Do you agree with the GASB that deferrals are inherently different from other financial statement elements and need to be reported separately as their own elements? Why or why not? Feel free to disagree with the GASB's conclusion on either conceptual or practical grounds.

Main Question: What is the opinion on this student's response? Please see below.

I agree with GASB that deferrals are different than other financial statement elements and should be reported separately. Assets are defined as resources that the government presently controls that provide services. Liabilities are resources that are required to be used or given up that the government cannot avoid. Revenues and expenses are resources being received or expended respectively during the relevant period. Deferrals are similar to revenues and expenditures in that they represent inflows and outflows of resources, but rather than relating to the relevant reporting period, they are referencing items that are associated with, and need to be recognized, in a future period. For a deferral, the actual receipt or expenditure of funds or transaction has occurred in the relevant reporting period, but the future period that the transaction is related to has not yet come to pass. Including revenues or expenses that are technically part of a future period in the current year's financial statements would lead to misrepresentation of the government's net position. More revenues would increase net position and more expenses would reduce it. A government could potentially look more or less solvent than they actually are. Additionally, important benchmarks such as costs of services, interperiod equity assessments, and various financial ratios would be misstated if deferral amounts are not reported separately, and removed from relevant calculations.