Abstract As defined by the existing positive law, it is clear that debt is a property that can be transferred and traded similar to other forms of corporeal property, but because it is a constructive existence and is subject to contingent liquidation, the economic value of these DEBTS is greatly determined by this. A lower liquidity contingency of the debt will result in a lower economic value. In some circumstances, it may be more difficult to liquidate a debt, and the likelihood of its collection is reduced. There can be several reasons for this condition, including the quality and characteristics of the debt, such as conditional debt, contingent debt, or future debt, as well as the situation of the debtor, such as insolvency or bankruptcy. In addition, there may be a dispute between the creditor and the debtor regarding the existence of the debt or its characteristics. This type of debt is referred to as a debt in action. In this case, the creditor cannot expect that the debt will be liquidated in a manner that is consistent with his desire, because the debtor, through whom the debt must be collected, unlike the creditor, denies the existence of the debt in its origin or some of its characteristics. In the event of a dispute between the creditor and the debtor, which may be caused by a difference in the existence and amount of the debt, or by a difference in its characteristics and function, it is less likely that the debt will be liquidated in the manner the creditor anticipates. When debt is assigned, the assignor does not guarantee the payment of the debt, but in any event, the existence of the debt is required. Thus, as with other contracts, a pillar of the validity of an assignment of debt is the existence of the transferred debt at the time of the assignment. It is, therefore, necessary to examine whether or not a debt in action that is disputed, whose existence is doubtful, can be transferred, and, if so, what are its effects and consequences? In Roman law, the assignment of debt in action was prohibited in the early periods due to the fear of speculation, but in later times, due to the benefits that were envisioned for such a transaction, it was permitted. As part of the effort to prevent speculation and safeguard the rights of the debtor, this right was provided for the debtor to pay the consideration of the assignment to the assignee, that is the amount that the assignee paid to the assignor to settle the dispute and acquire ownership of the debt. The countries that followed the Roman legal system in the later periods, such as France, accepted the assignment of the DEBTS in action. Despite some hesitation in Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence in this regard, the validity of this type of assignment of debt should be accepted by general contractual rules. The validity of this contract may be questioned initially due to the uncertainty, the lack of knowledge about the object of the contract, and the inability to deliver the object, however, by examining each of these objections, it can be demonstrated that these objections are irrelevant. Accordingly, the assignment of DEBTS in action should be regarded as valid under Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence. Due to the special nature of this type of debt, there are certain consequences associated with it. Unless otherwise agreed, the implied intent of the parties should be interpreted as a waiver of the warranty of title. As a result, the assignee may not be entitled to restitution of the consideration that has been paid to the assignor if, after the assignment of debt, the assignee claims against the debtor for recovery of the debt and it becomes evident that the debt did not exist when the assignment contract was concluded. Moreover, it is important to note that, since the fact that the debt is disputed is considered a defect of said debt, and also, since every contract of assignment of debt contains an implicit condition that the debt to be transferred is not denied by the debtor at the time of conclusion of the contract, the agreement may be terminated if the assignee is unaware of the dispute.

Remission of DEBTS is a legal action which, to the Shia jurisprudents, is the cancellation of right rather than ownership; however, mostly jurisprudents know it a disposition. Conversely, some considerremission of debt a contract. Article 289 of Civil Code follows the jurists’ famous viewpoint. In guaranty contracts, discarding part of creditors’ claim and/or acceptance of respite to the businessman is called remission of DEBTS. Inguaranty contracts Type 1 if the creditors ignore part of their request, such an interpretation may be considered conditional, but the elimination effect is not complete, because remission of DEBTSis conditional on the payment of the rest of the debt by the businessman. But the interpretation of remission of DEBTSType 2 fromguaranty contractsis not correct at all, because firstly accepting the deadline does not match the truth of remission of DEBTS, but has a fundamental incongruity with the conditions of remission of DEBTS in the law of our country. Secondly, the businessman is the guarantor of creditors. After the termination, cancellation, or ineligibility of the contract, the guarantor and liability will go to the businessman

t is the existence of a right or at least the existence of a cause leading to a right. Based on this, providing security deposit for a debt that will arise in the future, such as a loan to be received in the future, is contentious, and renowned jurists do not accept this type of security deposit. The main issue is whether the view on the invalidity of providing security deposit for future DEBTS is based on established and irrefutable evidence, or if there is room for questioning the validity of those arguments. Furthermore, considering the dependency of the security deposit on the debt, the existence of a debt is necessary for the creation of a security deposit. Studies indicate that there are two main perspectives in this regard: the first perspective confirms the invalidity of providing security deposit for future DEBTS, while the second perspective adheres to the principle of security deposit for future DEBTS and considers it valid. In civil law, there is also no explicit clarity on this issue. Judicial practice also does not accept security deposit for future DEBTS by adhering to the opinions of most jurists. After critically examining the arguments and evidence, the research concluded, using a descriptive-analytical approach, that since the goal of law is to preserve social order and justice, it must align with contemporary social needs. Therefore, in the context of security deposit, considering their credibility, customary practices, and rationality, there is no justification for requiring proof of the debt. This issue falls under general principles and applications of contracts. Therefore, security deposit for future DEBTS, where justified, is considered a valid principle in the legal system based on the mutual consent of the parties involved. Because individuals need security deposit for their transactions in their business relationships to ensure peace of mind. This not only maintains contractual balance and stability but also enhances investor confidence.

Earnings Management is a deliberate manipulation of financial reporting in order to achieve an expected level of earnings. So, earnings may increase, decrease or smooth based on various management's goals and objectives to mislead the stakeholders. It seems that the short-term debt structure can have regulatory benefits because it leads to greater monitoring by creditors and, as a result, reduces the earnings management. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of monitoring through short-term DEBTS on accrual-based earnings management. The sample consists of 136 firms listed in Tehran Stock Exchange during the period from 2010 to 2015. The discretionary accruals criterion calculated using Simon and Fang model (2014), is applied to measure accruals-based earnings management. The research method is the correlation method and data analysis method is the multivariate regression model. Results indicate that there is a significant relation between short-term bank DEBTS and accruals-based earnings management in low-rated firms. Also, Findings show that there is no significant relation between short-term bank DEBTS and accruals-based earnings management in high-risk firms.

There are four major jurisprudential opinions on the possibility of returning the debt to the debtor. Those who believe in the impossibility of the return of the defunct debt argue for the rule of "defunct will never return" and the principle of non-recurrence. Citing the intangible nature of debt, the manner of wise people, and the validity of termination and cancellation of contracts whit the subject of debt, some believe that debt recurrence is possible. Some believe that the defunct debt is like the destroyed debt. But if there is a reason for returning of debt, a debt like a debt that has been overthrown return. Some have considered the intention of the parties as decisive. If the intention of the parties is possession, the return of debt is possible, but with the intention of payment debt, debt will not return. According to Articles 806, 701 and 723 civil code, the legislator has accepted the above view. Some of the results of accepting the view of return the debt like a debt that has been overthrown are the non-return of guarantees and documents belonging to debt, and the invalidity of installments on it and it must pay immediately.

The budget deficit policy is one of the fiscal policy instruments for eliminating the shortage of government revenues and achieving targeted economic growth in many countries. In recent years, for various economic problems in Iran, governments get some parts of the budget deficit from different sources. Foreign borrowing is one of the sources of deficit financing and the ways of using it may have positive and negative effects on economic growth. In this paper the empirical relationship between budget deficit and economic growth of Iran in the period 1980-2011 is analyzed in long and short run applying Johansen and Juselius co-integration method and vector error correction model (VECM). Results suggest that the impact of external debt on economic growth is negative and significant in the long run and short run. Thus, the optimal foreign borrowing and the other sources of deficit financing should be used for increasing employment and the high efficiency projects and the ability to pay foreign and domestic DEBTS are necessary for achieving the targeted growth.

In developing countries, the amount of foreign DEBTS is high, while their military costs have been increased in recent decades. In this article, the effects of military costs and national income on foreign DEBTS have been investigated in 77 developing countries during 1993-2007, using GMM. Results show military cost has positive effect (0.33) and national income has negative effect (-0.38) on foreign DEBTS.

Over the last decade, especially after the recent global financial crisis, the governments financial plans and their effects on macroeconomic variables, has been the central issue of debate among economists. Private consumption is also among the variables that are in close relationship with government programs.Because of the importance of private consumption on the one hand and the problem of chronic budget deficit and growing public debt in the developing countries on the other hand, this paper investigates nonlinear effects of government debt on private consumption in OPEC countries for the period of 2000 to 2012, using Panel Smooth Transition Regression (PSTR) model. To this end, Debt-to- GDP ratio is used as transition variable. The results showed a strong nonlinear relationship between the variables studied and suggest a two-regime model with a threshold parameter of 7 percent and the slope parameter of 8669/1. In the first regime, government DEBTS have a positive impact on private consumption but crossing the threshold value, in the second regime, have a negative impact.Therefore, in high levels of government debt because the probability of the government's ability to repay debt and the resulting increase in tax from people to finance this debt, is high, Thus, households expect higher taxes in the future, and the current consumption can be reduced.

The legal characteristics of money serve as the gateway to the world of MONETARY DEBTS, emerging from a comprehensive understanding of money's economic roles. Customary law, in this context, seeks to explore social realities and understand the institutions that humans have developed. By examining existing practices, it aims to establish legal obligations. Consequently, the law positions itself to support the economic functions of money through a declarative lens, assessing these functions before recognizing them as legal definitions through applying reason and logic. Interestingly, domestic legal literature often lacks a function-oriented economic perspective and tends to blur the distinction between the legal characteristics of money and the rules governing MONETARY DEBTS. Discussions on this topic frequently focus more on regulations regarding MONETARY DEBTS rather than on the essence of “money” itself, regardless of its role in creating obligations. Therefore, the main question the authors seek to address is: What are the legal characteristics of money in its pure form? This research employs an analytical-library method and a comparative approach, drawing from legal and jurisprudential thought (particularly common law), to systematically identify the legal characteristics of money.