Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Ödüle Dayalı Kitle Fonlamasının Uluslararası Muhasebe Standartları Açısından Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2024, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 51 - 64, 31.01.2024

Abstract

İşletmelerin, yeni girişimlerin çevrimiçi platformlar aracılığıyla fon sağlayıcılara açık bir çağrı yaparak finansman sağladıkları kitle fonlaması yöntemi, dünyada ve Türkiye’de giderek yaygınlaşmaktadır. Kitle fonlaması, fon sağlayıcıların taşıdıkları amaca göre yatırım amaçlı ve yatırım amaçlı olmayanlar olarak iki grupta sınıflandırılmaktadır. Yatırım amacı taşımayan ödüle dayalı kitle fonlamasında işletmeler, geliştirdikleri veya geliştirmeyi düşündükleri ürünün satışını veya ön satışını kitle fonlaması platformu üzerinden gerçekleştirmektedir. Böylece fon toplayan ile fon sağlayan arasında işletme - müşteri ilişkisi kurulmaktadır. Çalışmada bu ilişki göz önünde bulundurularak, uyarlanmış örnekler üzerinde bu yöntemle fon toplamanın uluslararası muhasebe standartlarına göre değerlendirilmesi yapılmıştır. Ödüle dayalı kitle fonlaması yönteminin TFRS 15 Müşteri Sözleşmelerinden Hasılat kapsamında değerlendirilmesi ifade edilmiştir. Örneklerle, satışa hazır ürün ile fon toplanması, belirli bir fonlama hedefi ile fon toplanması, ürün satışının önemli bir finansman bileşeni içermesi, ürün ile birlikte opsiyon satışı, zamana yayılı edim yükümlülüğü getiren ürün satışı durumları incelenmiştir.

References

  • Beaulieu, T., Sarker, S., ve Sarker, S. (2015). A conceptual framework for understanding crowdfunding, Communications Of The Association For Information Systems, 37(1), 1-31. doi: 10.17705/1CAIS.03701
  • Belleflamme, P., Omrani, N., ve Peitz, M. (2015). The economics of crowdfunding platforms, Information Economics And Policy, 33, 11-28. doi: 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2015.08.003
  • Block, J. H., Groh, A., Hornuf, L., Vanacker, T., ve Vismara, S. (2021). The entrepreneurial finance markets of the future: a comparison of crowdfunding and ınitial coin offerings, Small Business Economics, 57(2), 865-882. doi:10.1007/s11187-020-00330-2
  • Cumming, D., Meoli, M., ve Vismara, S. (2019a). ınvestors’ choices between cash and voting rights: evidence from dual-class equity crowdfunding. Research Policy, 48(8), 1-19. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.014
  • European Commission. (2018). Inception impact assessment. legislative proposal for an eu framework on crowd and peer to peer finance, Erişim Adresi: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/1166-Legislative-proposal-for-an-EU-framework-on-crowd-and-peer-to-peer-finance
  • EY (2019). Global fintech adoption ındex 2019, Erişim Adresi: https://www.ey.com/en_gl/ey-global-fintech-adoption-index
  • Financial Conduct Authority. (2018). Loan-based (‘peer-to-peer’) and ınvestmentbased crowdfunding platforms: feedback on our post-implementation review and proposed changes to the regulatory framework, Erişim Adresi: https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/consultation/cp18-20.pdf
  • Financial Stability Board (2017a). Financial stability ımplications from fintech. supervisory and regulatory ıssues that merit authorities attention. Erişim Adresi: https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/R270617.pdf
  • Financial Stability Institute (2020). Policy responses to fintech: a cross-country overview. FSI Insights on Policy Implementation No 23.
  • Gerber, E. M., ve Hui, J. (2013). Crowdfunding: motivations and deterrents for participation. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 20(6), 1-32. doi: 10.1145/2530540
  • Havrylchyk, O. (2018). Regulatory framework for the loan-based crowdfunding platforms. OECD Economic Department Working Papers No. 1543. doi:10.4324/9781003220220
  • Langley, P., Lewis, S., McFarlane, C., Painter, J., ve Vradis, A. (2020). Crowdfunding cities: social entrepreneurship, speculation and solidarity in berlin, Geoforum, 115, 11-20.
  • Mollick, E. (2014). “The Dynamics Of Crowdfunding: An Exploratory Study”, Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1-16.
  • Özerhan, Y., ve Sultanoğlu, B. (2021). TFRS 15 “müşteri sözleşmelerinden hasılat” standardı kapsamında asıl-vekil ilişkisinin değerlendirilmesi, Muhasebe ve Denetime Bakış, 21(63), 19-38.
  • TFRS 15 Müşteri Sözleşmelerinden Hasılat, Erişim Adresi: http://www.kgk.gov.tr
  • Vismara, S. (2019). Sustainability İn Equity Crowdfunding, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 98-106. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.014
  • Vulkan, N., Åstebro, T., ve Sierra, M. F. (2016). Equity crowdfunding: a new phenomena, Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 5, 37-49. doi: 10.1016/j.jbvi.2016.02.001

REVIEW OF REWARD BASED CROWDFUNDING ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

Year 2024, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 51 - 64, 31.01.2024

Abstract

The crowdfunding method, in which businesses and new ventures provide financing by making an open call to funders through online platforms, is becoming increasingly widespread in the world and in Turkey. Crowdfunding is classified into two groups, depending on the purpose of the fund providers, as investment purposes and non-investment purposes. In reward-based crowdfunding that does not have investment purposes, businesses sell or pre-sell the product they have developed or intend to develop through the crowdfunding platform. Thus, a business-customer relationship is established between the fundraiser and the funder. Considering this relationship, in the study, fundraising with this method was evaluated according to international accounting standards on adapted examples. It has been stated that the reward-based crowdfunding method should be evaluated within the scope of IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers. Examples include raising funds with a product ready for sale, raising funds with a specific funding target, product sales containing a significant financing component, option sales with the product, and product sales that impose a performance obligation satisfied over time.

References

  • Beaulieu, T., Sarker, S., ve Sarker, S. (2015). A conceptual framework for understanding crowdfunding, Communications Of The Association For Information Systems, 37(1), 1-31. doi: 10.17705/1CAIS.03701
  • Belleflamme, P., Omrani, N., ve Peitz, M. (2015). The economics of crowdfunding platforms, Information Economics And Policy, 33, 11-28. doi: 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2015.08.003
  • Block, J. H., Groh, A., Hornuf, L., Vanacker, T., ve Vismara, S. (2021). The entrepreneurial finance markets of the future: a comparison of crowdfunding and ınitial coin offerings, Small Business Economics, 57(2), 865-882. doi:10.1007/s11187-020-00330-2
  • Cumming, D., Meoli, M., ve Vismara, S. (2019a). ınvestors’ choices between cash and voting rights: evidence from dual-class equity crowdfunding. Research Policy, 48(8), 1-19. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.014
  • European Commission. (2018). Inception impact assessment. legislative proposal for an eu framework on crowd and peer to peer finance, Erişim Adresi: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/1166-Legislative-proposal-for-an-EU-framework-on-crowd-and-peer-to-peer-finance
  • EY (2019). Global fintech adoption ındex 2019, Erişim Adresi: https://www.ey.com/en_gl/ey-global-fintech-adoption-index
  • Financial Conduct Authority. (2018). Loan-based (‘peer-to-peer’) and ınvestmentbased crowdfunding platforms: feedback on our post-implementation review and proposed changes to the regulatory framework, Erişim Adresi: https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/consultation/cp18-20.pdf
  • Financial Stability Board (2017a). Financial stability ımplications from fintech. supervisory and regulatory ıssues that merit authorities attention. Erişim Adresi: https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/R270617.pdf
  • Financial Stability Institute (2020). Policy responses to fintech: a cross-country overview. FSI Insights on Policy Implementation No 23.
  • Gerber, E. M., ve Hui, J. (2013). Crowdfunding: motivations and deterrents for participation. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 20(6), 1-32. doi: 10.1145/2530540
  • Havrylchyk, O. (2018). Regulatory framework for the loan-based crowdfunding platforms. OECD Economic Department Working Papers No. 1543. doi:10.4324/9781003220220
  • Langley, P., Lewis, S., McFarlane, C., Painter, J., ve Vradis, A. (2020). Crowdfunding cities: social entrepreneurship, speculation and solidarity in berlin, Geoforum, 115, 11-20.
  • Mollick, E. (2014). “The Dynamics Of Crowdfunding: An Exploratory Study”, Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1-16.
  • Özerhan, Y., ve Sultanoğlu, B. (2021). TFRS 15 “müşteri sözleşmelerinden hasılat” standardı kapsamında asıl-vekil ilişkisinin değerlendirilmesi, Muhasebe ve Denetime Bakış, 21(63), 19-38.
  • TFRS 15 Müşteri Sözleşmelerinden Hasılat, Erişim Adresi: http://www.kgk.gov.tr
  • Vismara, S. (2019). Sustainability İn Equity Crowdfunding, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 98-106. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.014
  • Vulkan, N., Åstebro, T., ve Sierra, M. F. (2016). Equity crowdfunding: a new phenomena, Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 5, 37-49. doi: 10.1016/j.jbvi.2016.02.001
There are 17 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Financial Accounting
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Turgay Yavuzarslan 0000-0002-0481-1279

Publication Date January 31, 2024
Submission Date December 26, 2023
Acceptance Date January 31, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 4 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Yavuzarslan, T. (2024). Ödüle Dayalı Kitle Fonlamasının Uluslararası Muhasebe Standartları Açısından Değerlendirilmesi. Denetim Ve Güvence Hizmetleri Dergisi, 4(1), 51-64.

26334          26335               26333