# 63 336-339 View full article

УДК 657:421

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36887/2415-8453-2026-1-63

Rudenko Nataliya,
Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Accounting and Auditing,
Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0500-9189
Kolevatova Alona,
Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Accounting and Auditing,
Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University
https://orciva Alonad.org/0000-0001-5035-5481

JEL classification: М40, М41, К22

Published: 25.02.2026

In the context of modern globalization challenges and Ukraine’s status as a candidate for European Union membership, the issue of unifying accounting rules is of strategic importance. Goods, as a key element of the current assets of trading and manufacturing enterprises, directly affect liquidity indicators and financial results. However, despite the lengthy process of reforming the national accounting system, the practical application of the provisions of NAS 9 “Inventories” and their comparison with international analogs, in particular IAS 2 “Inventories,” continue to generate much discussion among scientists and practitioners. The problem of regulatory management has become particularly acute during the period of martial law, when an urgent need arose for specific procedures to assess lost assets and reclassify commodity flows. Existing methodological guidelines often do not keep pace with dynamic changes in the economy and the digital transformation of business, leading to methodological gaps between national practice and international approaches. The purpose of the article is to research and conduct a comparative analysis of the regulatory and methodological regulation of accounting for goods in national practice and in accordance with international standards to justify the directions for its improvement. The methods of comparison, analysis, theoretical, and logical generalization were applied in the research process. The dialectical research method served as the methodological basis. The article investigates the regulatory and methodological regulation of accounting for goods in the context of national practice and international approaches. The economic essence of goods as objects of accounting is revealed, the legislative and regulatory foundations of their accounting in Ukraine are systematized, and a comparison of national and international approaches to the recognition and measurement of goods is conducted. Key problems in the regulatory and methodological regulation of accounting for goods in Ukraine, related to the dominance of regulatory and fiscally oriented approaches, are identified. Directions for improving accounting for goods are substantiated, providing for the strengthening of the conceptual component of national standards, the expansion of the accountant’s professional judgment, harmonization with international accounting standards, and the updating of methodological support, considering the digitalization of the economy.

Keywords: accounting for goods, NAS (National Accounting Standards), IAS (International Accounting Standards), regulatory and methodological regulation, enterprise management system, digitalization.

Rеferences

  1. Butynets, F. F. (2009). Bukhhalterskyi finansovyi oblik [Financial accounting]. Ruta.
  2. Vyniatynska, L. V., & Nyzhnyk, T. M. (2018). Standartyzatsiia ta harmonizatsiia bukhhalterskoho obliku zapasiv: porivnialnyi aspekt [Standardization and harmonization of accounting for inventories: A comparative aspect]. Ekonomika i Suspilstvo, (17), 634–638.
  3. Holov, S. F. (2007). Bukhhalterskyi oblik v Ukraini: analiz stanu ta perspektyvy rozvytku [Accounting in Ukraine: Status analysis and development prospects]. Tsentr Uchbovoi Literatury.
  4. Driha, O. P. (2014). Problemy obliku vyrobnychykh zapasiv v Ukraini [Problems of accounting for manufacturing inventories in Ukraine]. Efektyvna Ekonomika, (4). URL: http://www.economy.nayka.com.ua/?op=1&z=2922.
  5. Kobylianska, H. Yu., & Revenko, K. O. (2014). Porivnialna kharakterystyka PSBO 9 «Zapasy» i MSBO 2 «Zapasy» [Comparative characteristics of UAS 9 “Inventories” and IAS 2 “Inventories”]. Ekonomika: Teoriia ta Praktyka, (2), 50–56.
  6. Ministerstvo Finansiv Ukrainy. (2012). Mizhnarodnyi standart bukhhalterskoho obliku 2 «Zapasy» [International Accounting Standard 2 “Inventories”]. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/929_021#Text.
  7. Ministerstvo Finansiv Ukrainy. (1999). Polozhennia (standart) bukhhalterskoho obliku 9 «Zapasy» [Regulation (standard) of accounting 9 “Inventories”]. URL: http://zakon1.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0751-99.
  8. Verkhovna Rada Ukrainy. (1999). Pro bukhhalterskyi oblik ta finansovu zvitnist v Ukraini: Zakon Ukrainy vid 16.07.1999 № 996-XIV [On accounting and financial reporting in Ukraine: Law of Ukraine dated July 16, 1999, No. 996-XIV]. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/996-14#Text.

Quote article, APA style

Rudenko N. , Kolevatova A. Regulatory and methodological regulation of accounting for goods: national and international approaches. Ukrainian Journal of Applied Economics and Technology. 2026. №1. 336-339 pp. https://doi.org/10.36887/2415-8453-2026-1-63

Quote article, MLA style

Rudenko N. , Kolevatova A. Regulatory and methodological regulation of accounting for goods: national and international approaches. Ukrainian Journal of Applied Economics and Technology. https://doi.org/10.36887/2415-8453-2026-1-63