نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه حسابداری، واحد خمین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، خمین، ایران

2 استادیار گروه حسابداری، واحد چالوس، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، چالوس، ایران

3 استادیار گروه حسابداری، واحد خمین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، خمین، ایران

4 استادیار گروه حسابداری، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران

10.22054/qjma.2025.80986.2598

چکیده

اکوسیستم پیچیده‌ای از دارایی‌های سوداگرانه با بازده بالا و غیرقابل شناسایی همچون رمز ارزها و سایر دارایی‌ها با ویژگی‌های مشابه، در بستر شبکه‌ای از تبادلات تجاری مجازی در یک دهه‌ اخیر شکل گرفته است که نیازمندِ توجه جدی مبنی بر ارتقاء سطح نظارت‌های نهادی در بُعد کلان و پیاده‌سازی رویه‌های حسابداری جهت افشای جزئیات آن، در بُعد خرد در هر نظام اقتصادی می‌باشد. هدف این مطالعه تدوین معیارهای ارزش‌گذاری دارایی‌های دیجیتال و ارزیابیِ محورهای شناسایی‌شده بر اساس ماتریس‌های متقابل بر اساس ماتریس‌های متقابل می‌باشد. روش‌شناسی این مطالعه در دسته پژوهش‌های اکتشافی و توسعه‌ای قرار می‌گیرد که با ترکیب فرآیند جمع‌آوری داده‌ها در بخش کیفی و کمّی، اول به دنبال ارائه‌ یک چارچوب نظری بر اساس رویکرد گلیزر (1992) در فرآیند نظریه داده بنیاد می‌باشد و دوم به‌منظور تعیینِ مؤثرترین مؤلفه‌ محوری پیاده‌سازی حسابداری دارایی‌های دیجیتال نیز از فرآیند رتبه‌بندی تفسیری بهره برده می‌شود. ابزار مورداستفاده در بخش کیفی مصاحبه با خبرگانی می‌باشد که از طریق نمونه‌گیری نظری و گلوله برفی انتخاب می‌شوند و ابزار بخش کمّی مطالعه نیز، چک لیست‌های مقایسه‌ زوجی سطری « » و ستونی « » می‌باشد. نتایج بخش کیفی مطالعه طی 12 مصاحبه‌ انجام‌شده، حکایت از شناسایی 4 مقوله، 5 مؤلفه و 25 مضمون مفهومی دارد که با تأیید پایایی محورهای اصلی مطالعه از طریق تحلیل دلفی فازی، چارچوب نظری پدیده‌ موردبررسی ارائه شد. نتایج بخش کمّی مطالعه نیز نشان داد، مؤلفه‌ محوریِ رعایت کنترل‌های داخلی دارایی‌های دیجیتال « » به دلیل مجموع امتیازهای ماتریسی، مهم‌ترین سازوکار پیاده‌سازی حسابداری دارایی‌های دیجیتال در بستر شرکت‌های بازار سرمایه می‌باشد که می‌تواند ظرفیت‌های اطلاعاتیِ استفاده‌کنندگان را تقویت نماید. نتیجه‌ کسب‌شده بیان می‌کند پایبندی به رعایت ارزش منصفانه از طریق کنترل داخلی در رویه‌های حسابداری دارایی‌های دیجیتال، با جلوگیری از جریان سود یا زیانِ ناشی از نوسانات ارزش منصفانه در صورت سود و زیان، دقت اعداد این دارایی‌ها را از منظر افشای بهبود می‌بخشد و درعین‌حال ارتباط مقادیر حاصل با سایر جنبه‌های سود عملیاتی را ممکن می‌سازد و به ایجاد توازن بهتر صورت‌های مالی کمک می‌کند.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Developing Criteria for Valuing Digital Assets and Evaluation of Axes Identified Based on Mutual Matrices

نویسندگان [English]

  • Tayebeh Gharibi 1
  • Neamat Rostami Mazouei 2
  • Azar Moslemi 3
  • Masoud Taherinia 4

1 PhD student, Department of Accounting, Khomein Branch, Islamic Azad University, Khomein, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Chaloos Branch, Islamic Azad University, Chaloos, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Khomein Branch, Islamic Azad University, Khomein, Iran

4 Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Lorestan University, Khorram Abad, Iran

چکیده [English]

The purpose of this research is to develop a framework for digital asset accounting and to evaluate the axes identified based on mutual matrices. The methodology of this study is exploratory and developmental, combining qualitative and quantitative data collection. First, it seeks to provide a theoretical framework based on Glaser's (1992) ground theory approach. Second, to determine the most effective central component of digital assets accounting implementation, the interpretive ranking process is applied. The tools used in the qualitative part are interviews with experts selected through theoretical and snowball sampling, and the tools used in the quantitative part are paired comparison checklists of row "i" and column "j". The results of the qualitative part of the study, conducted through 12 interviews, indicate the identification of 4 categories, 5 components, and 25 conceptual themes. These formed the theoretical framework of the investigated phenomenon, with reliability of the main axes confirmed through Delphi analysis. The results of the quantitative part also showed that the central component of compliance with the internal controls of digital assets ("J4") is the most important mechanism for implementing digital asset accounting in the context of capital market companies, which can strengthen the information capacities of users.
Introduction
The changing world of global trade has led to the emergence of new forms of commercial exchange in which assets are traded virtually without the need for physical presence in a contract. In other words, with the reduction of barriers to international trade due to technological developments and the shift in the nature of assets toward virtualization, digital assets have become one of the easiest means of commercial exchange between companies and investors. These assets, which are intangible in nature, not only have high potential to increase the value of companies but also generate higher profit margins because they bring lower costs to companies compared to tangible assets.
 

2. Literature Review

Digital assets were initially classified as “Cryptocurrencies” in the category of intangible assets, valued by connecting to a “Blockchain” as the basis for maintaining and sharing these virtual assets among investors. The ecosystem of this type of asset, beyond the initial idea of ​transactions based on digital currencies, has now become part of the capital functions of companies, as increasing demand from investors has enhanced its value and nature as an intangible asset. As a result, although digital assets were initially similar to cryptocurrencies at the time of their emergence in 2008, today digital assets have a different definition from cryptocurrencies, despite a gray boundary in terms of the nature of their shares. In fact, this change was introduced by the World Bank with the aim of shaping the nature of digital assets in transparent financial reporting. In a specific definition, digital assets are considered to include content based on images, photos, videos, or any intangible content feature that can create value for its holder. By contrast, cryptocurrencies are a type of digital money in which currency production and verification of transaction authenticity are controlled using encryption algorithms.
 

Methodologhy

The methodology of this study is considered to be of a mixed data type. In the qualitative part of the study, due to the lack of a measurable theoretical basis to describe the concept of digital asset accounting, the grounded theory analysis process is used. This provides a theoretical framework as the basic objective of the study, while the quantitative part explores the main axes identified in the theoretical framework in the context of the capital market through reciprocal and diagonal matrix processes. Philosophically, the nature of this study can be considered basic according to the matrix of methodological strategies, with this philosophical basis justified in the methodology through an inductive/deductive combination. In other words, the philosophy of research based on induction helps identify emerging aspects of digital accounting in a cognitive framework, and the deductive philosophy allows the research to examine the identified factors.
 

Result

In this study, due to the dispersion of digital asset disclosure standards and the indirect nature of institutional oversight, an attempt was made to identify the effective factors in the implementation of digital asset accounting based on Glaser's approach in the grounded theory analysis process. Based on 12 interviews conducted with academic experts and through three coding stages, a total of 4 main categories, 5 central components, and 25 initial conceptual themes were identified. These dimensions were an attempt to answer the first research question, which sought to identify the axes of implementing digital asset accounting in capital market companies. The study aimed to determine the central components needed to create a strategic approach to preventing structural opportunism in the emergence of digital assets in the context of capital market companies. To explain the central components, the fuzzy Delphi process was used to assess whether the axes of implementing digital accounting are feasible at the level of capital market companies. The results of this process confirmed that all 5 identified main axes can be useful in the functional evaluation of implementing digital accounting procedures. Furthermore, during the paired comparison process based on reciprocal matrices, and in response to the second research question, it was determined that compliance with internal controls of digital assets ("J4") is the most effective axis component to be considered in the implementation of accounting for these assets.

Discussion

In analyzing the results, it should be stated that internal controls in the disclosure of digital assets, due to the continuous internal monitoring of companies from a structural perspective, enable companies to, first, improve the quality of financial reporting on these assets by facilitating the process of independent auditors' reviews. Second, dynamic monitoring through internal controls provides a level of assurance in calculating the fair value of digital assets in accordance with Standard No. 17 of Intangible Assets and helps strengthen the operational efficiency of companies in using these assets. Adherence to fair value through internal control, by preventing the flow of profit or loss resulting from fluctuations in fair value in the income statement, improves the accuracy of digital asset figures from a disclosure perspective. At the same time, it enables the connection of these values ​​with other aspects of operating profit and helps create a better balance in financial statements.

Conclusion

Given the results, it is recommended that policymakers in the field of accounting standards develop a new standard under the title of digital assets, based on the separation of digital assets into intangible asset items and relying on the existing accounting standards 8, 10, 15, 17, and 21. Integrating digital assets into the intangible asset subset can contribute to the consistency and overall philosophy of the standards for these assets.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Digital Assets
  • Mutual Matrices
  • Fair Value
  1. اسدی، امیرحسین.، بدیعی، حسین.، دارابی، رؤیا.، نوراله‌زاده، نوروز. (1403). ارزیابی پیشران‌های کلیدی بروز حسابداری خلاقانه در آینده‌ مشروعیت گزارشگری مالی شرکت‌ها، پژوهش‌های تجربی حسابداری، 14(2): 273-312. https://doi.org/10.22051/ jera.2024.45015.3168
  2. اصغری استیار، فرهاد.، محمدزاده، امیر.، عباسی، ابراهیم. (1402). ارزش‌گذاری سرویس‌های دیجیتال در ایران: شواهد آزمایشی برای گوگل و اینستاگرام، نشریه فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات ایران، 15(55): 14-25. https://doi.org/10.61186/ jict.43901.15.55.14
  3. زنده‌دل، نبی.، فرزین‌فر، علی‌اکبر.، قدرتی، حسن.، جباری، حسین.، صفری‌گرایلی، مهدی. (1402). ارائه چارچوبی برای الگوهای تفکر تحلیلی حسابرسان: با رویکرد تحلیلتم و مدل‌سازی بازنمایی سیستمی، پژوهش‌های حسابرسی حرفه‌ای، 3(11): 102-131. https://doi.org/10.22034/jpar.2023.1999301.1149
  4. گودرزی‌فراهانی، یزدان.، اسماعیلی، بابک.، عادلی، امیدعلی. (1401). ارتباط بین عدم اطمینان سیاستی با حسابداری دارایی‌های مالی رمزنگاری شده، پژوهش‌های حسابداری مالی و حسابرسی، 14(54): 141-158. https://doi.org/10.30495/faar.2022.693672
  5. نظری‌پور، محمد. (1403). شناسایی و تحلیل عوامل مؤثر بر قصد شرکت‌ها در به‌کارگیری سیستم‌های حسابداری دیجیتال، مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 21(84): 1-23. https://doi.org/10.22054/qjma.2024.80643.2586
  6. ستایش، محمدحسین و رضائیان‌زاده، زهرا. (1402). شناسایی و رتبه‌بندی عوامل مؤثر بر نوآوری در حسابداری، مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 20(78): 1-33. https://doi.org/ 10.22054/qjma.2023.73784.2461
  7. Alexander, A. (2021). Decrypting Cryptocurrencies. Accounting Today, May 17, Retrieved from: https:/‌/‌www.accountingtoday.com/‌news/‌decrypting-crypto-opportunities-and-obstacles-for-accountants
  8. Avdeychik, V., & Capozzi, J. (2018). SEC’s Division of Investment Management voices concerns over registered funds investing in cryptocurrencies and cryptocurrency-related products. Journal of Investment Compliance, 19(2), 8-12. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JOIC-04-2018-0034
  9. Barson, Z., & Junior, P. O. (2023). Connectedness in cross-assets and digital assets attention indices. Heliyon, 9(10), 1-23. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.heliyon.2023.e20668
  10. Berman, K.J., Hayes, M.J., Kaplan, M.E., Lim, B., Murphy, G.E., Do, Y., & Steinberg, J.R. (2019). SEC framework and no-action letter provide guidance on analyzing whether a digital asset is a security. Journal of Investment Compliance, 20(4), 68-71. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JOIC-10-2019-0054
  11. Celoza, A. (2024). Information management for digital asset development and delivery. Automation in Construction, 165(2), 76-91. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.autcon.2024.105518
  12. Chou, J.H., Agrawal, P., & Birt, J. (2022). Accounting for crypto-assets: stakeholders’ perceptions. Studies in Economics and Finance, 39(3), 471-489. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌SEF-10-2021-0469
  13. Dupuis, D., Smith, D., & Gleason, K. (2023). Old frauds with a new sauce: digital assets and space transition. Journal of Financial Crime, 30(1), 205-220. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JFC-11-2021-0242
  14. Dyntu, V., & Dykyi, O. (2019). Cryptocurrency and money laundering: A literature review. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(5), 75-93. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.30525/‌2256-0742/‌2018-4-5-75-81
  15. Foglia, M., Maci, G., & Pacelli, V. (2024). FinTech and fan tokens: Understanding the risks spillover of digital asset investment. Research in International Business and Finance, 68(3), 109-132. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.ribaf.2023.102190
  16. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, Calif.: Sociology Press.
  17. Hossain, M.B. (2023). Acquiring an awareness of the latest regulatory developments concerning digital assets and anti-money laundering. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 26(6), 1261-1268. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JMLC-10-2022-0147
  18. Hsu, C.-W., Kuo, T.-C., Chen, S.-H., & Hu, A.H. (2013). Using DEMATEL to develop a carbon management model of supplier selection in green supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 56(2), 164-172. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1016/‌j.jclepro.2011.09.012
  19. Hubbard, B. (2023). Decrypting crypto: implications of potential financial accounting treatments of cryptocurrency. Accounting Research Journal, 36(4/‌5), 369-383. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌ARJ-10-2022-0279
  20. Jackson, A, B., & Luu, S. (2023). Accounting For Digital Assets. Australian Accounting Review, https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1111/‌auar.12402
  21. Kallantary, M., Valiyan, H., Abdoli, M., & Shahri, M. (2024). Ontological basis of the creative accounting phenomenon as a financial misstatement. Journal of Accounting Literature, 47(3), 650-676. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JAL-11-2023-0196
  22. Kirkpatrick, K., Stephens, A., Gerber, J., Nettesheim, M., & Bellm, S. (2021). Understanding regulatory trends: digital assets & anti-money laundering. Journal of Investment Compliance, 22(4), 345-353. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JOIC-07-2021-0033
  23. Lombardi, R., & Secundo, G. (2021). The digital transformation of corporate reporting: a systematic literature review and avenues for future research. Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(5), 1179-1208. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌MEDAR-04-2020-0870
  24. Mabunda, S. (2018). Cryptocurrency: The New Face of Cyber Money Laundering, Conference: 2018 International Conference on Advances in Big Data. Computing and Data Communication Systems (icABCD), https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1109/‌ICABCD.2018.8465467
  25. Marei, Y., Almasarwah, A., Al Bahloul, M., & Abu Afifa, M. (2023). Cryptocurrencies in accounting schools?. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 13(6), 1158-1173. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌HESWBL-12-2022-0284
  26. Pal, C., & Shankar, R. (2023). 9A systematic inquiry of energy management in smart grid by using SAP-LAP and IRP approach. International Journal of Energy Sector Management, 17(5), 989-1012. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌IJESM-04-2022-0004
  27. Park, Y.J., Sang, Y., Lee, H., & Jones-Jang, S.M. (2020). The ontology of digital asset after death: policy complexities, suggestions and critique of digital platforms. Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, 22(1), 1-14. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌DPRG-04-2019-0030
  28. Sahoo, P.S.B.B., & Thakur, V. (2023). The factors obstructing the blockchain adoption in supply chain finance: a hybrid fuzzy DELPHI-AHP-DEMATEL approach. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 41(9), 2292-2310. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌IJQRM-06-2022-0198
  29. Sangwa, N.R., & Sangwan, K.S. (2023). Prioritization and ranking of lean practices: a case study. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 72(6), 1840-1878. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌IJPPM-04-2021-0214
  30. Scheibelhofer, E. (2023). The Interpretive Interview. An Interview Form Centring on Research Participants’ Constructions. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 4(1), 56-79. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1177/‌16094069231168748
  31. Smith, S. S. (2023). The Cryptoasset Auditing and Accounting Landscape, in The Emerald Handbook on Cryptoassets: Investment Opportunities and Challenges (pp. 13-24), Emerald Publishing Limited. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌978-1-80455-320-620221002
  32. Sun, Y., & Zhou, Y. (2024). Specialized complementary assets and disruptive innovation: digital capability and ecosystem embeddedness. Management Decision, 62(11), 3704-3730. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌MD-04-2023-0608
  33. Van Wegberg, R., Oerlemans, J. J., & van Deventer, O. (2018). Bitcoin money laundering: mixed results? An explorative study on money laundering of cybercrime proceeds using bitcoin. Journal of Financial Crime, 25(2), 419-435. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌JFC-11-2016-0067
  34. Xu, T., Shi, H., Shi, Y., & You, J. (2024). From data to data asset: conceptual evolution and strategic imperatives in the digital economy era. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 18(1), 2-20. https:/‌/‌doi.org/‌10.1108/‌APJIE-10-2023-0195