
AbstractThis study compares and contrasts US and international accounting and financial reporting practices for cryptocurrency. We analyze the financial statements of 40 global companies that have exposure to cryptocurrencies, including cryptocurrency purchases, mining, payments, trading, and investments in ICOs and early-stage blockchain ventures. We document inconsistency between Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), as well as distortions that can mislead users in assessing asset value, liquidity, profitability, and cash-generating abilities across firms. In particular, firms receiving cryptocurrencies in revenue-generating activities account for cryptocurrencies as intangibles using different measurement bases and classify the associated cash inflows differently. Some firms place cryptocurrencies in the usual long-term location of intangibles, while others consider intangibles as liquid, short-term assets. Limited guidance about crypto-assets from both IFRS and GAAP lets companies choose which existing standard to apply and how to apply it. Understanding the financial and valuation implications of these new virtual assets is vital for future accounting research and professional practice.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 46 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
