One of the most important principles that accountants apply when determining trading profit is the matching of costs against related revenues—a principle that in practical terms requires the identification of those costs incurred prior to and during the accounting period under review which have to be charged against the revenue brought into the profit and loss account and those which have to be carried forward as a charge against the revenues of future accounting periods. In the case of manufacturing and trading enterprises many of the problems associated with this matching process arise in relation to the valuation of stocks and work in progress. Expenditures incurred in bringing these stocks of raw materials, work in progress and finished goods to their present state at the balance sheet date, after taking into consideration the possibility of deterioration, pilferage, obsolescence and factors of a similar nature, are treated as a charge against the revenues of future accounting periods and are accordingly carried forward in the balance sheet under the classification of “current assets”. It is thus that the values ascribed to trading stocks become a key factor in determining the trading profit for the period. It is not surprising, therefore, that the methods of valuing stocks and work in progress should have formed the subject of one of the most significant of the Statements of Standard Accounting Practice that have been issued by the Accounting Standards Steering Committee under the sponsorship of the major accountancy bodies. Even less surprising is the strength of feeling that has been aroused by some of the views expressed by individuals and organisations in giving evidence to the ASSC and to the Sandilands Committee, which has also been considering the problems of stock valuation in relation to its inquiry into inflation accounting. In this article the finance director of Tate & Lyle Limited argues the case for the “base stock” method of stock valuation. Although this method has a limited range of applications and is not widely used, it has got valid arguments in its favour in certain circumstances—despite failing to find favour with the ASSC in its Statement of Standard Accounting Practice No. 9. He contends that for his company to use the “first in—first out” method that finds favour with many accountants as an “all purpose” basis, the outcome would be to produce trading results that bear little reality to the true position.