FASB chairman Robert Herz announces that a public forum, slated for June, will kick off an effort to move American companies to international accounting standards.
Marie Leone, CFO.com | US
May 2, 2008
The rush to IFRS is driven by what? Is US GAAP so bad it must be eliminated? So are existing Financial Statements prepared under US GAAP unreliable? I seem to remember drastic reductions in reported profits after a couple of German companies listed in New York. Bemused investor
Posted by Raymond Darke | May 31, 2008 01:39 pm
We know that FASB has been a slow and ineffective organization to create firm principles and rules, but that is due to its political structure, which tends to favor the big-4 accounting firms' interests, rather than the public interests. But that doesn't mean that the US should move to IFRS, which are substandard to FASB's and would open up the floodgates of fraud to make Enron and WorldCom look like a walk in the park. Instead the answer is to change the political appointments to the FASB Board to make sure that people with integrity are appointed, and then to eliminate International substandards altogether and replace them with Super-GAAP, based on US standards, but improved even more by having them rewritten by real accounting and fraud experts, not political CPA hacks.
Posted by Ralph Adamo | May 05, 2008 06:27 pm
Many thanks for the note from Frank Regan who asked us to add the meeting time to the article (which we did.) The blueprint meeting, scheduled for June 16, begins at 9:00 am, and runs until 4:00 pm. Click here to get a copy of the FASB press release.
Posted by Marie Leone | May 05, 2008 02:54 pm
This mad rush to IFRS is inane-its being driven by a small group of elites beholden to international money interests and the Big 4 for their own purposes. All the citations of "transparency", "robustness" and other imposing attributes are empty and vaccous abstrations unsupported by what we used to insist for in auditing "sufficient competent evidence". This will cause businesses untold millions of dollars simply to allow the Big 4 to hire international audit staff that will demand less pay, free time and other perks while ensuring that they have a huge revenue base from consulting on the transition. Essentially, the Big 4 have found a way to outsource their odious employment practices to a more willing workforce. Advocates have yet to explain how the differences will produce more effective or efficient reporting. FASB's "fair value" statements were produced with "convergence" in mind. Now the merger appears to be surrender. Moreover, those very statements seem to have contributed to the recent subprime mess. This approach surely sits well with the Eurpoeans, since they control IFRS, but I'm an American and it seems to me that this is tantamount to treason-reliquishing control to agents of foreign interests. It appears to me that far from regulating capital markets-the SEC is being regulated by a few big players whose agendas don't include national sovereignty, let alone primacy.
Posted by Super Heater | May 05, 2008 12:25 pm
You did not state the time of the meeting. Mentioning the time or a link to the meeting info would have been helpful
Posted by Frank Regan | May 04, 2008 07:44 pm
I feel like I'm waiting for a train that doesn't stop (GAAP) here anymore
Posted by Rick Macchiarulo | May 03, 2008 08:39 pm
The change is very positive. In today global economy it is important to have global standards in order to align financial reporting around the world. This change add transparency, generate an increase in trust and boost the international economy synchonization.
Posted by Jose Salazar | May 03, 2008 01:57 pm© CFO Publishing Corporation 2009. All rights reserved.