This article examines the classification, measurement, and financial reporting of crypto-assets in the context of the differences between the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), the US GAAP, and the emerging Ukrainian tax regime. The study substantiates that, under IFRS, cryptocurrency is generally classified as either a non-monetary intangible asset under IAS 38 or as inventory under IAS 2, depending on the purpose of holding. This creates asymmetric recognition of value changes and reduces the comparability of financial statements. The paper analyzes the implications of ASU 2023-08, which introduces a dedicated accounting model requiring eligible crypto-assets to be measured at fair value, with changes recognized in net income. The findings reveal an unprecedented divergence between IFRS and US GAAP in the formation of financial results from crypto-assets: IFRS preserves conservative measurement alternatives, whereas US GAAP emphasizes current fair value and recognizes both gains and losses in profit or loss. The study also examines the Ukrainian approach proposed by Draft Law No. 10225-d, which follows a realization-based taxation principle and generally links tax consequences to conversion into fiat currency rather than unrealized remeasurement. This creates a timing gap between accounting carrying amounts and the tax base and may generate deferred tax implications. The article considers the consequences for companies holding crypto assets as treasury reserves, investments, or trading inventories, including the effects on profit, liquidity assessment, financial covenants, tax planning, audit procedures, and disclosure. The article argues that Ukrainian enterprises should prepare accounting policies for crypto-assets in advance, establish clear criteria for distinguishing IAS 2 and IAS 38 treatment, document fair value sources and active markets, strengthen controls over blockchain addresses and private keys, and model prospective tax differences. For regulators, synchronization of tax rules with accounting methodology and methodological guidance on IFRS application are identified as priorities. The results contribute to the development of a more coherent analytical framework for assessing crypto-assets across accounting and taxation systems and provide a basis for further empirical research into reporting quality, investor decision-making, and the treatment of stablecoins, tokenized real-world assets, and non-fungible tokens. 

cryptocurrency, virtual assets, financial reporting, IFRS, US GAAP, IAS 38, measurement, fair value, intangible assets, taxation of crypto-assets 

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the transformation of accounting systems, company reporting, and ESG auditing within the framework of the emerging European model of sustainable business development and increasing requirements for transparency and accountability. It substantiates the role of these processes in ensuring the economic security of enterprises, particularly under growing regulatory pressure, heightened investor expectations, and the expanding influence of non-financial risks on financial performance. The study examines contemporary approaches to integrating financial and non-financial indicators into company reporting and identifies key trends in the development of integrated thinking and disclosure practices. Special attention is paid to the concept of double materiality as a methodological foundation for generating reliable and analytically sound non-financial information. This concept reflects both the impact of enterprises on the environment and society and the influence of ESG factors on financial standing and performance. European ESG audit practices are analyzed, including the verification of disclosure accuracy and completeness, the assessment of internal control systems, the identification of environmental and social risks, and the evaluation of the consistency of reporting with the company’s business model and sustainable development strategy. The author proposes a model for integrating ESG indicators into the chart of accounts through specialized subaccounts for environmental, social, and governance-related costs, as well as provisions for climate, regulatory, and reputational risks. This approach enhances transparency in cost formation, ensures consistency between financial and non-financial data, and establishes a solid information base for both internal and external ESG audits. Integrating non-financial risks into the accounting system is viewed as an element of strategic planning and a mechanism for improving organizational adaptability. The analysis of international standards (GRI, SASB, TCFD) and the European regulatory environment demonstrates that the three-level GRI structure ensures consistency in reporting, supports the assessment of material impacts on the economy, environment, and society, and increases the analytical value and reliability of ESG-related data. The application of an integrated approach to reporting and accounting strengthens economic security, fosters investor and stakeholder confidence, reduces information asymmetry, and supports long-term sustainability. Future research should focus on the digitization of ESG accounting, evaluation of non-financial risks’ impact on financial stability and enterprise value, adaptation of integrated reporting to sector-specific contexts, and the development of methodological recommendations for enhancing ESG audit effectiveness and sustainable risk management in the context of European integration. 

accounting, ESG, ESG audit, company reporting, sustainable development, economic security, GRI.