This is a standard German accounting term and is synonymous with terms such as "Periodisierung" or "Periodisierungsprinzip".

It also appears in the old (pre-2005) version of IAS 1.26:

"Expenses are recognised in the income statement on the basis of a direct association between the costs incurred and the earning of specific items of income (matching)."

"Aufwendungen werden in der Gewinn- und Verlustrechnung auf der Grundlage eines direkten Zusammenhangs zwischen den angefallenen Kosten und den entsprechenden Ertragsposten erfasst (sachliche Abgrenzung)."

The term isn't used directly in HGB s. 252(1) no. 4, which reads:

"Es ist vorsichtig zu bewerten, namentlich sind alle vorhersehbaren Risiken und Verluste, die bis zum Abschlußstichtag entstanden sind, zu berücksichtigen, selbst wenn diese erst zwischen dem Abschlußstichtag und dem Tag der Aufstellung des Jahresabschlusses bekanntgeworden sind; Gewinne sind nur zu berücksichtigen, wenn sie am Abschlußstichtag realisiert sind."

"Carrying amounts shall be determined prudently and in particular, all foreseeable risks and losses that have arisen prior to the balance sheet date shall taken into account, even if these become known only between the balance sheet date and the date on which the financial statements are prepared; profits may only be recognised if they have been realised at the balance sheet date."

English translation from "Deutsches Bilanzrecht/German Accounting Legislation", IDW-Verlag, 4th edition 2006. I have to admit a vested interest here. This is the book you should be referring to for all HGB-related material.

This provision deals generally with the "Vorsichtsprinzip" (prudence", the "Imparitätsprinzip" (imparity) and the "Realisationsprinzip" (realisation principle). Personally, I'd have said that the matching principle is governed by HGB s. 252(1) no. 5, rather than no. 4.

Perhaps you could give some more context.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 4 hrs (2008-04-20 11:42:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

This reference to SSAP No. 4 is unusual, to say the least: this is a US insurance accounting standard. Is "XXX" an insurance company in the US? If so, what's it doing playing around with IAS 20? Plus, accounting for grants and subsidies only appears to be a small element of SSAP No. 4.

I don't have the SSAPs to hand (you have to buy them...), but SSAP No. 4 is based largely on FASB Con 6 (Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 6), which I certainly do have. And "matching" is certainly the term used in Con 6:

"146. Matching of costs and revenues is simultaneous or combined recognition of the revenues and expenses that result directly and jointly from the same transactions or other events. In most entities, some transactions or events result simultaneously in both a revenue and one or more expenses. The revenue and expense(s) are directly related to each other and require recognition at the same time. In present practice, for example, a sale of product or merchandise involves both revenue (sales revenue) for receipt of cash or a receivable and expense (cost of goods sold) for sacrifice of the product or merchandise sold to customers. Other examples of expenses that may result from the same transaction and be directly related to sales revenues are transportation to customers, sales commissions, and perhaps certain other selling costs."

So, I stick by "matching".

I've just seen your other question on "Marktleistungsabgabekonzept" and will look at it later today.