberg, M., Paananen, M., & Novak, J. (2011). The adoption of IFRS 3: The effects of managerial discretion and stock market reactions. European Accounting Review, 20(3), 445–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/0963 8180.2010.495909
9. International Accounting Standards Board. (2004). IFRS 3: Business Combinations. IASB.
10. International Accounting Standards Board. (2020). Discussion paper DP/2020/1: Business Combinations—Disclosures, Goodwill and Impairment. IASB.
11. Johnson, L. T., & Petrone, K. R. (1998). Is goodwill an asset? Accounting Horizons, 12(3), 293–303.
12. Li, K. K., & Sloan, R. (2021). Accounting for intangibles: Can current standards succeed? Review of Accounting Studies, 26(3), 1055–1089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-021-09637-7
13. Mazzi, F., Slack, R., & Tsalavoutas, I. (2019). The role of impairment tests in the context of goodwill accounting: A review. The British Accounting Review, 51(5), Article 100833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.04.001
14. Ramanna, K., & Watts, R. (2012). Evidence on the use of unverifiable estimates in required goodwill impairment. Review of Accounting Studies, 17(4), 749–780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-012-9181-5
15. Santos, E., & Pimentel, D. (2023). Hybrid goodwill models: Rebalancing valuation relevance and prudence. Journal of International Accounting Research, 22(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.2308/JIAR-2021-018
16. Watts, R. (2003). Conservatism in accounting. Accounting Horizons, 17(3), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.2003.17.3.20
17. Zeff, S. A. (2007). The conceptual framework for business enterprises: A historical perspective. Accounting Historians Journal, 34(2), 89–131.