The decision about whether the nation's corporations should report under international accounting standards has foundered amid a change of Presidents and a corresponding change of leadership at the Securities and Exchange Commission.
David M. Katz, CFO.com | US
November 17, 2009
For a long-established, standard-setting governing system of timely developed guidelines and procedures ( GAAP )to be eliminated in favor of international faux modified accrual accounting basis and other slim-shady accounting standards or procedures which have not even marginally developed logically or consistently with the management of their own foreign currencies ( hyperinflation ) ( or their abolishment, hence the need for Euromark )has to be in homage to THE END OF REASON. If anything, IFRS should be more consistent with GAAP and not vice versa. I would prefer the elimination or revision of the overly-complex U.S. TAX CODE possibly in favor of some more generous and lucrative European model
Posted by Michael Hemingway | January 04, 2010 12:50 pm
James, I have a few constructive criticisms (not to say you are wrong, just thoughts I have) Are you asserting that the number of pages has any relevance to the effectiveness of the standards to do what they are supposed to do, which is provide more comparability among financial statements? The 12-15k pages of guidance is guidance that has been requested by the profession, and IFRS will get there, as it is just "younger" so to speak. Also, as I have stated many times, being able to tailor these "principle-based" standards to each companies benefit not only, in my opinion, hinders comparability, but transparancy as well.
Posted by John Schmidlin | November 18, 2009 10:49 am
As I commented before, US firms should create internal IFRS "Specailist" (and non-CPA's should focus on becoming IFRS specialist). This is a perfect time to do so. This would advert some of the reliance on the accounting firms for guidance. GAAP is said to be 12-15k pages and IFRS is 2.5k pages so it would be economical to have a IFRS staff (separate from internal auditing group). With IFRS being less rules based, US firms can apply the IFRS principles more to their favor.
Posted by James Blackwell | November 18, 2009 10:05 am
Below are just a few reasons why Herz and the Big 4 are all supporting this convergence: 1. The Big 4 will line their own pockets in profits by providing implementation guidance to companies. 2. Herz was a former member of the IASB. 3. The Big 4, as well as Herz, know that once the accelerated filers put forth the time and money to follow through with the covergence, it will be too little to late to return to GAAP.
Posted by John Schmidlin | November 17, 2009 10:38 am© CFO Publishing Corporation 2009. All rights reserved.