【文章內(nèi)容簡介】 the two ??inconsistency” categories together, despite the attempt in GAAP 2021 to suggest that the second category was of less widespread practical importance. This might constitute a further systematic bias because, for example, many of the abstruse points of US divergence (see above) were deliberately put into the second category. Future researchers could calculate whether their results are robust to, for example, a double weighting of the ?rst category?s items pared to those in the second. . Are there really two separate dimensions? As noted above, Ding et al. construct measures of two separate ??dimensions” of difference from IAS: absence and divergence. They say (p. 4) that this is their paper?s ?rst contribution to the literature. However, I suggest that the distinction between the measures might not be useful. In the end, the important issue is whether accounting practices are ??good”2or are parable among ?rms nationally or internationally. The purpose of GAAP 2021 was to catalog various aspects of de?ciency in rules that could contribute towards poor or nonparable accounting. In that context, the absence of rules is not a separate dimension from divergence of rules, as now explained. Suppose that IAS requires FIFO for inventory valuation, Country X requires LIFO, Country Y allows FIFO or LIFO, and Country Z has no rules. Countries X and Y will turn up in Ding et al.?s ??divergence” from IAS, whereas Country Z will exhibit ??absence”. However, whereas panies in Country X will indeed diverge from IAS practices (assuming that panies obey the rules), panies in Country Y (and in Z) might mostly be consistent with IAS (. use FIFO). In other words, some examples of de jure divergence lead to the same result as absence, and some do not. Most of the de jure absences recorded in GAAP 2021 relate to whole accounting topics (. impairment or pensions), so are likely to be greater causes of de facto divergence than some of the detailed de jure divergences. For researchers who are interested in accounting practice or in the effect of de jure differences on accounting practice, I suggest that there are not two dimensions. The absence of rules on whole accounting topics is likely to be a particularly major cause of divergence in practice. By creating two dimensions, as dependent variables, Ding et al. have to double up all their generating of hypotheses. That is, for each of their ?ve independent variables (determinants), they create hypotheses for both absence and divergence. I suggest that this is arti?cial, as illustrated in below which notes that Ding et al.?s hypothesis relating to how equity weakness causes divergence is wholly expressed in terms of how equity weakness might affect absence of disclosures. . Independent variables . Accounting profession Ding et al. make ??the importance of the accounting profession” an independent variable for difference between national standards and IAS. They list it as a ??determinant”. However, in their discussion (. Section ), they more carefully say that the two are ??associated”. I suggest that the direction of in?uence is more likely to be from accounting to the profession. Nobes (1998) discusses this, and concludes that the amount and style of ?nancial reporting affects the quantity and role of auditors. For example, the presence of large numbers of listed panies in the USA and the requirements for quarterly reporting, extensive disclosure and some use of fair values led to a need for more auditors in the USA in 2021 than in countries where these things were absent (. in Germany). Later, in their , Ding et al. talk of the importance of the profession in the context of setting standards. However, in most countries, the accounting rules are largely controlled by the public sector (. in Belgium, China, France or Germany) or by independent privatesector trusts (. the UK or the US). Japan has moved from the former to the latter. So, again, the profession is not directly relevant as an independent variable. However, there is probably some ??feedback”. For example, because the accounting profession bees large, it is willing and able to take the lead in standardsetting (. in the US until 1973, in the UK until 1990, and internationally until 2021). . Equity markets When formulating an hypothesis for the variables affecting divergence from IAS (in their ), Ding et al. discuss the need for an IASlike quantity of disclosures in strong equity countries. This, they suggest, should lead to smaller divergence from IAS in such countries than in weak equity countries. However, none of the survey topics included in their measures of divergence (the ??inconsistency” categories of GAAP 2021) wer