Introduction
Accounting harmonization is not a new phenomenon among accounting professionals. Since 1973 when The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) was established, harmonization of international accounting standards has been underway for many countries around the world. The basic premise for harmonization had been to create uniformity of standards and practices so that countries may trade freely, account for trade without having to incur costs in conversion standards. For this reason, many countries around the world, situated in proximity tend to harmonize accounting standards so as to maintain similar accounting procedures and reportage. For example the European Union and the North American group along with the Australian etc. In the recent years, ASEAN countries have been debilitating the issue of harmonizing accounting practices. However, as expects like Lambert and Hopkins (1997) predict the issue of transparency, fair accounting practices as well as professional judgments fairly differ from those of the standards set by the IASB that tantamount to Anglo-American system. To adopt the IASB and harmonizing national or international accounting systems would not be holistically possible. Although, the author is of the opinion that harmonization for uniformity is possible, under hand practices would take a long time to be eradicated.

Discussion
In their thesis on Accounting Harmonization in ASEAN, Ira Yuta Chairas and Wirawan Radianto (2001) are of the opinion that harmonization and standardizations are two different concepts. Harmonization tends towards process uniformity but it does not mean that the standard practice within the country is replaced by international standards. Standardization on the other hand is veering towards standard practices that are acceptable by almost all. For this reason, most countries are keen on harmonization instead of standardization. Yet it must be noted that standardization is imperative for setting benchmarks for measurements and reportage, especially among multinational companies that not only deal with host and home countries but also with other local governments where the branch is based. Trade unions, board of directors, investors, government and the trade associations for example all requires standard reporting of financial statements. Differences would result in wrong interpretation and consequently wrong decisions pertaining to investment and management. Hence any change in the accounting practice and principals should consider these issues in mind.

Apart from that businesses are influenced by local cultures. In Asian countries especially financial information among the common people as well as among the corporate leaders are categorized by secrecy, non-transparency, dishonesty and unfair practices. As a result most of the companies are known for their corruption, in collaboration with government officials. In such an environment harmonization of accounting practices and principals would be difficult since the people responsible for accounting reportage are the ones who resist change. Yet despite this fact, one of the resolutions that could reverse their practice is through standardization. Before harmonization, ASEAN authorities should set standards in their countries so that the professionals become fluent with the new practice. Once this is set, it is possible for companies to regulate their accounting practices through increased transparency as well as fair trade practices.

Setting up of a standard in the country for accounting purpose would only be difficult should the government be unwilling to incorporate new laws and regulations (Gupta 1992). This is possible because revising or changing of accounting practice means change in the systematic accounting procedures followed by companies. Especially, for account professionals they must be trained and taught how to report each items in the financial statements etc. However, the advantage for setting up such standards is long term and therefore would benefit both the companies and the authority in the long run. For example multinational companies are forced to adopt local and national accounting practices otherwise most branches are already following the international accounting practices for the purpose of harmonizing trade in different currencies and to avoid confusions. ASEAN countries, by adopting the international standards would be able to avoid this confusion and thereby achieve smooth trade flow in the international market where foreign exchange through multinational companies is concerned.

Conclusion
Thus, countries like China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam though may not have adequate accounting systems to consolidate and standardize, however once they adopt the new standards they would be able to harmonize into the new international standards. Adoption of international and coordination of international standards would allow the countries to enhance transparency and fair trade practice through standardization. This would benefit them in the long term as these countries are developing and attracting investors from developed countries whose first concern is transparency and just financial practices. Accounting harmonization is only a step towards the right direction for regional cooperation.
Introduction

Accounting harmonization is not a new phenomenon among accounting professionals. Since 1973 when The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) was established, harmonization of international accounting standards has been underway for many countries around the world. The basic premise for harmonization had been to create uniformity of standards and practices so that countries may trade freely, account for trade without having to incur costs in conversion standards. For this reason, many countries around the world, situated in proximity tend to harmonize accounting standards so as to maintain similar accounting procedures and reportage. For example the European Union and the North American group along with the Australian etc. In the recent years, ASEAN countries have been debilitating the issue of harmonizing accounting practices. However, as expects like Lambert and Hopkins (1997) predict the issue of transparency, fair accounting practices as well as professional judgments fairly differ from those of the standards set by the IASB that tantamount to Anglo-American system. To adopt the IASB and harmonizing national or international accounting systems would not be holistically possible. Although, the author is of the opinion that harmonization for uniformity is possible, under hand practices would take a long time to be eradicated.

Discussion
In their thesis on Accounting Harmonization in ASEAN, Ira Yuta Chairas and Wirawan Radianto (2001) are of the opinion that harmonization and standardizations are two different concepts. Harmonization tends towards process uniformity but it does not mean that the standard practice within the country is replaced by international standards. Standardization on the other hand is veering towards standard practices that are acceptable by almost all. For this reason, most countries are keen on harmonization instead of standardization. Yet it must be noted that standardization is imperative for setting benchmarks for measurements and reportage, especially among multinational companies that not only deal with host and home countries but also with other local governments where the branch is based. Trade unions, board of directors, investors, government and the trade associations for example all requires standard reporting of financial statements. Differences would result in wrong interpretation and consequently wrong decisions pertaining to investment and management. Hence any change in the accounting practice and principals should consider these issues in mind.

Apart from that businesses are influenced by local cultures. In Asian countries especially financial information among the common people as well as among the corporate leaders are categorized by secrecy, non-transparency, dishonesty and unfair practices. As a result most of the companies are known for their corruption, in collaboration with government officials. In such an environment harmonization of accounting practices and principals would be difficult since the people responsible for accounting reportage are the ones who resist change. Yet despite this fact, one of the resolutions that could reverse their practice is through standardization. Before harmonization, ASEAN authorities should set standards in their countries so that the professionals become fluent with the new practice. Once this is set, it is possible for companies to regulate their accounting practices through increased transparency as well as fair trade practices.

Setting up of a standard in the country for accounting purpose would only be difficult should the government be unwilling to incorporate new laws and regulations (Gupta 1992). This is possible because revising or changing of accounting practice means change in the systematic accounting procedures followed by companies. Especially, for account professionals they must be trained and taught how to report each items in the financial statements etc. However, the advantage for setting up such standards is long term and therefore would benefit both the companies and the authority in the long run. For example multinational companies are forced to adopt local and national accounting practices otherwise most branches are already following the international accounting practices for the purpose of harmonizing trade in different currencies and to avoid confusions. ASEAN countries, by adopting the international standards would be able to avoid this confusion and thereby achieve smooth trade flow in the international market where foreign exchange through multinational companies is concerned.

Conclusion
Thus, countries like China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam though may not have adequate accounting systems to consolidate and standardize, however once they adopt the new standards they would be able to harmonize into the new international standards. Adoption of international and coordination of international standards would allow the countries to enhance transparency and fair trade practice through standardization. This would benefit them in the long term as these countries are developing and attracting investors from developed countries whose first concern is transparency and just financial practices. Accounting harmonization is only a step towards the right direction for regional cooperation.