The following independent scenarios are provided:

Rela Corp. changes its estimate of the useful life of one of its pieces of machinery. Using the previous estimate, the depreciation expense in the current year would have been $15,000 and in applying the revised estimated useful life, the current year depreciation expense is $25,000.

A transposition error was made in recording an inventory purchase in the prior year. $19,500 was recorded instead of $15,900. The inventory is still on hand and the supplier has not yet been paid and the error has not yet been detected.

Herring Inc. recorded a sale for a service provided of $10,000 in 20X5 when it should have been recorded in 20X4. The sale has terms of 2/10, n/30 and remains outstanding. The error has not been fixed.

BlameIt Corp. has revised the point at which revenue is recognized. As a result, revenue for the prior year should be $39,000 lower. Revenue in the current should be $57,000 lower. None of these amounts have been collected from customers.

Raymond Corp. has always used the average cost method for inventory valuation. In 20X9 management decided that FIFO would be more appropriate because its more frequently used by competitor companies. The change reduced inventory at 31 December 20X8 by $40,000 and a 31 December 20X9 by $49,000.

Required:

For each scenario determine:

The type of accounting change

The appropriate treatment

The impact on assets, liabilities, and equity in the year prior to the accounting change (ignore tax effects)

The impact on assets, liabilities, and equity in the year of the accounting change (ignore tax effects)

Explain how the appropriate treatment of scenario 5 would be different if the change to inventory costing had been mandated by a new accounting standard.

With which conceptual framework criterion does retrospective accounting treatment align most closely?