Printer Friendly

International experiences with accrual budgeting in the public sector/ Experiencias internacionais com o orcamento publico por regime de competencia.

1 INTRODUCTION

In recent years, the accrual basis of accounting has been adopted for the preparation of financial statements by different levels of government in many countries in an attempt to improve the information contained in these statements. Until the adoption of accrual accounting, accounting events disclosed in financial statements were conducted by cash-basis accounting. This change has allowed the users of this information to assess accountability for all resources controlled by the entity as well as the distribution of those resources, to evaluate performance, the financial position and cash flows of the entity and to make decisions about providing resources for the entity or conducting joint business ventures (International Federation of Accountants --IFAC, 2011).

Until the early 1990s, when the first countries began to adopt the accrual basis of accounting, the application of the accrual regime to the public sector was limited to units, bodies, agencies and companies operating in economic activity exploration sectors often competing with private companies.

The International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) through the issuance of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards--IPSAS declared the use of the accrual basis as a good accounting practice for the public sector. Accordingly, IPSAS 1--Presentation of Financial Statements expressly directs in its second paragraph that international standards should be adopted in an environment that uses the accrual basis of accounting: "This standard shall be applied to all general purpose financial statements prepared and presented under the accrual basis of accounting in accordance with IPSASs." (IFAC, 2010, p. 32). Following this initiative, the accrual basis of accounting began to be adopted by other governments in a project of convergence with international standards (Torres, 2004; Marti, 2004).

In parallel, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) adopted the accrual basis for preparing Government Finance Statistics (GFS) in 2001. Information from finance statistics allows those who use this information to analyze various factors such as the size of the public sector, the contribution of the public sector to aggregate demand, investments and savings, the impact of fiscal policy on the use of resources, effectiveness of expenditure on poverty reduction and sustainability of fiscal policies among others (International Monetary Fund--IMF, 2001).

In 2001, other IMF documents such as the System of National Accounts--SNA, 1993, the Balance of Payments Manual and the Monetary and Financial Statistics Manual already required the use of the accrual basis for the generation of their financial statements. The alignment of the Government Finance Statistics Manual (GFSM) with the other manuals was desirable to facilitate the flow of data between different systems.

Thus, the GFSM suggested that "many countries will need to revise their underlying accounting systems to reflect the accrual basis of recording" (IMF, 2001, p. vii). This recommendation stems from the change in regime that was underway in some countries, which was perceived as a future trend and an indicator that a greater amount of information could be generated if these countries adopted the accrual basis of accounting; this potential underscored the importance of modifying the accrual basis adopted in the manual (Efford, 1996).

Nevertheless, the GFSM concedes the possibility of adjusting the data from cash accounting systems if there are no major differences. Nevertheless, the IMF suggests the generation of accounting reports based on cash and accrual accounting (IMF, 2007).

Accrual budgeting is a recent development for most of the countries in which it has been implemented. Therefore, academic discussion on accrual budgeting remains incipient. Scholars from the countries that have recently adopted accrual budgeting have focused their work on case studies relating to the results generated by the change (Guthrie, 1998; Warren & Barnes, 2003; Carlin, 2003, 2005, Van Der Hoek, 2005; Scheers, Sterck, & Bouckaert, 2005; Marti, 2006; Wynne, 2008; Robinson, 2009).

When extending a literature search to professional studies, many public bodies and international organizations were identified that have studied accrual budgeting intent on assessing the usefulness of accrual budgeting within their particular budgetary systems (Government Accountability Office--GAO, 2000 2007; Athukorala & Reid, 2003; Algemene Rekenkamer, 2003) as well as to establish a theoretical framework regarding the efficacy of changing to accrual budgeting (Christie, 2009; Federal Finance Administration, 2008).

In Brazil, although the accrual basis of accounting has been explored academically (Pigatto, Holanda, Moreira, & Carvalho, 2010; Borges, Mario, Cardoso & Aquino, 2010), the theme of accrual budgeting has not merited similar attention. Our literature search has identified a study performed by Rezende, Cunha, and Bevilacqua (2010), which briefly addresses the use of accrual budgeting and highlights the necessity to deepen this discussion.

The Federal Accounting Council (Conselho Federal de Contabilidade--CFC) and the National Treasury are currently converging public sector accounting standards with international accounting standards. This work includes the translation and validation of IPSAS, the convergence of the Brazilian Accounting Standards for the Public Sector (Normas Brasileiras de Contabilidade Aplicada ao Setor Publico--NBCASP) with international standards established by IFAC, compliance with the edition of the Manual for Public Sector Accounting (Manual de Contabilidade Aplicada ao Setor Publico MCASP) according to national and international standardization and a reinterpretation of Law 4,320/1964 to allow the accrual basis to be adopted as the basis of accounting records.

Despite the adoption of the accrual basis of accounting, IPSAS does not assume that the accrual basis will be used in budgeting. Specifically, IPSAS 24 Presentation of Budget Information in Financial Statements provided the option to use either the cash or accrual basis for budgeting. The ongoing process of convergence to international standards does not necessarily mean that the accrual basis must be adopted for the budget.

These changes are leading to discussions in the Brazilian public sector regarding the topic of public budgeting on an accrual basis. The discussion of the subject in the First International Information Seminar on Public Sector Costs (I Seminario Internacional Informacao de Custos no Setor Publico) (1) and the Second International Seminar on Public Sector Accounting (II Seminario Internacional de Contabilidade Publica) (2) is indicative of the relevance of this issue for public accountants.

Considering the imminent update of Brazil's public finance legislation and based on the revision of Senate Bill 229/2009, the present study aims to create a knowledge base that will initiate research on the topic of accrual budgeting.

Experiences with public budgeting using the accrual basis in the international arena remain subjected to adjustments in the continuous improvement of certain processes and the quality of information. Experience from the implementation of the accrual basis in Switzerland, the UK and Australia evaluated in several studies presented in this article will be the starting point for our analysis. Therefore, the present study aims to verify differences related to public management, financial results and cultural aspects associated with the change to accrual-based budgeting. This study will define the main differences between cash-based and accrual-based budgeting and accounting and will identify the changes required in the budgetary process to establish the accrual basis for the allocation of the budgetary revenue and expenditure. To fulfill its purpose, this article analyzes international experiences based on the data presented in a literature search. Content analysis was conducted to establish the changes made in those countries. Content analysis was chosen because it allows one to draw inferences from the text under study (Bauer, 2008). The analysis of revenue and expenditures according to different criteria guided our comparison.

2 DEVELOPMENT

One way in which budgets can be classified is according to the accounting process used for the allocation of resources. By dividing budgets in this way, some budgets record government expenditure at the time when payment is made (cash basis) and some budgets record expenditure at the time the event occurs (accrual basis). Other budgeting methods consider the time associated with the legal obligation to incur an expense related to a project, which is a variation of the cash basis regime (obligation basis) (GAO, 2000). In addition, the budgets from many countries have mixed formulas of the above models, and the implementation of accrual budgeting in some countries has been limited to certain agencies or certain programs (GAO, 2007).

In cash budgeting, revenue and expenditure are recorded when cash is added to or taken from the financial coffers. In this scenario, the date of the event generating the transaction is irrelevant. Allocating resources according to the cash basis means that a budgetary authorization of expenditure effectively corresponds to an outflow of resources of equal value. When considering that the elapsed time between the generating event and the financial transaction is relatively small for the vast majority of government transactions, the distortion of financial information does not generally involve a considerable amount of money (Blondall, 2003b, 2004).

In the obligation regime (used in the United States), budgetary expenditure is considered to occur at the point of creation of the legal contract for execution of this expenditure. Thus, for long-term projects with expenditure spread over several financial years, expenditure is considered as if it took place to its total value at the beginning of the project because the legal relationship was established at this time (GAO, 2000).

In accrual budgeting, establishment of expenditure ceilings and forecasting of revenue are performed according to the accrual basis of accounting. According to Luder and Jones (2003, p. 35), "the term 'accrual budgeting' means, in practice, the extent to which the accrual accounting records and measures are used in the budgeting process." In Brazil, this concept is included in Article 9 of Resolution 750/93 of the CFC, which was amended by Resolution 1,282/2010, and states: "The Principle of Accrual determines that the effects of transactions and other events are recognized in the period to which they relate, regardless of receipt of payment."

The standardization performed by the national body of accounting professionals in Brazil, the CFC, resulted in the issuance of ten resolutions dealing with public sector accounting in Brazil in late 2008. Thus, began the drafting process of the NBCASP.

The CFC issued Resolutions number 1,128 to 1,137/2008. The CFC also issued Resolution 1,366/2011, which addresses criteria for the allocation of costs in the public sector. None of these resolutions addresses the regime to be used for the recognition of budgetary revenue and expenditure in the public sector, as this concern is addressed by federal regulation.

The enforcement regime of the Brazilian budget is enshrined in Article 35 of Law 4,320/1964: "Art 35. Belong to the financial year: I--revenue collected in that financial year; II--expenditure legally made in that financial year". Thus, Brazil currently uses a modified cash basis of accounting, in which in addition to relating expenditure to the time when the financial asset left the public coffers, the legislation also considers expenditure made at the time that the compromise to make the payment was committed. The definition of commitment is present in the same law: "The expenditure commitment is the act emanated from the competent authority establishing the State's obligation to make the outstanding payment, dependent or not on implementation of the condition." In the case of revenue, the entry of the asset in the single account of the National Treasury occurs only at the gathering stage subsequent to collection, so that the recognition of financial gain actually occurs before the inflow of financial resources.

Thus, although the perspective given to accrual in the public sector is that "the principle of accrual applies in full to the public sector", according to the text of Annex II of Resolution 750/1993 of the CFC amended by Resolution 1,367/2011, full implementation occurs only in relation to equity items. Thus, the budgetary subsystem, which according to Resolution 1,129/2008 "records, processes and highlights the acts and facts relating to budgetary planning and execution", follows the regime defined in Law 4,320/1964.

The values reported by accrual budgeting are not necessarily identical to those revealed by accrual accounting because in the former case they are recorded ex ante, whereas in accrual accounting, this recording is made ex-post. Nevertheless, the term accrual budgeting is generally used to refer to budget records based on Financial Accounting Standards (Robinson, 2009). The ex-ante nature of the budget means that certain operations that are recorded in accounting and that influence the generation of accounting results are not recorded in the budget such as the revaluation of assets. However, this does not mean that it is not necessary to pay attention to these values at the time of budget preparation. In the specific case of reevaluations, the assumed asset value affects the appropriation to be made for depreciation in the budget. Furthermore, in cases where agencies are "saving" money in the acquisition of assets, the undervaluation of an acquired asset can mean that the funds earmarked for this purpose are not sufficient to maintain and/or replace them (GAO, 2007.) The fact that depreciation is an uncontrollable expense raises concerns about the inclusion of depreciation in the budget (Robinson, 2002b). In this sense, a study conducted by the U.S. Government Accountability Office--GAO (1995), the Court of Auditors of the United States found that the inclusion of depreciation in the budget reduces control and increases the uncertainty of budget estimates.

One of the main goals that motivated the introduction of the accrual basis in the public budget was to make the public budget more transparent and to improve the efficiency of public spending and accountability. Transparency is achieved because by considering the expenses incurred at the time of the money-generating event with the time during which the financial asset is disbursed being insignificant, one can obtain the real cost of government action allowing one to compare the cost of the activity if undertaken by the government and the cost of outsourcing the activity. Therefore, accrual budgeting acts as a decision tool for managers and as a way to measure results (Schick, 1996; Likierman, 2000; Salinas, 2002; Blondall, 2003a; Barton, 2005; Van Der Hoek, 2005; Marti Lopez, 2008; Robinson, 2009; Jagalla, Becker, & Weber, 2011). Conversion to accrual budgeting means that the budget is transformed from an aspect of public expenditure authorization and financial control to a tool for planning and management (Sterck, Scheers, & Bouckaert, 2004).

However, a study conducted by Carlin (2005) in the state of Victoria, Australia showed that the evaluation of the total cost of departments using the accrual basis tends to show a higher cost for the public sector making it impossible to compare services provided by the public sector with services provided by the private sector.

Nevertheless, the adoption of the accrual basis for budgeting does not have the power to allow the assessment of different government bodies, and other actions are necessary to accomplish this goal (Robinson, 2002a). One way to assess different government bodies is the use of budgeting based on products (output budget). However, Carlin (2003) argues that output budget distorts operating and economic results of the government. Perhaps it was for this reason that in New Zealand, the disclosure of information on government costs had no impact on decision-making (Warren & Barnes, 2003).

Furthermore, proper cost management by the units responsible for incurring the expense is hampered by the requirement to meet a budget. The evaluation of managers using the results obtained in the generation of public services becomes impossible in the context of budgetary controls, which do not allow the flexibility required for the manager to achieve the lowest cost (Schick, 2007).

Changing the time at which certain expenses and revenues are recognized due to a change from the cash to accrual basis makes it necessary, for example, to recognize Social Security benefits in relation to contributions to pension schemes. In this case, the expense regarding payment of these benefits is related to the generating event rather than viewing these payments as having no apparent connection. Conversely, costs relating to expenditure for Social Security cannot be recorded in advance because they do not meet the necessary requirements to be recognized as an obligation. Another modification is the recognition of the expense at the time the stock is consumed leaving the expense to be recorded upon payment to the supplier, which occurs when using the pure cash basis. Regarding other types of assets that are not intended for consumption, these assets must be depreciated over their useful life, meaning that the resources spent on their purchase become a form of expense that is divided across the period of existence of the asset (Blondall, 2003a; Robinson, 2009).

Certain rights that public servants acquire over time should also be recognized according to the fulfillment of the conditions necessary for that acquisition. The following may be cited as examples in Brazil: the right to paid vacation leave, the thirteenth salary and bonus leave, which still exists in certain spheres of government. Similarly, interest on a loan is recognized in accordance with the passage of time. This is particularly important for loans on which the interest is paid only at the end of the period as well as for loans associated with a grace period (Blondall, 2003a; Robinson, 2009).

Considering the case of capital assets and their treatment in public budgets on an accrual basis, the Australian National Commission of Audit indicated that "accrual budgets would eliminate distortions in the cash-based budget deficit or surplus caused by asset sales" (Australian National Commission of Audit, 1996). This proposal is founded based on the fact that the revenue from the sale of assets could not be used to reduce the budget deficit, which is not true when the cash basis is implemented.

However, the identification of public assets and their evaluation is problematic. There is no consensus regarding the accounting of common goods. International standardization on the subject conducted by IPSAS 17 Property, Plant and Equipment (Tangible Fixed Assets) stipulates the requirement for accounting of infrastructure assets (streets, squares and roads, for example), while decreeing accounting of so-called heritage assets to be optional, among which are public monuments and national parks (IFAC, 2010).

Regarding the assessment of the value of most of these assets, where there are cases of assets being built more than a century ago, complexity arises from the lack of information regarding the construction cost of the asset. Furthermore there are no markets for trading public assets, thus their evaluation at market price is also unfeasible. These factors could mean that even under the accrual basis, the selling of undervalued assets can take place to reduce the budget deficit with the profit generated by this transaction (Robinson, 1998). The GFSM suggests the value of the insurance premium on the asset in question as a solution to the lack of common means of asset evaluation (IMF, 2001).

Despite these difficulties, New Zealand includes both categories of goods as assets (GAO, 2007). The UK has solved the issue by determining a nominal value for non-operating assets that were already owned while evaluating new acquisitions at their purchase price (Diamond, 2006).

The use of the accrual regime leads to an improvement in the way that resources are allocated for the maintenance of government assets. When using the cash basis, projects related to capital expenditure were only considered if there was a budget surplus. With depreciation, public assets will always occupy part of the budget (Christie, 2009).

Another relevant difference between the cash and accrual basis is the timing of revenue recognition. In accrual budgeting, the generating event of the revenue is considered. The birth of the right to receive money from the State regardless of the payment of such by the taxpayer represents the birth of revenue on an accrual basis. Using this approach, there is also the need to assume that a portion of taxpayers will not make such a payment creating a provision in the value relating to this portion (Blondall, 2004).

Expenditure recorded under the accrual period that has a non-monetary nature such as depreciation and the right to Social Security benefits may be included in the budget in two different ways: the cash-in-hand model and the no-cash-in-hand model (Blondall, 2004).

In the cash-in-hand model, administrative units receive financial resources to meet their expenditure needs where disbursement occurs during the financial year as well as for expenses not involving cash. In this model, the control of the acquisition of assets becomes less transparent, as the administrative unit could use the resources received for purposes other than replacing the depreciated asset (Blondall, 2004).

In the no-cash-in-hand model, financial resources are only allocated for the payment of expenses in a certain period. Expenses that do not correspond to disbursements receive budgetary resources but not financial resources. This model has the advantage of ensuring parliamentary control over the acquisition of capital assets reducing the autonomy of units in the use of financial resources related to expenses recorded according to the generating event, although financial resources are not paid during the period (Blondall, 2004).

As costs become more transparent, the budget becomes more complex. The political decision regarding the allocation of budgetary funds should always be represented in the budget. However, that premise cannot be verified in accrual budgeting. In fact, in countries where accrual budgeting has been implemented, the role of Parliament in the budgetary process has decreased, and the role of technicians has increased concomitantly. In this sense, it is interesting to note that the adoption of the accrual basis in most countries is a movement that has been initiated by technicians and not by politicians. In the case of Australia, where the accrual budget was adopted along with the output budget, organizational changes commonly performed by agencies have made it difficult for politicians in this country to follow the development of public expenditure over time. This lack of transparency undermines parliamentary control over the budget, and Australian politicians still have difficulty understanding accrual budgeting even ten years after the implementation of accrual budgeting. The very posture of the legislature changes when the object of reform is focused on the budget with many parliamentarians showing aversion to changes in the budgetary process. In Germany, for example, parliamentary opposition suspended the budget modernization plan (Luder & Jones, 2003; Blondall, 2003a, 2003b, 2004; Scheers, Sterck, & Bouckaert, 2005; Schick, 2007; Robb & Newberry, 2007; Blondall, Bergvall, Hawkesworth, & Deighton-Smith, 2008; Robinson, 2009; Jones & Luder, 2011; Adhikari & Mellemvik, 2011).

The cash regime portrays public expenditure in a straightforward manner, as the budgeted amounts are those that actually leave the public coffers. Furthermore, the implementation of the accrual basis requires estimates to be made, which are more easily manipulated and more difficult to understand, which brings about concerns regarding the generation and use of information. Most likely for this reason, studies indicate that the decision-making process of government continues to use cash-based information even after the accrual basis is applied (Diamond, 2006; Schick, 2007; GAO, 2007; Groot & Budding, 2008; Barton 2011).

The use of tools to assess costs and the production of accurate financial and budgetary information are key for the optimal allocation of public funds, and so that managers can be held accountable for the results (OECD, 2009). However, the reluctance of some governments in using the accrual method for budget preparation indicates that the factors discussed above have prevented the adoption of accrual budgeting as a logical step to be taken after the adoption of the accrual method for public accounting in those countries.

The basis chosen for the appropriation of budgetary revenue and expenditure is that used primarily for the generation of reports and documents used by public servants and political agents (Athukorala & Reid, 2003).

Therefore, it is important to confirm that the use of the same regime for the preparation of the budget and the generation of financial statistics is advantageous for both systems by allowing information generated by one system to be directly used as the basis of analysis for the other (Keuning & Van Tongeren, 2004).

The same purpose can be observed when the accounting basis used is accrual in nature because one of the goals of the financial statements generated by accrual accounting is the evaluation of conformity of the entity in relation to accrual budgeting (International Federation of Accountants--IFAC, 2000). The use of different systems for budgeting and accounting, although individually useful as management tools, diminishes their relevance regarding budgetary policy and the development of public policies (Paulsson, 2006).

As a result, the accrual regime, which was initially for the preparation of financial statements, began to be used as the basis for budget allocation of public expenditure (Schick, 2007).

The adoption of accrual as the basis of accounting records without the use of the accrual basis for the appropriation of budgetary revenue and expenditure can prevent financial statements from being useful as tools for decision-making essentially rendering the financial statements useful only for bureaucratic reasons (Anessi-Pessina & Steccolini, 2007).

A study conducted by the Netherlands Court of Audit (Algemene Rekenkamer, 2003), in which the experience of the Swedish central government was discussed (the Swedish government maintained cash budgeting after the introduction of accrual accounting), concluded that use of the two different systems was inadvisable because of compatibility problems with the information from the accounting and budgetary documents. A similar study conducted on local Italian governments (Anessi-Pessina, Nasi & Steccolini, 2008) found that the reliability of the financial statements prepared under the accrual regime was being undermined at least partially by the use of traditional budgetary accounting, which is a solution that is being adopted in Brazil.

These problems using different regimes occur because the goals of the accrual and cash regimes can be conflicting (Diamond, 2006). Chan (2001) adds that harmony between budgeting and accounting standards is an essential factor for the credibility of the information generated by the accounting statements.

However, the purpose for which the information is used in each system, the greater resistance found against budgetary regime change and the use of mixed modified regimes can be considered as the reason why many governments still operate with different regimes for accounting and budgeting (Paulsson, 2007).

In this sense, it is interesting that Australia, which adopted both budgeting and accounting on an accrual basis, continues to make decisions based mostly on cash flow information when referring to budgetary policies (Blondall et al., 2008.) In a study conducted by Connolly and Hyndman (2006), the use of accrual information in Northern Ireland, a country that uses accrual budgeting and accounting, was also found to be limited because managers did not understand this information. The adoption of the accrual basis in Northern Ireland has therefore failed to generate the expected benefits.

An important consideration is that although budgetary reforms occurring in more developed countries can be considered successful experiences, the same cannot be said of attempts to reproduce the success of budgetary reforms in developing countries (Allen, 2009; Mellemvik & Adhikari, 2011), as it has been necessary for each country to adapt budgetary reforms to their own reality (Bale & Dale, 1998). Thus, while the adoption of the accrual basis in accounting makes accrual budgeting advantageous, the advantage of using accrual accounting in countries that do not have highly developed systems remains debatable (Hepworth, 2003).

The difficulty encountered by developing countries in increasing the collection of public revenue as well as in their greater susceptibility to international crises are undoubtedly related to the problems those countries face in implementing these reforms (IMF, 2003). Moreover, Schick (1998) considers that institutional differences between developed countries and developing countries can make the adoption of good public management practices unviable.

In addition to the level of resource allocation, accrual budgeting may be used to meet the goal of macroeconomic stabilization, where the accrual basis can be used to calculate budgetary results for political financial purposes and for the establishment of ceilings relating to government debt (Diamond, 2006).

The two functions performed by fiscal policy that should be guaranteed by any budgetary system are fiscal sustainability and fiscal stabilization (Robinson, 2009). The influence of the budgetary process on financial results can be found when identifying countries that, despite going through periods of economic growth and commitment to fiscal discipline, have not obtained favorable results with regard to finances (Blondall, 2003a).

An argument has been made that the measurement of government financial results using the cash basis may be incomplete rendering government financial results subject to manipulation. This can occur because payment may be anticipated or postponed when the expense associated with the consumption of assets is not considered, thus generating a different result (Schick, 2007). A study performed by the U.S. General Accountability Office--GAO (2007) identified six areas as generators of the biggest differences in determining the results between the two different regimes: benefits for public servants, benefits for military personnel, compensation for veterans, capital assets, insurance and environmental contingencies.

Thus, budgeting on a cash basis can bypass the generation of contingencies that will be paid in the future. An accrual budget therefore can be advantageous in making governments act with greater caution with respect to making commitments with a low impact on the current budget but could have additional impact on future fiscal years (Schick, 2007). Thus, the best method for measuring the potential cost of long-term commitments is the accrual budget because it allows the calculation of the likely cost of cash flows in present values and anticipates measures to ensure that financial sustainability is not compromised (Meyers, 2009; Salinas, 2002).

In considering that changing the point at which revenues and expenses are recognized interferes with the evaluation of fiscal policy, Marti (2006) identified that the larger deficit generated by the accrual budget and the possibility of evaluating the long-term impact mean that better policies for the treatment of fiscal aggregates can be adopted.

In addition, the accrual budget also enables the identification of budgetary effects on long-term sustainability as well as intergenerational effects in showing the relationship between total government revenue and costs for a certain period forming a more actuarially solid budget (Ball, Dale, Eggers, & Sacco, 2000; Barton, 2009).

The use of the accrual regime therefore increases the ease with which to represent the maintenance of the net equity of the public entity (Robinson, 1998). Accordingly, whereas a balanced cash budget is one in which cash inputs outweigh outputs, all costs incurred in a given period of time are considered when using the accrual basis of accounting (Robinson, 2002c).

Another important factor to consider is that although governments may seek to generate positive budgetary outcomes when adopting the accrual basis, cash deficits may be generated (Buti, Martins, & Turrini, 2007). Therefore, fiscal policy will only be considered appropriate for governments that use the accrual basis when there is also a control on the amount of financial resources received and expended (Robinson, 2009).

When using accrual budgeting practices, mere control of the total expenditure is insufficient to maintain fiscal debt. This occurs because expenditure on capital goods is no longer included in the budget, as expenditures on capital goods will only be recognized through the depreciation of the asset that is built or acquired (Robinson, 2009).

Countries that have implemented accrual budgeting have accounted for capital expenditures in two ways. In some countries, control of capital expenditure has been achieved through a budget ceiling for the capital expenditure of the body. This model is followed in the UK and in New Zealand and is more transparent, as the ceilings are explicit in the budget document. However, Australia chose not to include ceilings for capital expenditures in the budget. In Australia, expenditures with one-year depreciation help determine the amount to be spent on capital expenditures. This value is accumulated by the body, and thus external authorization was not necessary to incur the expense when the body had depreciated to a sufficient extent for making capital expenditure (Jones, 2003; Robinson, 2009). Thus, in the words of Robinson (2002b), the receipt of funds by the body is effectively accomplished by expenditure rather than disbursement. However, in the latter case, the agencies could use the accumulated funds for other purchases showing that in this model, parliament can easily lose control over the acquisition of capital assets (GAO, 2007).

The Finance and Public Administration Committees of the Australian Senate considered this provision of allocations for asset depreciation as an anomaly because the assets that were being depreciated had been approved in the budget upon acquisition resulting in double expenditure (Murray 2008). The fact that, with the adoption of the accrual basis, none of the agencies received the funds relating to accumulated depreciation means that such a method makes even less sense (Blondall et al., 2008). Based on this premise, a recommendation was made to the government suggesting that a new model should be developed for the 2009/2010 budget (Murray, 2008). Thus, control of capital expenditures based on the total resources required for a given financial year on the budget was subsequently established for the 2010/2011 fiscal year (Australia, 2008). Furthermore, cash budgeting was reintroduced for the generation of governmental financial statistics in addition to the accrual budgeting from the 2008/2009 budget (Barton, 2009).

In contrast to what Rezende et al. (2010) suggested previously, this change was not the end of accrual budgeting in Australia. In fact, "cash transactions are specifically identified because cash management is considered an integral function of accrual budgeting" (Australia, 2010, p. 9-31). Thus, the change was concentrated on the model used for authorization of capital expenditure, which was no longer based on the accumulation of depreciation balances throughout the budgets of the agency and on the recentralization of financial resource management effectively abandoning the cash-in-hand model.

Of the countries that have adopted the accrual regime, there is no standardization on the regime used for the calculation of financial results. Indicators of fiscal aggregates in New Zealand and Canada are based on the accrual method, whereas Australia and the UK use a cash basis for calculating government outcomes. However, all countries without exception use information generated on a cash basis at some point (GAO, 2007).

Robinson (2009) notes that governments that use the accrual regime should also generate fiscal aggregates based on the accrual method. The author adds that the use of accrual-based aggregates is advantageous because public equity debt is a better indicator for the management of fiscal sustainability than cash debt. However, the use of fiscal aggregates on a cash or accrual basis can be performed regardless of the regime adopted for accounting or budgeting (Schick, 2009).

The analysis of studies conducted on international experiences with accrual budgeting highlights some difficulties that the model may encounter if adopted in Brazil. First, there would be a change in the bodies that currently concentrate budgetary resources given the change in the focus of consideration of budgetary expenditure. As owners of a considerable amount of assets, the expenditures of the Armed Forces, for example, would be increased by virtue of the inclusion of depreciation. The need for statutory modification is clear because Law 4,320/1964 determines which regime should be used for budgeting. Furthermore, a cultural change is needed for a culture that is completely focused on the generation of cash-based information, and this change must be accompanied by training of the public servants that work with this information. Finally, as observed in the Australian example, the complexity of the budgetary process will increase, and Parliament's understanding of the budgetary process would therefore decrease. This obstacle cannot be underestimated because the complexity of accrual budgeting was one of the main reasons why Sweden and Germany did not adopt accrual budgeting.

The following table shows the main advantages and disadvantages of accrual budgeting ascertained in this study:
Figure 1

Advantages and disadvantages of using accrual budgeting
in the public sector

Advantages                        Disadvantages

* Increased transparency          * Increased accounting
regarding cost of public          estimates in the budget,
services                          possibly generating
                                  uncertainty regarding the
* Improved accountability by      numbers budgeted
results
                                  * Increased budget complexity
* Generation of information on
the same basis as accounting      * Reduced parliamentary
information                       control over the budget

* Improved allocation of
expenditure with maintenance
of public assets

* Better identification of
contingencies that will be
paid in the future


3 CONCLUSIONS

The accrual basis for budgeting revenue and expenditure is a process that began approximately twenty years ago, yet accrual budgeting remains a foreign topic in Brazil despite the fact that the accrual approach has been used in accounting events applied to the public sector and cost information used by the federal government.

The main purpose of this study was to understand the importance of accrual budgeting at a period when Brazil has adopted the accrual basis for accounting. As Brazil is in the process of changing the laws for public finances, a regime of accrual budgeting should not be implemented without first being explored and discussed in academia.

The lack of international studies analyzing financial results and the evolution of public debt of countries that have adopted the accrual regime, the dissent among scholars regarding the benefits achieved by adopting accrual budgeting and, in particular, the scarcity of studies making comparisons between countries that have already adopted the accrual regime justify the need to discuss the budget-making options academically from the Brazilian perspective. Therefore, this article opens the discussion of accrual budgeting in Brazil by analyzing previous studies and highlighting possible future developments on the subject.

This article has fulfilled its objective of developing a theoretical starting point for the study of the public budget on an accrual basis in Brazil bringing together the main aspects of this budget allocation model by using studies conducted on the subject around the world.

Future discussions and studies should explore the advantages and disadvantages of accrual budgeting in greater depth, which will require more studies on the experiences of other countries that have adopted accrual budgeting. Future studies should compare countries that have kept cash budgeting after the adoption of the accrual basis of accounting with countries that have adopted the accrual basis of budgeting and accounting to determine to what extent the same regime should be used for accounting and budgeting.

In addition, studies should be conducted to consider the peculiarities of the Brazilian budget model, the political institutions and the characteristics of the Brazilian bureaucracy focusing not only on international experiences. Such an approach is necessary to avoid the adoption of the accrual model without considering the peculiarities of the Brazilian public administration.

References

Adhikari, P., & Mellemvik, F. (2011). The rise and fall of accruals: a case of nepalese central government. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 1 (2), 123-143.

Algemene Rekenkamer. (2003). Accrual budgeting and accounting in central government--budgets and accounts in balance. Haia.

Allen, R. (2009). The challenge of reforming budgetary institutions in developing countries. IMF Working Paper, WP/09/96.

Anessi-Pessina, E., & Steccolini, I. (2007). Effects of budgetary and accruals accounting coexistence: evidence from Italian local governments. Financial Accountability & Management, 23 (2), 113-131.

Anessi-Pessina, E., Nasi, G., & Steccolini, I. (2008). Accounting reforms: determinants of local governments' choices. Financial Accountability & Management, 24 (3), 321-342.

Athukorala, S. A., & Reid, B. (2003). Accrual budgeting and accounting in government and its relevance for developing member countries. Manila: Asian Development Bank.

Australia. (2008). Operation Sunlight--enhancing budget transparency. Recuperado de http://www.finance.gov.au/financial-framework/ financial-management-policy-guidance/operation-sunlight/docs/ operation-sunlight-enhancing-budget-transparency.pdf.

Australia. (2010). Budget Paper, 1, 2010-2011. Budget strategy and outlook. Recuperado de http://www.budget.gov.au/2010-11/content/ bp1/download/bp1.pdf.

Bale, M., & Dale, T. (1998). Public sector reform in New Zealand and its relevance to developing countries. The World Bank Observer, 13 (1), 103-121.

Ball, I., Dale, T., Eggers, W. D., & Sacco, J. (2000). Reforming financial management in the public sector: lessons Canada can learn from New Zealand. Frontier Centre for Public Policy, Policy Series, 6.

Barton, A. (2005). Professional accounting standards and the public sector --a mismatch. Abacus, 41 (2), 138-158.

Barton, A. (2009). The use and abuse of accounting in the public sector financial management reform program in Australia. Abacus, 45 (2), 221-248.

Barton, A. (2011). Why governments should use the government finance statistics accounting system. Abacus, 47 (4), 411-445.

Bauer, M. W. (2008). Analise de conteudo classica. In W. Martin Bauer, & G. Gaskell. Pesquisa qualitativa com texto, imagem e som. (pp. 189-217). Petropolis: Vozes.

Blondall, J. R. (2003a). Budget reform in OECD member countries: common trends. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 2 (4), 7-26.

Blondall, J. R. (2003b). Accrual accounting and budgeting: key issues and recent developments. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 3 (1), 43-59.

Blondall, J. R. (2004). Issues in accrual budgeting. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 4 (1), 103-120.

Blondall, J. R., Bergvall, D., Hawkesworth, I., & Deighton-Smith, R. (2008). Budgeting in Australia. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 8 (2), 1-64.

Borges, T. B., Mario, P. do C., Cardoso, R. L., & Aquino, A. C. B. de. (2010). Desmistificacao do regime contabil de competencia. Revista de Administracao Publica, Rio de Janeiro, 44 (4), 877-901.

Buti, M., Martins, J. N., & Turrini, A. (2007). From deficits to debt and back: political incentives under numerical fiscal rules. CESifo Economic Studies, 53 (1), 115-152.

Carlin, T. M. (2003). Accrual output based budgeting systems in Australia --a great leap backwards. Australian Accounting Review, 13 (2), 41-47.

Carlin, T. M. (2005). Debating the impact of accrual accounting and reporting in the public sector. Financial Accountability & Management, 21 (3), 309-336.

Chan, J. L. (2001, Fall). The implications of GASB statement n. 34 for public budgeting. Public Budgeting & Finance, 21 (3), 79-87.

Christie, T. (2009). Accrual budgeting by canadian federal, provincial and territorial governments. Toronto: The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants.

Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2006). The actual implementation of accruals accounting--caveats from a case within the UK public sector. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19 (2), 272-290.

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. CFC. (1993). Resolucao 750/93. Recuperado de www.cfc.org.br/sisweb/sre/docs/RES_750.doc.

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. CFC. (2010). Resolucao 1282/2010. Recuperado de www.cfc.org.br/sisweb/sre/docs/RES_1282.doc.

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. CFC. (2011). Resolucao 1367/2011. Recuperado de www.cfc.org.br/sisweb/sre/docs/RES_1367.doc.

Diamond, J. (2006). Budget system reform in emerging economies: the challenges and the reform agenda. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund.

Efford, D. (1996). The case for accrual recording in the IMF's government finance statistics system. IMF Working Paper, WP/96/73.

Federal Finance Administration. (2008). The new accounting model of the swiss confederation. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 8 (1), 1-38.

Government Accountability Office. GAO, U.S. (1995). Budget issues the role of depreciation in budgeting for certain federal investments. Washington.

Government Accountability Office. GAO, U.S. (2000). Accrual budgeting --experiences of other nations and implications for the United States. Washington.

Government Accountability Office. GAO, U.S. (2007). Budget issues accrual budgeting useful in certain areas but does not provide sufficient information for reporting on our nation's longer-term fiscal challenge. Washington.

Groot, T., & Budding, T. (2008). New public management's current issues and future prospects. Financial Accountability & Management, 24 (1), 1-13.

Guthrie, J. (1998). Application of accrual accounting in the australian public sector--rhetoric or reality. Financial Accountability & Management, 14 (1), 1-19.

Hepworth, N. (2003, January). Preconditions for successful implementation of accrual accounting in central government. Public Money & Managemtent, 23 (1), 37-44.

International Federation of Accountants. IFAC. (2000). Government financial reporting: accounting issues and practices. Recuperado em 23 setembro, 2011, de http://www.ifac.org/publications-resources/study-11-Government-Financial-Reporting-Accounting- Issues-and-Practices.

International Federation of Accountants. IFAC. (2010). 2010 IFAC Handbook of international public sector accountingpronouncements. Recuperado em 18 outubro, 2010, de http://web.ifac.org/publications/%20international-public-sector-accounting-standards-board.

International Federation of Accountants. IFAC. (2011). Transition to the accrual basis of accounting: guidance for public sector entities. (3rd. ed.). Recuperado em 22 setembro, 2011, de http://www.ifac.org/ publications-resources/study-14-transition-accrual-basis-accounting-guidance-governments-and-governm.

International Monetary Fund. IMF. (2001). Government finance statistics manual. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.

International Monetary Fund. IMF. (2003). Public debt in emerging markets: is it too high? World Economic Outlook. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.

International Monetary Fund. IMF. (2007). Manual on fiscal transparency. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.

Jagalla, T., Becker, S. D., & Weber J. (2011). A taxonomy of the perceived benefits of accrual accounting and budgeting: evidence from german states. Financial Accountability & Management, 27 (2), 134-165.

Jones, R. United Kingdom. (2003). In K. Luder, & J. Rowan. Reforming governmental accounting and budgeting in Europe. Frankfurt am Main: Fachverlag Moderne Wirtschaft, 941-1018.

Jones, R., & Luder, K. (2011). The federal government of Germany's circumspection concerning accrual budgeting and accounting. Public Money & Management, 31 (4), 265-270.

Keuning, S., & Van Tongeren, D. (2004). The relationship between government accounts and national accounts, with special reference to the Netherlands. Review of Income and Wealth, 50 (2), 167-179.

Lei 432/1964. (1964). Recuperado de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/ leis/14320compilado.htm.

Likierman, A. (2000). Changes to managerial decision-taking in U.K. central government. Management Accounting Research, 11 (2), 253-261.

Luder, K., & Jones, R. (2003). The diffusion of accrual accounting and budgeting in european governments--a cross-country analysis. In K.

Luder, & R. Jones. Reforming governmental accounting and budgeting in Europe. (pp. 13-58). Frankfurt am Main: Fachverlag Moderne Wirtschaft.

Marti, C. (2004). Hacia el presupuesto por devengo en las administraciones publicas. Auditoria Publica, 34, 87-94.

Marti, C. (2006). Accrual budgeting: accounting treatment of key public sector items and implications for fiscal policy. Public Budgeting and Financing, 26 (2), 45-65.

Marti Lopez, C. (2008). Aspectos clave en la presupuestacion por devengo: las cargas de capital. Presupuesto y gasto publico, 51, 243-254.

Meyers, R. T. (2009). The "Ball of Confusion" in federal budgeting: a shadow agenda for deliberative reform of the budget process. Public Administration Review, 69 (2), 211-223.

Murray, A. (2008). Review of Operation Sunlight: overhauling budgetary transparency. Australia. Recuperado de http://www.finance.gov. au/financial-framework/financial-management-policy-guidance/ operation-sunlight/docs/budget-transparency-report.pdf.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD. (2009). Evolutions in budgetary practice: Allen Schick and the OECD Senior Budget Officials. Paris.

Paulsson, G. (2006). Accrual accounting in the public sector: experiences from the central government in Sweden. Financial Accountability & Management, 22 (1), 47-62.

Paulsson, G. (2007). Accrual accounting and cash budgeting--the prospects for running a dual system. Sweden: Department of Business Administration, School of Economics and Management, Lund University.

Pigatto, J. A. M., Holanda, V. B. de, Moreira, C. R., & Carvalho, F. A. (2010). A importancia da contabilidade de competencia para a informacao de custos governamental. Revista de Administracao Publica, Rio de Janeiro, 44 (4), 821-837.

Rezende, F., Cunha, A., & Bevilacqua, R. (2010). Informacoes de custos e qualidade do gasto publico: licoes da experiencia internacional. Revista de Administracao Publica, Rio de Janeiro, 44 (4), 959-992.

Robb, A, & Newberry, S. (2007). Globalization: governmental accounting and International Financial Reporting Standards. Socio-Economic Review, 5 (4), 725-754.

Robinson, M. (1998). Measuring compliance with the Golden Rule. Fiscal Studies, 19 (4), 447-462.

Robinson, M. (2002a, Winter). Output-purchase funding and budgeting systems in the public sector. Public Budgeting and Financing, 22 (4), 17-33.

Robinson, M. (2002b, Spring). Financial control in australian government budgeting. Public Budgeting and Financing, 22 (1), 80-93.

Robinson, M. (2002c). National and state fiscal rules in Australia: an outline and critical analysis. Rome: Proceedings of the 3rd Banca d'Italia Workshop on Fiscal Policy, Perugia, Banca d'Italia, January 2001.

Robinson, M. (2009). Accrual budgeting and fiscal policy. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 2009 (1), 1-29.

Salinas, F. J. (2002). Accrual budgeting and fiscal consolidation in the EMU. Contemporary Economic Policy, 20 (2), 193-206.

Scheers, B., Sterck, M., & Bouckaert, G. (2005). Lessons from Australian and British reforms in results oriented financial management. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 5 (2), 133-162.

Schick, A. (1996). The spirit of reform: managing the New Zealand state sector in a time of change. New Zealand: Report Prepared for the State Services Commission and The Treasury.

Schick, A. (1998). Why most developing countries should not try New Zealand's Reforms. The World Bank Research Observer, 13 (1), 123-131.

Schick, A. (2007). Performance budgeting and accrual budgeting: decision rules or analytic tools? Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 7 (2), 109-138.

Schick, A. (2009). Budgeting for fiscal space. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 2009 (2), 1-18.

Sterck, M., Scheers, B., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Reformes budgetaires dans le secteur public: tendances et defis. Revue Internationale de Politique Comparee, 11 (2), 241-269.

Torres, L. (2004). Accounting and accountability: recent developments in government financial information systems. Public Administration and Development, 24 (5), 447-456.

Van der Hoek, M. P. (2005). From cash to accrual budgeting and accounting in the public sector: the Dutch experience. Public Budgeting & Finance, 25 (1), 33-45.

Warren, K, & Barnes, C. (2003). The impact of GAAP on fiscal decision making: a review of twelve years' experience with accrual and output based budgets in New Zealand. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 3 (4), 7-40.

Wynne, A. (2008). Accrual accounting for the public sector--a fad that has had its day? International Journal on Governmental Financial Management, 8 (2), 117-132.

* Different version of this article containing sections found within this article were presented at ENANPAD, 2011, Rio de Janeiro and at the International Conference on Public Policy, 2013, Grenoble.

(1) Conducted by the National Treasury on 03 to 04 December 2009, in the Auditorium of the School of Finance Administration in Brasilia.

(2) Conducted by the CFC on 20 to September 22, 2010 in Belo Horizonte.

Bento Rodrigo Pereira Monteiro

Legislative Analyst, House of Representatives

E-mail: bentomonteiro@yahoo.com

Ricardo Correa Gomes

First Associate Professor, Department of Business Administration, School of Economics, Business Administration and Accounting Sciences--FACE, University of Brasilia

E-mail: rgomes@unb.br

Received on 8.27.2012--Accepted on 10.16.2012--3rd version accepted on 5.23.2013

1 INTRODUCAO

Nos ultimos anos, buscando o aperfeicoamento da informacao contida nas demonstracoes contabeis regularmente apresentadas pelos entes publicos, foi adotado o regime contabil de competencia como base de elaboracao desses demonstrativos em diferentes niveis de governo de diversos paises. Ate entao, o reconhecimento dos eventos contabeis evidenciados nesses demonstrativos era realizado de acordo com o regime contabil de caixa. Essa mudanca permitiu que os usuarios dessas informacoes pudessem avaliar a accountability por todos os recursos controlados pela entidade, bem como a distribuicao desses recursos, avaliar o desempenho, a posicao financeira e o fluxo de caixa da entidade, e tambem tomar decisoes sobre o fornecimento de recursos para a entidade ou sobre a realizacao de negocios com ela (International Federation of Accountants--IFAC, 2011).

Ate o inicio dos anos 1990, quando os primeiros paises comecaram a adota-lo, o regime de competencia na contabilidade aplicada ao setor publico encontrava-se limitado as unidades, orgaos, agencias, empresas que atuavam em setores de exploracao de atividade economica, em muitos casos competindo com empresas privadas.

A International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), atraves da emissao das Normas Internacionais de Contabilidade para o Setor Publico (International Public Sector Accounting Standards--IPSAS), difundiu o uso do regime de competencia como uma boa pratica contabil tambem para o setor publico. Nesse sentido, a IPSAS 1--Presentation of Financial Statements (Apresentacao das Demonstracoes Financeiras) orienta expressamente, em seu segundo paragrafo, que a adocao das normas internacionais devera ser realizada em um ambiente que utilize o regime contabil de competencia: "Essa norma deve ser aplicada em todas as demonstracoes contabeis destinadas a atender propositos ou fins gerais elaboradas e apresentadas de acordo com o regime de competencia conforme as IPSAS" (IFAC, 2010, p. 32). A partir disso, o regime contabil de competencia comecou a ser adotado por outros governos, em funcao de um projeto de convergencia com as normas internacionais (Torres, 2004; Marti, 2004).

Paralelamente, o Fundo Monetario Internacional (FMI) adotou o regime de competencia para elaboracao das estatisticas fiscais governamentais (Government Finance Statistics --GFS) a partir de 2001. As informacoes de estatisticas fiscais permitem aqueles que as utilizam a analise de diversas informacoes como, por exemplo, o tamanho do setor publico, a sua contribuicao para a demanda agregada, investimento e poupanca, impacto da politica fiscal no uso de recursos, efetividade do gasto para reducao da pobreza, sustentabilidade das politicas fiscais entre outros (International Monetary Fund--IMF, 2001).

Em 2001, outros documentos do FMI, como o Sistema de Contas Nacionais (System of National Accounts--SNA, 1993), o Manual do Balanco de Pagamentos (Balance of Payments Manual) e o Manual de Estatisticas Monetarias e Financeiras (Monetary and Financial Statistics Manual), ja exigiam o uso do regime de competencia para a geracao dos seus demonstrativos. O alinhamento do Manual de Estatisticas Fiscais Governamentais com os demais manuais era desejavel, de modo que a vinculacao dos dados existentes nos diferentes sistemas fosse facilitada.

Assim, o Manual de Estatisticas Fiscais Governamentais identifica que "muitos paises precisarao revisar os seus sistemas contabeis para refletir o regime de competencia como base de registro" (IMF, 2001, p. vii, traducao do autor). Isso ocorreu porque a substituicao do regime, que estava em curso em alguns paises, foi percebida como uma tendencia para o futuro, de modo que uma quantidade maior de informacoes seria gerada de acordo com o regime de competencia, motivo pelo qual a base adotada no manual deveria ser modificada (Efford, 1996).

Apesar disso, o Manual de Estatisticas Fiscais Governamentais admite que e possivel o ajuste dos dados a partir de sistemas contabeis em caixa, desde que as diferencas nao sejam relevantes. De qualquer forma, e considerada uma boa pratica a possibilidade de que relatorios com base nos dois regimes possam ser gerados pela contabilidade (IMF, 2007).

O orcamento por regime de competencia e uma experiencia recente na maioria dos paises no qual foi implantado. Assim, a discussao academica sobre o tema ainda e incipiente. Neste cenario, os academicos dos paises que passaram pela mudanca concentraram seu trabalho em estudos de caso referentes ao resultado gerado pela mudanca realizada (Guthrie, 1998; Warren & Barnes, 2003; Carlin, 2003, 2005; Van Der Hoek, 2005; Scheers, Sterck, & Bouckaert, 2005; Marti, 2006; Wynne, 2008; Robinson, 2009).

Quando se estende a pesquisa a trabalhos profissionais, encontram-se diversos orgaos publicos e organismos internacionais que tem estudado o assunto de modo a avaliar a utilidade do orcamento por regime de competencia no ambito de seus sistemas orcamentarios (Government Accountability Office--GAO, 2000, 2007; Athukorala & Reid, 2003; Algemene Rekenkamer, 2003), bem como para servir de fundamentacao teorica sobre a realizacao da mudanca (Christie, 2009; Federal Finance Administration, 2008).

No Brasil, embora o regime de competencia dentro da contabilidade ja venha sendo explorado academicamente (Pigatto, Holanda, Moreira, & Carvalho, 2010; Borges, Mario, Cardoso, & Aquino, 2010), o tema do orcamento por competencia ainda nao mereceu similar atencao. Pesquisa realizada identificou somente o trabalho de Rezende, Cunha, e Bevilacqua (2010) abordando brevemente a utilizacao do regime de competencia no orcamento, sendo necessario aprofundar essa discussao.

Atualmente, o Conselho Federal de Contabilidade (CFC) e a Secretaria do Tesouro Nacional estao realizando a convergencia das normas de Contabilidade Aplicada ao Setor Publico para o padrao internacional de contabilidade. Esse trabalho inclui a traducao e validacao das IPSAS, a elaboracao das Normas Brasileiras de Contabilidade Aplicada ao Setor Publico convergidas para o padrao internacional definido pelo IFAC e a edicao do Manual de Contabilidade Aplicada ao Setor Publico observando a normatizacao nacional e internacional, bem como uma reinterpretacao da Lei 4.320/1964, de forma a poder adotar a competencia como base do registro contabil.

Apesar da adocao da competencia como regime utilizado para a contabilidade, as IPSAS nao pressupoem que o regime a ser utilizado no orcamento sera o de competencia. Especificamente a IPSAS 24, Apresentacao de Informacoes Orcamentarias nas Demonstracoes Contabeis, deixa livre a opcao pela utilizacao do orcamento de competencia ou de caixa. De forma que o processo de convergencia as normas internacionais em andamento nao fara com que o regime de competencia tenha que ser adotado para o orcamento.

Essas mudancas estao trazendo o tema do orcamento publico por regime de competencia para o debate no setor publico brasileiro. A discussao do assunto no I Seminario Internacional Informacao de Custos no Setor Publico (1) e no II Seminario Internacional de Contabilidade Publica (2) e um indicativo da relevancia do tema para os contadores publicos.

Considerando a iminente atualizacao da legislacao de financas publicas do Brasil, tendo em vista a Tramitacao do Projeto de Lei do Senado 229/2009, o presente trabalho visa a criacao de uma base de conhecimento que de inicio a pesquisa sobre o tema.

As experiencias com o orcamento publico por regime de competencia no cenario internacional ainda estao sujeitas a ajustes no processo continuo de melhoria de seus processos e da qualidade das suas informacoes. A experiencia na implantacao do referido regime na Suica, Reino Unido e Australia, avaliadas em diversas pesquisas presentes neste trabalho, sera o ponto de partida para a analise a ser realizada nesta pesquisa. Dessa forma, o presente trabalho teve como objetivo a verificacao das diferencas referentes a gestao publica, resultado fiscal e aspectos culturais da mudanca. Cabe ao presente trabalho definir as diferencas principais entre esses regimes e identificar as mudancas necessarias no processo orcamentario para que se estabeleca o regime de competencia para a alocacao das receitas e despesas orcamentarias. Para que este artigo cumpra o seu papel serao analisadas as experiencias internacionais, a partir dos dados apresentados na pesquisa bibliografica utilizada. A analise de conteudo realizada foi feita de forma a verificar as mudancas realizadas nesses paises. Foi escolhida para atender a esse objetivo, pois e uma tecnica que permite que se produzam inferencias a partir do texto em estudo (Bauer, 2008). A analise do reconhecimento das despesas e receitas segundo os diferentes criterios norteou esse processo de comparacao.

2 DESENVOLVIMENTO

Uma forma pela qual os orcamentos podem ser classificados e em funcao do processo contabil utilizado para a alocacao dos recursos. Ao dividi-los dessa forma, encontram-se aqueles que registram os gastos publicos no momento em que o recurso publico e pago (regime de caixa) e aqueles que realizam esse registro no momento em que o fato gerador ocorre (regime de competencia). Ha ainda os que consideram o momento em que a obrigacao legal de realizar toda a despesa referente a um projeto e contraida, variacao do regime de caixa (regime de obrigacao) (GAO, 2000). Alem disso, os orcamentos de diversos paises possuem formulas mistas dos modelos acima, tendo a implantacao do regime de competencia no orcamento de alguns paises sido limitada a determinadas agencias ou a determinados programas (GAO, 2007).

No orcamento por caixa, despesas e receitas sao registradas no mesmo momento em que o caixa e movimentado atraves do ingresso ou dispendio de disponibilidades financeiras. Neste, e irrelevante a data de ocorrencia do fato gerador. A alocacao de recursos seguindo o regime de caixa faz com que, a uma autorizacao orcamentaria para o gasto, corresponda efetivamente uma saida de recursos de igual valor. Ao considerar que, para a grande maioria das transacoes governamentais, o tempo decorrido entre o fato gerador e a movimentacao financeira e relativamente pequeno, a distorcao das informacoes financeiras geralmente nao envolve uma quantia consideravel (Blondall, 2003b, 2004).

O regime de obrigacao (utilizado nos Estados Unidos) tem como marco para a consideracao da realizacao da despesa orcamentaria a criacao do vinculo legal para a execucao dessa despesa. Dessa forma, em projetos de longo prazo, com execucao da despesa em diversos exercicios financeiros, a despesa e considerada executada pelo seu valor total no inicio da realizacao do projeto, visto que o vinculo legal ja foi estabelecido nesse momento (GAO, 2000).

No orcamento por competencia, a fixacao da despesa e a previsao da receita sao realizadas considerando o conceito contabil de competencia. Conforme Luder e Jones (2003, p. 35), "o termo 'orcamento por competencia' significa, de novo na pratica, a extensao na qual medidas e registros da contabilidade por competencia sao usados no processo orcamentario". No Brasil, esse conceito encontra-se no artigo 9 da Resolucao 750/93 do Conselho Federal de Contabilidade, alterada pela Resolucao 1.282/2010, a qual lhe deu a seguinte redacao: "O Principio da Competencia determina que os efeitos das transacoes e outros eventos sejam reconhecidos nos periodos a que se referem, independentemente do recebimento ou pagamento".

A normatizacao realizada pelo orgao de classe dos profissionais de contabilidade no Brasil, o CFC, resultou na emissao, no final de 2008, de dez resolucoes tratando da contabilidade aplicada ao setor publico no Brasil. Iniciando assim o trabalho de elaboracao das Normas Brasileiras de Contabilidade Aplicada ao Setor Publico.

O CFC emitiu as Resolucoes numeros 1.128 a 1.137/2008. Emitiu tambem a Resolucao 1.366/2011, que trata sobre os criterios de alocacao de custos no setor publico. Nenhuma dessas resolucoes trata do regime a ser utilizado para o reconhecimento de receitas e despesas orcamentarias no setor publico, em virtude de esse reconhecimento ser tratado por norma federal.

O regime de execucao do orcamento brasileiro encontra-se insculpido no artigo 35 da Lei 4.320/1964: "Art. 35. Pertencem ao exercicio financeiro: I--as receitas nele arrecadadas; II--as despesas nele legalmente empenhadas". Com isso, pode-se verificar que o Brasil atualmente adota um regime de caixa modificado, em que, na verdade, mais do que relacionar as despesas com o momento em que o recurso financeiro sai dos cofres publicos, o legislador optou por considerar a despesa executada no momento em que e feito o compromisso de realizacao do pagamento, representado pelo empenho. A definicao de empenho encontrase presente na mesma lei: "O empenho de despesa e o ato emanado de autoridade competente que cria para o Estado obrigacao de pagamento pendente ou nao de implemento de condicao". No caso da receita, a entrada do recurso na conta unica do Tesouro Nacional ocorre somente no estagio de recolhimento, posterior a arrecadacao, de forma que o seu reconhecimento ocorre efetivamente antes do ingresso dos recursos financeiros.

Assim, embora a perspectiva dada a competencia no setor publico seja a de que "o Principio da Competencia aplica-se integralmente ao Setor Publico", conforme redacao do anexo II da Resolucao 750/1993 do CFC, alterada pela Resolucao 1.367/2011, essa aplicacao integral ocorre somente no que se refere aos itens patrimoniais. De forma que o subsistema orcamentario que, segundo a Resolucao 1.129/2008, "registra, processa e evidencia os atos e os fatos relacionados ao planejamento e a execucao orcamentaria", encontra-se seguindo o regime definido na Lei 4.320/1964.

Os valores registrados pelo orcamento por competencia nao sao necessariamente identicos aqueles revelados pela contabilidade por competencia, visto que, no primeiro, eles sao registrados ex-ante, enquanto que, na contabilidade, esse registro e realizado ex-post. Apesar disso, o termo orcamento por competencia geralmente e usado para se referir ao registro do orcamento baseado nos padroes da contabilidade financeira (Robinson, 2009). O carater ex-ante do orcamento faz com que determinadas operacoes que sao registradas na contabilidade, influenciando na geracao do resultado contabil, nao sejam registradas no orcamento, como e o caso das reavaliacoes de bens. Isso nao significa, no entanto, que nao seja necessario ter atencao com relacao a esses valores no momento de elaboracao do orcamento. No caso especifico das reavaliacoes, o valor considerado para os bens afeta a apropriacao a ser realizada para a depreciacao no orcamento. Alem disso, nos casos em que os orgaos fazem uma "poupanca" para a aquisicao de bens, a sua subavaliacao pode fazer com que os fundos reservados para esse fim nao sejam suficientes para mante-los e/ ou substitui-los (GAO, 2007). O fato de que a depreciacao e uma despesa incontrolavel levanta preocupacoes com relacao a sua inclusao no orcamento (Robinson, 2002b). Nesse sentido, em estudo realizado pela U.S. Government Accoun tability Office--GAO (1995), Tribunal de Contas dos Estados Unidos, foi identificado que a inclusao da depreciacao no orcamento diminui o controle e aumenta a incerteza das estimativas orcamentarias.

Um dos principais objetivos que motivaram a introducao do regime de competencia no orcamento publico foi o de torna-lo mais transparente e melhorar a eficiencia do gasto publico e a accountability pelos resultados. Isso e alcancado, pois ao considerar as despesas realizadas no momento de ocorrencia de seu fato gerador, sendo irrelevante o momento em que o recurso financeiro e desembolsado, permite-se que o custo real da acao governamental seja obtido, de forma a permitir a comparacao do custo da atividade desenvolvida pelo governo com o custo de terceirizar essa atividade, servindo como ferramenta de decisao para os gestores e tambem como uma forma de medir o seu resultado (Schick, 1996; Likierman, 2000; Salinas, 2002; Blondall, 2003a; Barton, 2005; Van Der Hoek, 2005; Mar ti Lopez, 2008; Robinson, 2009; Jagalla, Becker, & Weber, 2011). Essa mudanca indica a transformacao do orcamento como peca de autorizacao da despesa publica e controle financeiro em direcao a um instrumento de planejamento e gestao (Sterck, Scheers, & Bouckaert, 2004).

Entretanto, pesquisa realizada por Carlin (2005) no estado de Victoria, na Australia, demonstrou que a avaliacao do custo total dos departamentos atraves do regime de competencia tende a mostrar sempre um custo mais elevado para o setor publico, inviabilizando a sua comparacao com o setor privado.

Apesar disso, a adocao do regime de competencia para elaboracao do orcamento nao tem o poder de, por si so, permitir que medicoes dos diferentes orgaos governamentais sejam realizadas, sendo necessarias outras acoes para que esse efeito possa ser permitido (Robinson, 2002a). Entre essas acoes encontra-se a utilizacao do orcamento por produto (output budget). No entanto, Carlin (2003) argumenta que o orcamento por produto distorce o resultado operacional e economico do governo. Talvez por essa razao, na Nova Zelandia, a disponibilizacao das informacoes dos custos governamentais nao teve impacto na tomada de decisao (Warren & Barnes, 2003).

Alem disso, o adequado gerenciamento de custos pelas unidades responsaveis pela realizacao do gasto e prejudicado pela obrigacao de cumprir um orcamento. Nao e possivel avaliar os gestores pelo resultado obtido na geracao dos servicos publicos ao mesmo tempo em que os controles orcamentarios nao possuem flexibilidade que permita ao gestor atingir o menor custo (Schick, 2007).

A alteracao da ocasiao em que determinadas despesas e receitas sao reconhecidas, causada pela mudanca de regime de caixa para competencia, faz com que, por exemplo, exija-se o reconhecimento do direito ao beneficio previdenciario referente as contribuicoes realizadas para os Regimes de Previdencia. Isso faz com que a despesa referente ao pagamento desses beneficios relacione-se com o seu fato gerador, ao inves de serem fatos sem aparente conexao. Por outro lado, os custos referentes aos gastos com a seguridade social nao podem ser previamente registrados, visto que nao preenchem os requisitos necessarios para serem reconhecidos como uma obrigacao. Outra modificacao e o reconhecimento da despesa no momento em que o estoque e consumido, deixando de haver o seu registro por ocasiao do pagamento ao fornecedor, que ocorre quando e utilizado o regime de caixa puro. Com relacao aos demais tipos de bens, os quais nao sao destinados ao consumo, torna-se necessaria a sua depreciacao no decorrer da sua vida util, fazendo com que os recursos gastos na sua compra tornemse despesa de forma parcelada, dividida pelo seu periodo de existencia (Blondall, 2003a; Robinson, 2009).

Determinados direitos que os servidores adquirem ao longo do tempo tambem devem ser reconhecidos de acordo com o cumprimento das condicoes necessarias para essa aquisicao. No caso brasileiro, podem-se citar como exemplos: o direito a ferias, decimo terceiro salario e tambem a licenca premio, ainda existente em determinadas esferas de governo. Da mesma forma, os juros de um emprestimo sao reconhecidos de acordo com a passagem do tempo. Isso e particularmente importante para os emprestimos cujos juros sejam pagos somente no final do periodo, bem como para aqueles que possuem um periodo de carencia (Blon dall, 2003a; Robinson, 2009).

Considerando o caso dos bens de capital e seu tratamento nos orcamentos publicos por regime de competencia, a Comissao Nacional de Auditoria da Australia indicou que os "orcamentos de competencia eliminariam distorcoes no deficit ou superavit do orcamento de caixa causado pela venda de ativos" (National Comission of Audit, 1996, traducao do autor). Esse entendimento tem como ponto de partida o fato de que a receita obtida com a venda de ativos nao poderia ser utilizada como forma de reduzir o deficit no orcamento, o que pode ocorrer quando o regime adotado e o de caixa.

No entanto, a identificacao de bens publicos, bem como a sua avaliacao e problematica. Nao ha consenso a respeito da contabilizacao de bens de uso comum. A normatizacao internacional sobre o assunto, realizada atraves da IPSAS 17--Property, Plant and Equipment (Ativo Fixo Tangivel) indica a obrigatoriedade de contabilizacao dos ativos de infraestrutura (ruas, pracas e estradas, por exemplo), enquanto que regulamenta como opcional a contabilizacao dos chamados ativos hereditarios (heritage assets), entre os quais se encontram os monumentos publicos e parques nacionais (IFAC, 2010).

No que se refere a avaliacao do valor da maioria desses bens, a complexidade decorre da inexistencia de informacoes referentes ao custo de construcao desses bens, havendo casos em que ha bens construidos ha mais de um seculo. Acrescente-se que nao ha mercados para negociacao de bens publicos, de forma que a sua avaliacao ao preco de mercado e igualmente inviavel. Esses fatores podem fazer com que mesmo sob o regime de competencia ocorra venda de ativos subavaliados reduzindo o deficit orcamentario com o lucro gerado por essa transacao (Robinson, 1998). O Manual de Estatisticas Fiscais Governamentais oferece, como alternativa a ausencia dos meios comuns de avaliacao de bens, o valor do premio do seguro sobre o ativo em questao (IMF, 2001).

Apesar das dificuldades mencionadas, a Nova Zelandia foi capaz de incluir ambas as categorias de bens nos seus ativos (GAO, 2007). O Reino Unido resolveu a questao determinando um valor nominal para os bens nao operacionais que ja se encontravam em sua propriedade, enquanto que as novas aquisicoes seriam avaliadas pelo seu preco de compra (Diamond, 2006).

A utilizacao do regime de competencia permite uma melhora na maneira como sao alocados recursos para a manutencao dos ativos governamentais. Ao utilizar o regime de caixa, os projetos que se referiam a despesas de capital somente eram considerados caso houvesse uma sobra orcamentaria. Com a depreciacao, os bens publicos sempre terao uma cota do orcamento (Christie, 2009).

Outra diferenca relevante entre caixa e competencia e o momento do reconhecimento da receita. No orcamento por competencia, deve-se considerar a ocorrencia do fato gerador do tributo. O nascimento do direito de receber do Estado, independente de seu pagamento pelo contribuinte, e o que representa o nascimento da receita no regime de competencia. A esse registro, acrescenta-se a necessidade de prever que uma parcela dos contribuintes nao efetuara esse pagamento, criando-se uma provisao no valor referente a essa parcela (Blondall, 2004).

As despesas registradas segundo o periodo de competencia que tem natureza nao monetaria como, por exemplo, a depreciacao e o direito aos beneficios previdenciarios, podem ser apropriadas no orcamento de duas maneiras diferentes: o modelo cash-in-hand e o modelo no-cash-in hand (Blondall, 2004).

No modelo cash-in-hand, as unidades administrativas recebem recursos financeiros para atender as suas necessidades com despesas cujo desembolso ocorra durante o exercicio, bem como para as despesas que nao envolvem caixa, recebendo os recursos para cobertura de todos os seus custos. Nesse modelo, o controle da aquisicao dos bens se torna menos transparente, pois a unidade administrativa poderia utilizar os recursos recebidos para outra finalidade que nao a de substituir o ativo depreciado (Blondall, 2004).

No modelo no-cash-in-hand somente sao alocados recursos financeiros referentes ao pagamento das despesas no periodo. As despesas as quais nao corresponde o desembolso recebem recursos orcamentarios, mas nao recursos financeiros. Esse modelo possui a vantagem de assegurar o controle parlamentar sobre a aquisicao de bens de capital, diminuindo a autonomia das unidades no uso dos recursos financeiros referentes a despesas registradas em razao da ocorrencia do fato gerador, mas que nao serao pagas no periodo (Blondall, 2004).

Ao mesmo tempo em que os custos ficam mais transparentes, o orcamento se torna mais complexo. A decisao politica referente a alocacao dos recursos orcamentarios deve ser sempre representada no orcamento. Entretanto, no orcamento por competencia essa premissa nao pode ser verificada. Na verdade, nos paises onde o orcamento por competencia foi implantado, o Parlamento teve o seu papel no processo orcamentario diminuido, ampliando concomitantemente o papel representado pelos tecnicos. Nesse sentido, e interessante notar que a adocao do regime de competencia na maioria dos paises e um movimento iniciado pelos tecnicos e nao pelos politicos. Especificamente no caso australiano, onde o orcamento de competencia foi adotado juntamente com o output budget, as mudancas organizacionais comumente realizadas na estrutura das agencias fazem com que seja dificil para os politicos daquele pais acompanhar a evolucao dos gastos publicos ao longo do tempo. Essa falta de transparencia enfraquece o controle parlamentar sobre o orcamento, sendo verificado que, mesmo mais de dez anos apos a sua implementacao, os politicos australianos ainda tem dificuldade de entender o orcamento por competencia. A propria postura do legislativo muda conforme o objeto da reforma se foca no orcamento, sendo possivel notar uma aversao dos parlamentares a mudancas no processo orcamentario, de modo que na Alemanha, por exemplo, a oposicao do Parlamento colocou em suspenso o plano de modernizacao do orcamento (Luder & Jones, 2003; Blondall, 2003a, 2003b, 2004; Scheers, Sterck, & Bouckaert, 2005; Schick, 2007; Robb & Newberry, 2007; Blondall, Bergvall, Hawkesworth, & Deighton-Smith, 2008; Robinson, 2009; Jones & Luder, 2011; Adhikari & Mellemvik, 2011).

O regime de caixa consegue retratar os gastos publicos de uma maneira direta, visto que os valores orcados serao aqueles que efetivamente sairao dos cofres publicos. Alem disso, a aplicacao da competencia precisa que estimativas sejam realizadas, as quais, alem de poderem ser mais facilmente manipuladas, tambem sao de mais dificil compreensao, ou seja, existem preocupacoes com relacao a geracao das informacoes, bem como quanto a sua utilizacao. Provavelmente por essa razao, pesquisas ainda indiquem que o processo de tomada de decisao governamental continua a usar informacoes baseadas em caixa, mesmo depois de implantada a competencia (Diamond, 2006; Schick, 2007; GAO, 2007; Groot & Budding, 2008; Barton, 2011).

A utilizacao de ferramentas para aferir os custos, bem como a producao de informacoes contabeis e orcamentarias corretas sao fundamentais para a boa alocacao de recursos publicos e para que os gestores sejam responsabilizados pelos seus resultados (OECD, 2009). No entanto, a relutancia de alguns governos em utilizar o regime de competencia para a elaboracao do orcamento indica que os fatores acima abordados tem impedido que a adocao do orcamento por regime de competencia seja um passo logico a ser dado apos a adocao do mesmo regime pela contabilidade publica desses paises.

A base escolhida para apropriacao das receitas e despesas orcamentarias e a utilizada prioritariamente para a geracao dos documentos e relatorios utilizados pelos servidores publicos e agentes politicos (Athukorala & Reid, 2003).

Assim, e importante verificar que a utilizacao do mesmo regime para a elaboracao do orcamento e para a geracao das estatisticas fiscais e vantajosa para os dois sistemas, ao permitir que informacoes geradas por um sistema possam ser diretamente usadas como base de analise para o outro (Keuning & Van Tongeren, 2004).

Essa mesma finalidade pode ser observada quando o regime contabil utilizado passa a ser o de competencia, visto que um dos objetivos dos demonstrativos gerados segundo esse regime e a avaliacao da conformidade da entidade em relacao ao orcamento de competencia (Internacional Federation of Accountants--IFAC, 2000). A utilizacao de sistemas diferentes para orcamento e contabilidade, embora mantenha a sua utilidade como ferramenta gerencial, diminui a sua importancia com relacao a politica orcamentaria e a elaboracao de politicas publicas (Paulsson, 2006).

Em virtude disso, o regime de competencia, que inicialmente era uma regra destinada somente a elaboracao de demonstracoes contabeis, comecou a ser usado como base de apropriacao de gastos publicos no orcamento (Schick, 2007).

Observa-se que a adocao da competencia como base do registro contabil, sem que o mesmo ocorra para apropriacao das receitas e despesas orcamentarias, pode impedir que as demonstracoes contabeis tenham utilidade como ferramentas para tomada de decisao, tornando-se somente um trabalho realizado por motivos burocraticos (AnessiPessina & Steccolini, 2007).

Nesse sentido, pesquisa realizada pelo Tribunal de Contas da Holanda (Algemene Rekenkamer, 2003) na qual foi abordada a experiencia do governo central da Suecia, governo que manteve o orcamento de caixa apos a introducao da contabilidade por competencia, concluiu que a utilizacao de dois sistemas diferentes era desaconselhavel em virtude dos problemas de compatibilizacao das informacoes dos documentos contabeis e orcamentarios. Na mesma direcao, pesquisa realizada com governos locais italianos (Anessi-Pessina, Nasi, & Steccolini, 2008) constatou que a confiabilidade das demonstracoes contabeis elaboradas segundo o regime de competencia estava sendo prejudicada, entre outros fatores, pela manutencao da contabilidade orcamentaria tradicional, solucao que tambem esta sendo adotada no Brasil.

Isso ocorre porque os objetivos dos regimes de competencia e de caixa sao potencialmente conflitantes (Diamond, 2006). Chan (2001) acrescenta que a harmonia entre os padroes de orcamento e de contabilidade trata-se de um fator essencial para a credibilidade das informacoes geradas pelas demonstracoes contabeis.

No entanto, o proposito com o qual as informacoes sao usadas em cada sistema, a maior resistencia encontrada para a mudanca do regime orcamentario e a utilizacao de regimes modificados mistos podem ser apontados como a razao para que muitos governos ainda operem com bases diferentes para contabilidade e orcamento (Paulsson, 2007).

Nesse sentido, e interessante o fato de que a Australia, que adotou o orcamento e a contabilidade por regime de competencia, continue a tomar decisoes baseadas majoritariamente em informacoes de caixa, quando o assunto se refere a politicas orcamentarias (Blondall et al., 2008). Em pesquisa realizada por Connolly e Hyndman (2006) tambem foi identificado que o uso da informacao por competencia na Irlanda do Norte, pais que usa orcamento e contabilidade por competencia, era limitado, visto que ela nao era compreendida pelos gestores, de modo que a adocao do regime de competencia na Irlanda do Norte nao foi capaz de gerar os beneficios esperados.

E importante considerar que, apesar de as reformas orcamentarias ocorridas nos paises mais desenvolvidos poderem ser consideradas experiencias de sucesso, o mesmo nao se pode dizer das tentativas de clona-las em paises em desenvolvimento (Allen, 2009; Adhikari & Mellemvik, 2011), de modo que cada pais deve adaptar as reformas orcamentarias neles realizadas a sua propria realidade (Bale & Dale, 1998). Assim, ao mesmo tempo em que a adocao da competencia na contabilidade faz com que o orcamento por competencia se torne vantajoso, o seu uso em paises que nao possuam sistemas altamente desenvolvidos e discutivel (Hepworth, 2003).

A dificuldade dos paises em desenvolvimento em conseguir aumentar a arrecadacao das receitas publicas, bem como a sua maior sujeicao as crises internacionais certamente tem relacao com os problemas enfrentados por eles em implantar essas reformas (IMF, 2003). Alem disso, Schick (1998) considera que as diferencas institucionais existentes entre os paises desenvolvidos e os demais podem fazer com que a adocao de boas praticas de gestao publica seja inviabilizada.

Alem do nivel de alocacao de recursos, o orcamento de competencia pode ser utilizado para atender a outro nivel de tomada de decisao do orcamento. Trata-se do nivel de estabilizacao macroeconomica, onde a competencia pode ser usada para calculo de resultado orcamentario para fins de politicas fiscais e para o estabelecimento de limites relacionados ao endividamento governamental (Diamond, 2006).

As duas funcoes exercidas pela politica fiscal que devem ser garantidas por qualquer sistema orcamentario sao a sustentabilidade fiscal e a estabilizacao fiscal (Robinson, 2009). A influencia do processo orcamentario adotado no resultado fiscal pode ser percebido ao identificar paises que, apesar de passarem por periodos de crescimento economico e de respeito a disciplina fiscal, nao obtiveram resultado favoravel no que se refere ao resultado fiscal (Blondall, 2003a).

Argumenta-se que a medicao do resultado fiscal do governo por meio do regime de caixa pode ser incompleta, tornando-se, por isso, sujeita a manipulacao. Isso ocorre, pois, ao nao considerar a despesa quando do consumo dos ativos, a realizacao do pagamento pode ser antecipada ou postergada, gerando um resultado diferente (Schick, 2007). Trabalho realizado pelo U.S. General Accountability Office --GAO (2007) identificou seis areas como geradoras das maiores diferencas ao apurar o resultado entre os dois diferentes regimes: beneficios dos servidores civis, beneficios dos militares, compensacao para os veteranos, bens de capital, seguros e contingencias ambientais.

Assim, pode-se ver que o orcamento realizado conforme o regime de caixa pode ignorar a geracao de contingencias que serao pagas no futuro. Dessa forma, e identificado que o orcamento por competencia pretenderia fazer com que os governos agissem com maior precaucao ao realizar comprometimentos com baixo impacto no orcamento atual, mas que afetariam diversos exercicios fiscais (Schick, 2007). Assim, o melhor metodo para a medicao do custo potencial dos compromissos de longo prazo e justamente o orcamento por competencia, pois ele permite calcular o custo provavel dos fluxos de caixa em valores presentes e antecipar medidas para que a sustentabilidade fiscal nao seja comprometida (Meyers, 2009; Salinas, 2002).

Marti (2006), ao considerar que a modificacao do momento de reconhecimento das receitas e despesas interfere na avaliacao da politica fiscal, identifica que o maior deficit gerado pelo orcamento realizado seguindo a competencia, bem como a possibilidade de avaliacao do impacto de longo prazo, fazem com que uma melhor politica para tratamento dos agregados fiscais possa ser adotada.

Alem disso, o orcamento por competencia tambem permite indicar os efeitos orcamentarios na sustentabilidade de longo prazo, bem como aos seus efeitos intergeracionais, ao mostrar a relacao entre as receitas e os custos totais do governo para um determinado periodo, formando um orcamento atuarialmente mais solido (Ball, Dale, Eggers, & Sacco, 2000; Barton, 2009).

Assim, a utilizacao do regime de competencia faz com que seja mais facil representar a manutencao do patrimonio liquido do ente publico (Robinson, 1998). Nesse sentido, enquanto um orcamento de caixa equilibrado e aquele no qual as entradas no caixa superam as saidas, ao utilizar o regime de competencia, todos os custos incorridos no periodo sao considerados (Robinson, 2002c).

Deve-se considerar tambem que os governos, ao adotar o regime de competencia, podem procurar gerar resultados orcamentarios positivos, gerando, no entanto, deficits de caixa (Buti, Martins, & Turrini, 2007). Por essa razao, a politica fiscal somente sera considerada adequada, para os governos que utilizam o regime de competencia, quando houver tambem um controle sobre a quantidade de recursos financeiros recebidos e gastos (Robinson, 2009).

Ao utilizar o regime de competencia para a elaboracao do orcamento, o mero controle dos totais das despesas sera insuficiente para que o nivel de endividamento fiscal possa ser mantido. Isso ocorre porque os gastos realizados com despesas de capital deixam de constar no orcamento, visto que a realizacao dessa despesa se dara somente atraves da depreciacao do bem adquirido ou construido (Robinson, 2009).

Os paises que implementaram o orcamento por regime de competencia realizaram esse controle de duas formas. Em alguns, o controle das despesas de capital foi realizado atraves de um limite orcamentario para as despesas de capital do orgao. Esse modelo, seguido no Reino Unido e na Nova Zelandia, e mais transparente, visto que os limites estarao explicitos no documento orcamentario. A Australia, no entanto, optou por nao incluir esse controle no orcamento. Nele, as despesas com depreciacao de um ano formavam o montante que pode ser gasto com despesas de capital. Esse valor era acumulado por orgao, de modo que nao era necessaria uma autorizacao externa ao orgao para a realizacao da despesa quando o orgao houvesse acumulado depreciacao em montante suficiente para a realizacao da despesa de capital (Jones, 2003; Robinson, 2009). Assim, nas palavras de Robinson (2002b), o recebimento de recursos pelo orgao e realizado efetivamente pela despesa ao inves de pelo desembolso. No entanto, pode ser observado que, neste ultimo caso, as agencias poderiam utilizar os fundos acumulados para outras aquisicoes, evidenciando que, nesse modelo, o Parlamento pode facilmente perder o controle sobre a aquisicao de bens de capital (GAO, 2007).

O Comite de Administracao Publica e Financas do Senado australiano considerou essa provisao de apropriacoes para depreciacao de bens como sendo uma anomalia, visto que os bens que estavam sendo depreciados ja haviam sido autorizados no orcamento quando de sua aquisicao, resultando numa dupla contagem (Murray, 2008). O fato de que, com a adocao da competencia, nenhuma das agencias recebeu os recursos referentes a depreciacao acumulada faz com que tal metodo faca ainda menos sentido (Blondall et al., 2008). Baseado nisso, foi editada uma recomendacao para o governo, no sentido de que um novo modelo fosse desenvolvido para o orcamento de 2009/2010 (Murray, 2008). Assim, o controle das despesas de capital passou a ser feito com base no total de recursos necessarios para um determinado exercicio financeiro a partir do orcamento elaborado para o periodo de 2010/2011 (Australia, 2008). Alem disso, foi reintroduzido o orcamento de caixa para a geracao das estatisticas fiscais governamentais, adicionalmente ao orcamento por competencia, a partir do orcamento de 2008/2009 (Barton, 2009).

Diferentemente do que foi considerado por Rezende et al. (2010), essa mudanca nao foi o fim do orcamento por competencia na Australia. Na verdade, "transacoes em caixa sao especificamente identificadas porque a gestao de caixa e considerada uma funcao integral do orcamento por competencia" (Australia, 2010, p. 9-31). Dessa forma, a modificacao se concentrou no modelo utilizado para autorizacao das despesas de capital, que deixou de ser baseado no acumulo dos saldos de depreciacao ao longo dos orcamentos do orgao e na recentralizacao da gestao dos recursos financeiros, ou seja, um abandono do modelo cash-in-hand.

Nao ha, entre os paises que adotaram o regime de competencia, um padrao sobre o regime utilizado para o calculo do resultado fiscal. Os indicadores de agregados fiscais na Nova Zelandia e no Canada sao baseados em competencia, enquanto que a Australia e o Reino Unido utilizam caixa para calculo do resultado do governo. Entretanto, todos, sem excecao, ainda usam informacoes geradas com base no regime de caixa em algum momento (GAO, 2007).

Robinson (2009) identifica que os governos que utilizam o regime de competencia deveriam tambem gerar agregados fiscais baseados em competencia. Ele acrescenta que o uso de agregados baseados em competencia e vantajoso em virtude de que a divida publica patrimonial e um indicador melhor para a gestao da sustentabilidade fiscal do que o endividamento em caixa. Entretanto, a utilizacao dos agregados fiscais por caixa ou competencia pode ser realizada independentemente do regime adotado para a contabilidade ou orcamento (Schick, 2009).

A partir da analise das pesquisas realizadas sobre as experiencias internacionais com o regime de competencia no orcamento, podem-se vislumbrar algumas dificuldades que o modelo encontraria para ser adotado no Brasil. Primeiramente, haveria uma mudanca nos orgaos que hoje concentram os recursos orcamentarios, dada a mudanca no enfoque de consideracao das despesas orcamentarias. As Forcas Armadas, por exemplo, possuidoras de uma quantidade consideravel de ativos teriam sua despesa aumentada em virtude da inclusao da depreciacao. A necessidade de uma modificacao legal e clara, visto que a Lei 4.320/1964 determina qual o regime a ser utilizado no orcamento. Mas, alem disso, tambem ha uma necessidade de mudanca de cultura, que hoje esta totalmente voltada para a geracao de informacoes de caixa, acompanhada de treinamento dos servidores que trabalham com essas informacoes. Finalmente, como foi visto no exemplo australiano, a complexidade do processo orcamentario aumentaria, acompanhada de um menor entendimento do orcamento pelos parlamentares. Esse obstaculo nao pode ser menosprezado, visto que foi uma das principais causas para a nao adocao do orcamento por competencia na Suecia e na Alemanha.

A figura a seguir apresenta as principais vantagens e desvantagens do orcamento de competencia apuradas neste trabalho:
Figura 1 Vantagens e desvantagens do uso do regime
de competencia no orcamento publico

Vantagens                        Desvantagens

* Aumento da transparencia do    * Aumento de estimativas
custo dos servicos publicos      contabeis no orcamento,
                                 podendo gerar incerteza sobre
* Melhora a accountability       os numeros orcados
pelos resultados
                                 * Aumento da complexidade do
* Geracao de informacoes no      orcamento
mesmo regime das informacoes
contabeis                        * Controle parlamentar sobre o
                                 orcamento e diminuido
* Melhora na alocacao das
despesas com manutencao de
ativos publicos

* Identifica melhor
contingencias que serao pagas
no futuro


3 CONCLUSAO

Embora o regime de competencia para a orcamentacao de receitas e despesas seja um processo iniciado ha cerca de vinte anos, o tema no Brasil ainda e desconhecido, mesmo depois de abordado em eventos de contabilidade aplicada ao setor publico e de informacoes de custos no governo federal.

A necessidade de entender a importancia do regime de competencia no orcamento, num momento em que o Brasil adota esse regime para a contabilidade e encontra-se em processo de alterar a lei de financas publicas, de modo a evitar que tal regime seja considerado sem que seja conhecido e discutido na Academia, foi a principal razao para a existencia deste trabalho.

A falta de estudos internacionais analisando resultados fiscais e evolucao da divida publica dos paises que adotaram o regime de competencia, o dissenso entre os acade micos a respeito dos beneficios atingidos com a reforma, bem como a escassez de pesquisas realizando comparacoes entre os paises que ja o adotaram, principalmente, nesse ultimo caso, sob uma perspectiva do Brasil, justificam a necessidade de discutir o orcamento academicamente. Assim, o presente artigo permite iniciar essa discussao ao analisar as pesquisas realizadas e apontar as possibilidades de futuros desenvolvimentos a respeito do tema.

O artigo cumpriu o objetivo de desenvolver um ponto de partida teorico para o estudo do orcamento publico por regime de competencia no Brasil, reunindo os aspectos principais desse modelo de alocacao orcamentaria tendo, como fonte, os estudos sobre a materia realizados no mundo.

Existe agora a necessidade de aprofundar o tema. Para isso sao necessarias pesquisas sobre as experiencias de adocao do regime de competencia no orcamento. A comparacao entre os paises que mantiveram o orcamento em caixa depois da adocao da competencia com os paises que fizeram a adocao da competencia para orcamento e contabilidade e importante para verificar ate que ponto e fundamental que o mesmo regime seja utilizado para os dois sistemas.

Alem disso, ha necessidade de realizar a pesquisa de modo a considerar as particularidades do modelo orcamentario brasileiro, suas instituicoes politicas, bem como as caracteristicas da burocracia brasileira e nao somente as experiencias internacionais. Tal abordagem e necessaria para que se evite a adocao do modelo sem que as peculiaridades da administracao publica brasileira sejam consideradas.

Referencias

Adhikari, P., & Mellemvik, F. (2011). The rise and fall of accruals: a case of nepalese central government. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 1 (2), 123-143.

Algemene Rekenkamer. (2003). Accrual budgeting and accounting in central government--budgets and accounts in balance. Haia.

Allen, R. (2009). The challenge of reforming budgetary institutions in developing countries. IMF Working Paper, WP/09/96.

Anessi-Pessina, E., & Steccolini, I. (2007). Effects of budgetary and accruals accounting coexistence: evidence from Italian local governments. Financial Accountability & Management, 23 (2), 113-131.

Anessi-Pessina, E., Nasi, G., & Steccolini, I. (2008). Accounting reforms: determinants of local governments' choices. Financial Accountability & Management, 24 (3), 321-342.

Athukorala, S. A., & Reid, B. (2003). Accrual budgeting and accounting in government and its relevance for developing member countries. Manila: Asian Development Bank.

Australia. (2008). Operation Sunlight--enhancing budget transparency. Recuperado de http://www.finance.gov.au/financial-framework/ financial-management-policy-guidance/operation-sunlight/docs/ operation-sunlight-enhancing-budget-transparency.pdf.

Australia. (2010). Budget Paper, 1, 2010-2011. Budget strategy and outlook. Recuperado de http://www.budget.gov.au/2010-11/content/ bp1/download/bp1.pdf.

Bale, M., & Dale, T. (1998). Public sector reform in New Zealand and its relevance to developing countries. The World Bank Observer, 13 (1), 103-121.

Ball, I., Dale, T., Eggers, W. D., & Sacco, J. (2000). Reforming financial management in the public sector: lessons Canada can learn from New Zealand. Frontier Centre for Public Policy, Policy Series, 6.

Barton, A. (2005). Professional accounting standards and the public sector --a mismatch. Abacus, 41 (2), 138-158.

Barton, A. (2009). The use and abuse of accounting in the public sector financial management reform program in Australia. Abacus, 45 (2), 221-248.

Barton, A. (2011). Why governments should use the government finance statistics accounting system. Abacus, 47 (4), 411-445.

Bauer, M. W. (2008). Analise de conteudo classica. In W. Martin Bauer, & G. Gaskell. Pesquisa qualitativa com texto, imagem e som. (pp. 189217). Petropolis: Vozes.

Blondall, J. R. (2003a). Budget reform in OECD member countries: common trends. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 2 (4), 7-26.

Blondall, J. R. (2003b). Accrual accounting and budgeting: key issues and recent developments. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 3 (1), 43-59.

Blondall, J. R. (2004). Issues in accrual budgeting. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 4 (1), 103-120.

Blondall, J. R., Bergvall, D., Hawkesworth, I., & Deighton-Smith, R. (2008). Budgeting in Australia. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 8 (2), 1-64.

Borges, T. B., Mario, P. do C., Cardoso, R. L., & Aquino, A. C. B. de. (2010). Desmistificacao do regime contabil de competencia. Revista de Administracao Publica, Rio de Janeiro, 44 (4), 877-901.

Buti, M., Martins, J. N., & Turrini, A. (2007). From deficits to debt and back: political incentives under numerical fiscal rules. CESifo Economic Studies, 53 (1), 115-152.

Carlin, T. M. (2003). Accrual output based budgeting systems in Australia --a great leap backwards. Australian Accounting Review, 13 (2), 41-47.

Carlin, T. M. (2005). Debating the impact of accrual accounting and reporting in the public sector. Financial Accountability & Management, 21 (3), 309-336.

Chan, J. L. (2001, Fall). The implications of GASB statement n. 34 for public budgeting. Public Budgeting & Finance, 21 (3), 79-87.

Christie, T. (2009). Accrual budgeting by canadian federal, provincial and territorial governments. Toronto: The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants.

Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2006). The actual implementation of accruals accounting--caveats from a case within the UK public sector. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19 (2), 272-290.

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. CFC. (1993). Resolucao 750/93. Recuperado de www.cfc.org.br/sisweb/sre/docs/RES_750.doc.

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. CFC. (2010). Resolucao 1282/2010. Recuperado de www.cfc.org.br/sisweb/sre/docs/RES_1282.doc.

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. CFC. (2011). Resolucao 1367/2011. Recuperado de www.cfc.org.br/sisweb/sre/docs/RES_1367.doc.

Diamond, J. (2006). Budget system reform in emerging economies: the challenges and the reform agenda. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund.

Efford, D. (1996). The case for accrual recording in the IMF's government finance statistics system. IMF Working Paper, WP/96/73.

Federal Finance Administration. (2008). The new accounting model of the swiss confederation. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 8 (1), 1-38.

Government Accountability Office. GAO, U.S. (1995). Budget issues the role of depreciation in budgeting for certain federal investments. Washington.

Government Accountability Office. GAO, U.S. (2000). Accrual budgeting --experiences of other nations and implications for the United States. Washington.

Government Accountability Office. GAO, U.S. (2007). Budget issues accrual budgeting useful in certain areas but does not provide sufficient information for reporting on our nations longer-term fiscal challenge. Washington.

Groot, T., & Budding, T. (2008). New public management's current issues and future prospects. Financial Accountability & Management, 24 (1), 1-13.

Guthrie, J. (1998). Application of accrual accounting in the australian public sector--rhetoric or reality. Financial Accountability & Management, 14 (1), 1-19.

Hepworth, N. (2003, January). Preconditions for successful implementation of accrual accounting in central government. Public Money & Managemtent, 23 (1), 37-44.

International Federation of Accountants. IFAC. (2000). Government financial reporting: accounting issues and practices. Recuperado em 23 setembro, 2011, de http://www.ifac.org/publications-resources/study-11-Government-Financial-Reporting-Accounting- Issues-and-Practices.

International Federation of Accountants. IFAC. (2010). 2010 IFAC Handbook of international public sector accountingpronouncements. Recuperado em 18 outubro, 2010, de http://web.ifac.org/publications/%20international-public-sector-accounting-standards-board.

International Federation of Accountants. IFAC. (2011). Transition to the accrual basis of accounting: guidance for public sector entities. (3rd. ed.). Recuperado em 22 setembro, 2011, de http://www.ifac.org/ publications-resources/study-14-transition-accrual-basis-accounting guidance-governments-and-governm.

International Monetary Fund. IMF. (2001). Government finance statistics manual. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.

International Monetary Fund. IMF. (2003). Public debt in emerging markets: is it too high? World Economic Outlook. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.

International Monetary Fund. IMF. (2007). Manual on fiscal transparency. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.

Jagalla, T., Becker, S. D., & Weber J. (2011). A taxonomy of the perceived benefits of accrual accounting and budgeting: evidence from german states. Financial Accountability & Management, 27 (2), 134-165.

Jones, R. United Kingdom. (2003). In K. Luder, & J. Rowan. Reforming governmental accounting and budgeting in Europe. Frankfurt am Main: Fachverlag Moderne Wirtschaft, 941-1018.

Jones, R., & Luder, K. (2011). The federal government of Germany's circumspection concerning accrual budgeting and accounting. Public Money & Management, 31 (4), 265-270.

Keuning, S., & Van Tongeren, D. (2004). The relationship between government accounts and national accounts, with special reference to the Netherlands. Review of Income and Wealth, 50 (2), 167-179.

Lei 432/1964. (1964). Recuperado de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/ leis/14320compilado.htm.

Likierman, A. (2000). Changes to managerial decision-taking in U.K. central government. Management Accounting Research, 11 (2), 253-261.

Luder, K., & Jones, R. (2003). The diffusion of accrual accounting and budgeting in european governments--a cross-country analysis. In K.

Luder, & R. Jones. Reforming governmental accounting and budgeting in Europe. (pp. 13-58). Frankfurt am Main: Fachverlag Moderne Wirtschaft.

Marti, C. (2004). Hacia el presupuesto por devengo en las administraciones publicas. Auditoria Publica, 34, 87-94.

Marti, C. (2006). Accrual budgeting: accounting treatment of key public sector items and implications for fiscal policy. Public Budgeting and Financing, 26 (2), 45-65.

Marti Lopez, C. (2008). Aspectos clave en la presupuestacion por devengo: las cargas de capital. Presupuesto y gasto publico, 51, 243-254.

Meyers, R. T. (2009). The "Ball of Confusion" in federal budgeting: a shadow agenda for deliberative reform of the budget process. Public Administration Review, 69 (2), 211-223.

Murray, A. (2008). Review of Operation Sunlight: overhauling budgetary transparency. Australia. Recuperado de http://www.finance.gov. au/financial-framework/financial-management-policy-guidance/ operation-sunlight/docs/budget-transparency-report.pdf.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD. (2009). Evolutions in budgetary practice: Allen Schick and the OECD Senior Budget Officials. Paris.

Paulsson, G. (2006). Accrual accounting in the public sector: experiences from the central government in Sweden. Financial Accountability & Management, 22 (1), 47-62.

Paulsson, G. (2007). Accrual accounting and cash budgeting--the prospects for running a dual system. Sweden: Department of Business Administration, School of Economics and Management, Lund University.

Pigatto, J. A. M., Holanda, V. B. de, Moreira, C. R., & Carvalho, F. A. (2010). A importancia da contabilidade de competencia para a informacao de custos governamental. Revista de Administracao Publica, Rio de Janeiro, 44 (4), 821-837.

Rezende, F., Cunha, A., & Bevilacqua, R. (2010). Informacoes de custos e qualidade do gasto publico: licoes da experiencia internacional. Revista de Administracao Publica, Rio de Janeiro, 44 (4), 959-992.

Robb, A, & Newberry, S. (2007). Globalization: governmental accounting and International Financial Reporting Standards. Socio-Economic Review, 5 (4), 725-754.

Robinson, M. (1998). Measuring compliance with the Golden Rule. Fiscal Studies, 19 (4), 447-462.

Robinson, M. (2002a, Winter). Output-purchase funding and budgeting systems in the public sector. Public Budgeting and Financing, 22 (4), 17-33.

Robinson, M. (2002b, Spring). Financial control in australian government budgeting. Public Budgeting and Financing, 22 (1), 80-93.

Robinson, M. (2002c). National and state fiscal rules in Australia: an outline and critical analysis. Rome: Proceedings of the 3rd Banca d'Italia Workshop on Fiscal Policy, Perugia, Banca d'Italia, January 2001.

Robinson, M. (2009). Accrual budgeting and fiscal policy. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 2009 (1), 1-29.

Salinas, F. J. (2002). Accrual budgeting and fiscal consolidation in the EMU. Contemporary Economic Policy, 20 (2), 193-206.

Scheers, B., Sterck, M., & Bouckaert, G. (2005). Lessons from Australian and British reforms in results oriented financial management. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 5 (2), 133-162.

Schick, A. (1996). The spirit of reform: managing the New Zealand state sector in a time of change. New Zealand: Report Prepared for the State Services Commission and The Treasury.

Schick, A. (1998). Why most developing countries should not try New Zealand's Reforms. The World Bank Research Observer, 13 (1), 123-131.

Schick, A. (2007). Performance budgeting and accrual budgeting: decision rules or analytic tools? Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 7 (2), 109-138.

Schick, A. (2009). Budgeting for fiscal space. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 2009 (2), 1-18.

Sterck, M., Scheers, B., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Reformes budgetaires dans le secteur public: tendances et defis. Revue Internationale de Politique Comparee, 11 (2), 241-269.

Torres, L. (2004). Accounting and accountability: recent developments in government financial information systems. Public Administration and Development, 24 (5), 447-456.

Van der Hoek, M. P. (2005). From cash to accrual budgeting and accounting in the public sector: the Dutch experience. Public Budgeting & Finance, 25 (1), 33-45.

Warren, K, & Barnes, C. (2003). The impact of GAAP on fiscal decision making: a review of twelve years' experience with accrual and output based budgets in New Zealand. Journal on Budgeting, Paris, OECD, 3 (4), 7-40.

Wynne, A. (2008). Accrual accounting for the public sector--a fad that has had its day? International Journal on Governmental Financial Management, 8 (2), 117-132.

* Versoes diferentes do artigo que compartilham trechos com o presente artigo foram apresentados no EnANPAD, 2011, Rio de Janeiro e na International Conference on Public Policy, 2013, Grenoble.

(1) Realizado pela Secretaria do Tesouro Nacional, de 03 a 04 de dezembro de 2009, no Auditorio da Escola de Administracao Fazendaria, em Brasilia.

(2) Realizado pelo Conselho Federal de Contabilidade, de 20 a 22 de setembro de 2010, em Belo Horizonte.

Bento Rodrigo Pereira Monteiro

Analista Legislativo da Camara dos Deputados

E-mail: bentomonteiro@yahoo.com

Ricardo Correa Gomes

Professor Associado I do Departamento de Administracao da Faculdade de Economia, Administracao e Ciencias Contabeis-- FACE da Universidade de Brasilia

E-mail: rgomes@unb.br

Recebido em 27.8.2012--Aceito em 16.10.2012--3a. versao aceita em 23.5.2013
COPYRIGHT 2013 Departamento de Contabilidade - FEA/USP
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2013 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Monteiro, Bento Rodrigo Pereira; Gomes, Ricardo Correa
Publication:Revista Contabilidade & Financas
Date:May 1, 2013
Words:16765
Previous Article:Editorial.
Next Article:Social disclosure and cost of equity in public companies in Brazil/ Social disclosure e custo de capital proprio em companhias abertas no Brasil.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters