Final answer:
It is true that consistency in accounting does not prevent changes in accounting methods, provided changes are properly disclosed and justified. It is also true that colonial objections to taxation were more about representation than about taxation itself.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that 'consistency does not mean that no change in accounting method can be made' is true. In accounting principles, consistency refers to the use of the same accounting methods or principles over time, which allows for comparisons between different financial periods to be fair and meaningful. However, a company may change its accounting methods for legitimate reasons, such as a change in industry practice or regulation, to provide more reliable and relevant information. When a change is made, it should be fully disclosed and justified in the financial statements to ensure transparency.
Regarding Exercise 7.3.1, it is also true that the colonists did not necessarily object to the principle of taxation itself. Their opposition was mainly focused on the idea that British Parliament could impose taxes on the colonists without their consent—essentially, no taxation without representation. The way the tax revenue would be used, and the lack of say in the decision-making process concerning taxes, contributed significantly to the dissatisfaction that led to the American Revolution.