采用增减记帐法记帐,总帐与其明细帐的性质不属于同一类别怎样记帐的问题,有同志认为,“反方向登记”扰乱了统驭关系,“同方向登记”违反了记帐规则,只有“明细科目升级,按性质重新归类”才是解决之道(见本刊1984年第6期《“反方向登记”的统驭辩析》)。这种看法是值得商榷的。无庸赘言,“反方向登记”乱了统驭关系,理论上是错误的,实际工作中容易造成混乱,是不可取的。“明细科目升级,按性质重新归类”一法固然可用,但是势必多设置调整性质的一级科目,使核算复杂化,所以此法也不理想。比较而言,“同方向登记”倒还是可用的。现仍以低值易耗品摊销会计分录为例来说明这个问题。增:车间经费——××车间减:低值易耗品——低值易耗品摊销上述分录属于“同方向登记”,统驭关系依然 With the addition and subtraction of bookkeeping, the nature of the general ledger and its subsidiary accounts do not belong to the same category as how to keep accounts. Some comrades believe that “registration in the opposite direction” has disturbed the relationship between unified and discord, and “registration in the same direction” has violated accounting. The rules are the only solution to the problem of “reconstruction of detailed subjects and reclassification according to their nature” (see Dispute of “Reverse Direction Registration”, Issue 6, 1984). This view is debatable. Needless to say, “registration in the opposite direction” has confused the relationship between reunification and reunification, and it is theoretically wrong. It is undesirable to cause confusion in practical work. The “Detailed Subject Escalation, Reclassification by Nature” method is certainly available, but it is bound to set up more primary subjects for adjustment, which complicates the calculation. Therefore, this method is not ideal. In contrast, “registration in the same direction” is still available. This is still illustrated by the example of amortizing accounting entries for low-value consumables. Increase: workshop expenses - × × workshop minus: low-value consumables - amortization of low-value consumables The above entry is “registration in the same direction,” and the relationship between reorganization and