Standardized chart of Accounts

This chart of accounts is compatible with IFRS, US GAAP and other, comparable accounting standards.

A number of EU member states, for example France and Germany, mandate a chart of accounts.

Similar rules may be found in China, Russia, OHADA member states and elsewhere.

Plan Comptable Général
Required by French law

Standard-Kontenrahmen
Required by German law

法定会计科目表

In these jurisdictions, deviating from the prescribed COA may not be permissible or only in specific scenarios.

For example, French (link: anc.gouv.fr) accounting standard Art. 1222-70 (view pdf) states: "Les montants des ventes, des prestations de services, des produits afférents aux activités annexes sont enregistrés au crédit des comptes 701 « Ventes de produits finis », 702 « Ventes de produits intermédiaires », 703 « Ventes de produits résiduels », 704 « Travaux », 705 « Études », 706 « Prestations de services », 707 « Ventes de marchandises » et 708 « Produits des activités annexes ». Les rabais, remises et ristournes accordés hors facture ou qui ne sont pas rattachables à une vente déterminée sont portés au débit du compte 709 « Rabais, remises et ristournes accordés ». Version 1er janvier 2026 Page 180 sur 181 Même lorsqu'ils sont déduits sur la facture de vente, les escomptes de règlement sont comptabilisés au débit du compte 665 « Escomptes accordés »."

Deviating from the French COA by not using accounts 701 to 708 would be inconsistent with this legislation.

Some jurisdictions allow or require certain entities to apply IFRS alongside, or in place of, national GAAP in certain scenarios. In such jurisdictions, the COAs presented here could be used provided they do not conflict with other legislation.

For example, in the Czech Republic, the Accounting Act 563/1991 paragraph §19a (1) states:

"An [unconsolidated] entity that is a trading company and is an issuer of investment securities admitted to trading on a European regulated market shall apply international accounting standards regulated by European Union law (hereinafter referred to as "international accounting standards") for accounting and the preparation of financial statements" [paragraph § 23a requires IFRS at the consolidated entity level].

This implies, if the COA presented here is used for IFRS bookkeeping purposes and IFRS recognition guidance is applied correctly, it may (implicitly) be used in place of the chart of accounts mandated by the same law but only by a trading company (consolidated entity) that is an issuer of investment securities admitted to trading on a European regulated market.

Nevertheless, the Income Tax Act 586/1992 §23 (2) states:

"The tax base is determined a) from the net income (profit or loss), always without the influence of International Accounting Standards, for taxpayers required to maintain accounts. A taxpayer that prepares financial statements in accordance with International Accounting Standards regulated by European Community shall apply for the purposes of this Act to determine net income and to determine other data decisive for determining the tax base a special legal regulation [CZ GAAP]). When determining the tax base, entries in off-balance sheet account books are not taken into account, unless otherwise provided in this Act. ..."

Thus, since Czech accounting law assumes the mandated chart of accounts will be used for accounting purposes, if a different chart of accounts is used, it will need to yield the same result as if the mandated chart of accounts were used. While this is not impossible with careful mapping and associated adjustments, it is generally more practical to use the mandated national GAAP COA for Czech accounting and taxation purposes, and a separate IFRS compatible COA for IFRS recognition, measurement, reporting, and disclosure purposes.

This site strongly encourages users to consult qualified, national experts before using its COAs for external, particularly tax and/or statutory, reporting purposes.

As such, it may be used in a dual-reporting environment ⚠.

All files are downloadable in .xlsx format in . They may also be purchased individually on this page.

Import into some ERP systems may require a .csv format.

As the COAs utilize a comma (see implementation guidance page), instead of saving as CSV in Excel, the COA should be saved as tab-delimited text for best results.

Alternatively, install Python (with Pandas and Openpyxl libraries) and download this file Excel-to-CSV.zip.

Rename the COA to 'Excel-TSV-Input.xlsx' and run the script.

Note: conversion to CSV strips the formatting necessary for the scripts on this page to function as designed. Use the Depth column to rebuild the hierarchy, before running these scripts.

As outlined in IFRS 16.47.a.i, an ROU should be classified like the underlying asset if that asset were owned (unless the ROU is presented separately). Thus, the right to use, for example, a building, would be presented in PP&E while the right to use a patent would be intangible (below).

While the ASC does not provide similarly explicit guidance, the FASB-defined XBRL taxonomy includes PropertyPlantAndEquipmentAndFinanceLeaseRightOfUseAssetAfterAccumulatedDepreciationAndAmortizationAbstract.

This implies that an ROU associated with an underlying asset that is PP&E should be recognized as PP&E.

Since the guidance provided by the ASC (specifically 842-20-45-1 through 3) does not preclude presenting an ROU within PP&E, this account would be consistent with that guidance.

Note: provided the right-of-use asset is recognised on the balance sheet, the guidance is flexible about how it is presented. For example, a leased building may be presented within the “Buildings” line item rather than on a separate “right-of-use asset” line, as long as the notes explain that the amount relates to a leased (right-of-use) building rather than an owned building. From an internal accounting perspective, the building could thus be posted either to the Buildings account with a metadata flag indicating that it is an ROU or to the ROU account with metadata describing the underlying asset as a building.

A right to use an asset is a contractual right. Thus, the right-to-use asset (ROU) is, strictly speaking, always intangible. Nevertheless, as outlined in IFRS 16.47.a.i, an ROU should be classified (unless it is presented separately) in the same way as the underlying asset if it were owned. Thus, an ROU of a building would be presented in PP&E (above) while an ROU of a patent would be presented here.

Since ASC 842-20-45-1 and 2 do not preclude recognizing the right to use an intangible asset as an ROU within intangible assets (provided financial and operating ROUs are not mixed as outlined in ASC 842-20-45-3) it would not be incorrect to recognize those ROUs here.

Note: provided the right-of-use asset is recognised on the balance sheet, the guidance is flexible about how it is presented. For example, a leased patent may be presented within the “Patents” group or as a standalone "Patent" rather than as a separate “right-to-use patent” item, as long as the notes explain that the amount relates to a leased (right-of-use) asset rather than an owned asset. From an internal accounting perspective, a patent could thus be posted either to the Patents account, with a metadata flag indicating that it is an ROU, or to an ROU account, with metadata describing the underlying asset as a patent.

While crypto assets have more in common with financial assets than intangible assets, ASC 350-60-15-1.a defines: a. Meet the definition of intangible assets as defined in the Codification ... d. Are secured through cryptography... The 2026 FASB-approved XBRL taxonomy (link) likewise places CryptoAssetFairValue on the balance sheet as a separate line item directly below intangible assets and above right-of-use assets.

For its part, the 2026 FASB-approved XBRL taxonomy (link) places both FinanceLeaseRightOfUseAsset and OperatingLeaseRightOfUseAsset following intangible asset and immediately following crypto assets. This suggests the FASB would prefer if ROAs were classified as intangible.

IFRS does not specifically discuss Crypto but the IFRIC (June 2019 agenda decision) concluded that typical cryptocurrencies meet the definition of an intangible asset under IAS 38, unless they are held for sale in the ordinary course of business, in which case IAS 2 (inventories) applies.

For accounting purposes, expenses should be recognized by nature and their function treated as a reporting attribute.

In practice, however, expenses are occasionally both recognized and reported by function even though this leads to duplicate accounts such as Employee benefits: Production, Employee benefits: Sales, Employee benefits: Administration or Depreciation: Production equipment, Depreciation: Sales equipment, Depreciation: Office equipment.

While not disallowed, this approach is not recommended as it results in an untidfy G/L.

Nevertheless, as it is not explicitly disallowed, this approach could theoretically be used. As such, it has to be included in this COA as a possible option even though it will almost certainly not ever be used in a real-world setting.

Note: both nature of expense and function of expense classification cannot, obviously, be used for recognition purposes at the same time as this would lead to expense double counting.

Traditionally, charts of accounts have been divided into five basic categories: 1. assets 2. liabilities, 3. equity, 4. revenue and 5. expense. Technically, as revenue less expense is accumulated in retained earnings, which is a subclassification of equity, 3 categories would be sufficient.

Nevertheless, revenue and expense are critically important both for accounting and reporting purposes, so the tradition of treating them as basic classifications is valid.

However, not all revenue and expense have the same character nor significance.

For example revenue from the sale of goods and services, cost of sales, selling expenses, administrative expenses, general expenses are key to capturing and reporting an entity's operations and performance. Perhaps more importantly, for financial statement users, they have significant predictive value. In contrast, interest paid or interest received (except for financial institutions) is comparatively less significant and, as interest is often dictated by market conditions, has little, if any, predictive value for users evaluating operating results.

Further down the spectrum, gains and losses, generally the result of changes in fair value over which an entity has no control, while needing to be accounted for, are usually uncorrelated with an entity's operations so of little use when evaluating an entity’s performance and have little, if any, predictive value.

Thus, instead of the traditional 5 basic categories, this chart of accounts includes 6. This section thus comprises non-operating revenue and expense as well as gains and losses.

Note: this structure is also fully consistent with the requirements of IFRS 18 that requires operating, investing and financing activities to be firmly segregated on the statement level. Similarly, it is fully consistent with chapter 4 of US GAAP’s conceptual framework, particularly paragraphs E84 and E85.