At-A-Glance
Parallel struggles proceed in the
world of accounting standards at the
snail�s pace the profession is known
for. Small versus large and local versus
global characterize the challenges in
the march towards universal standards
that are both relevant and credible for
all interested parties. We start this
issue with an article that highlights
the debate in the US over separate
standards for smaller companies as
opposed to one-size-fits-all. Then we
turn to the status of international
standards, where the US appears to be
the laggard. Finally, we look at how the
world is dealing with the lofty goal of
marrying these two struggles by way of
IFRS for SMEs.
Editor Gerald E. Herter, CPA
|
|
In This Issue
|
|
Private Company Financial Standards
The Ongoing Saga
For several decades, the vast majority of CPA
firms have clamored for standards that are
relevant and practical for their private
clients. Yet once again this past October, after
an extensive process with widespread input, the
Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF), parent
body of the FASB, rejected the call. A blue
ribbon panel�s recommendation for a new
authoritative body for private company standards
was turned aside for the establishment of a
council subject to the FASB.
Recognizing the failure of a previous attempt to
address this issue through the formation of the
Private Company Financial Reporting Committee
(PCFRC) in 2006, FAF along with the AICPA and
NASBA set up the broad based eighteen member
panel to study and report back. As if to hedge
their bets, the FAF at the same time had their
all-powerful FASB implement specific measures
designed to give attention to previously
marginalized private company stakeholders. These
efforts eased the board�s way for rejecting the
panel�s advice, by inferring that the issue had
been satisfactorily addressed by a supposedly
more responsive FASB.
In fairness, recent tangible efforts by the FASB
to consider the plight of private companies were
evident in the updated standard on testing for
Goodwill Impairment, a new project to consider
easing disclosure requirements for fair value
measurement, and attention to simplified
disclosures and testing exceptions in the
revenue recognition deliberations.
Going even further, a Senate sub-committee in
January expressed opposition to all changes in
the status quo, even challenging the formation
of the FASB proposed council, fearing the
undermining of GAAP, reduction of financial
transparency, conflicts with international
standards, and complicating accounting
practices.
However, speaking for many AICPA members,
President Barry Melancon in October stated:
"Without an autonomous board with
standard-setting authority, we end up with
nothing more than a continuation of what we�ve
already had that didn�t work. The proposed
process, with FASB veto power at its core, is
what we have today.�
The FAF allowed for a comment period (ended in
January) on the proposed FASB controlled Private
Company Standards Improvement Council (PCSIC).
Well over 6,000 responses were received, most
echoing the AICPA position specified by
Melancon.
A series of four roundtables around the country
took place from January through March 1. From
listening to parts of the first roundtable in
Atlanta, I found that proponents from the two
sides of the issue sound eerily like major
political parties, hopelessly at odds, while the
usefulness of CPA-reported-on financial
statements continues to decline, in favor of
other data that users find more pertinent to
their needs. Hopefully after the roundtables,
the FAF will give further consideration before
imposing a divisive plan that further polarizes
the profession. A compromise measure is
attainable that, while not totally satisfying to
either side, would address the concerns of major
stake holders.
For further information, see
Plan to Establish the Private Company Standards
Improvement Council
|
IFRS: Adoption, Convergence, Condorsement?
The World Waits on the USA
The International Accounting Standards Committee was
founded in 1973 for the purpose of establishing and
promoting worldwide accounting standards. Sensing a need
for a more credible and specific focus, in 2001 the IASB
took up the cause, pushing for a single enforceable set
of standards that all countries would follow.
After almost 40 years of effort, where does this noble
endeavor stand today? Over 120 countries now require or
permit IFRS in some format. However, the proverbial
elephant in the room is the USA, which still has not
weighed in on its final plan. At the Integra
International World Meeting in Melbourne last October,
Integra AAA president, and A & A guru, Steve Austin
predicted a major announcement on IFRS in early December
by the SEC. Sure enough, the announcement came.
Unfortunately, the decision was in effect to �kick the
can down the road.�
To help put in perspective the status of IFRS, the
various alternatives should be clarified. Adoption, or
endorsement, means that a country accepts IFRS fully
without modification. Convergence is where a country
harmonizes its own GAAP standards to agree with IFRS
over a period of time. Condorsement, a term coined in
2010 by SEC Deputy Chief Accountant, Paul A. Beswick, is
a hybrid of the other two alternatives. Under
condorsement, a country has its own GAAP in place at a
given point in time and agrees that all IFRS issued from
that point forward will be adopted without modification.
Meanwhile, the country�s remaining GAAP is gradually
converged with IFRS, standard by standard.
While the SEC in early 2010 had indicated that a
determination on IFRS could come �as soon as 2011,� SEC
Chief Accountant, James L. Kroeker, on December 5, 2011,
quantified the timeline as �a few additional months� for
the staff �to produce a final report.� A recommendation
of �an approach for Commission consideration� would also
be forthcoming. While Kroeker is highly enthusiastic
about the progress made thus far, he stressed that the
key issues of assuring both high quality standards and a
vital ongoing role for the United States in setting and
enforcing the international standards were more
important than timing of a decision. Mary Shapiro, SEC
Chairman, recently echoed the concern for reaching a
satisfactory outcome rather a quick one.
For the IASB take on where the US stands, IASB chairman,
Hans Hoogervorst, noted at a January seminar in Moscow
that the if, when and how of the US with respect to
IFRS, was the question he was most often asked. While
acknowledging the complexities facing the US in this
decision, he emphasized that �both I and my counterpart
at the FASB have made it clear that a continued program
of convergence by another name is not an acceptable way
forward. I do believe that the US will ultimately come
on board. Quite simply, they need us and we need them.�
He seemed to be alluding that a US approach that
continued to make exceptions to established IFRs
pronouncements should not be sanctioned. However, many
of the countries that are already using IFRS in some
form have modifications specific to their own needs.
Another voice from the financial world, the Fitch rating
service, in its annual commentary, agreed that the US
would eventually embrace IFRS, but that the decision
would not come easily. Also, some form of condorsement
was considered the only approach that could succeed.
This brief summary just scratches the surface of the
struggle toward universal standards. Stay tuned as this
worldwide dance continues over the coming months.
For further information, see
IASB Chairman Speech on
Global Standards
IFRS for SMEs
Relief for Small Companies?
While the US grapples contentiously with accounting
standards for public and private companies, the IASB has
answered the plea from countries around the world for a
robust set of pronouncements paralleling IFRS that
smaller entities can apply. But the call for a mini-IFRS
does not carry the level of urgency that IFRS for public
companies does. Many smaller companies have no need to
tap into the world�s capital markets. Typically,
countries already have local accounting standards in
place that serve the needs at this level.
IFRS for SMEs, released in 2009, would appear to appeal
to companies that have relationships outside of their
national jurisdiction, or plan to move into the public
arena. These standards are �built on an IFRS foundation�
according to IASB Board member Paul Pacter�s update to
the European Financial Reporting Group in January. He
indicated that over 70 countries have adopted IFRS for
SMEs or plan to do so.
Along with simplifying the full IFRS principles, the SME
version eliminates irrelevant sections, reduces required
disclosures and limits modifications to once every three
years. An example of relevancy is the smaller company
focus on short-term cash flows, liquidity, and solvency,
as opposed to the public company emphasis on earnings
per share and longer term forecasts.
To further facilitate the move to IFRS for SMEs, the SME
Implementation Group (SMEIG) was formed in September
2010 to assist, by way of a series of questions and
answers (Q&A). Three Q&A�s have been issued with seven
more under consideration. The issued Q&A�s primarily
clarify whether or not a company is a public entity, for
purposes of determining if IFRS for SMEs can be used.
The draft Q&A�s cover other issues, such as defining
terms that indicate when exemptions from requirements
are allowed, when full IFRS can be used where the SME
standards are silent, and dealing with departures from
IFRS for SMEs. A full review of IFRS for SMEs is
scheduled for 2012.
Though the Blue Ribbon Panel, mentioned in the earlier
article on Private Company Standards, does not favor
IFRS for SMEs, the AICPA has provided endorsement and
considers IFRS for SMEs acceptable as a form of GAAP in
the US. Before employing this set of standards, a
company would want to assure that the users of its
financials approve, as well as the local state�s
accountancy board. If so, these standards may well be
easier to apply than traditional US GAAP. However, the
cost of converting to IFRS for SMEs needs to be
considered, also.
The current state of affairs invites confusion, with the
US allowing alternative versions of GAAP. In Great
Britain, a current proposal has large companies required
to use IFRS, middle tier companies required to use IFRS
for SMEs, and micro-companies no larger than about $1
million in revenue and $500 thousand in assets allowed
to continue with yet another set of Financial Reporting
Standards for Smaller Entities (FRSSE). Extrapolating
the US and UK approaches to the rest of the world leads
to the conclusion that, on an international basis,
standards for non-public entities are much further from
universality than even their public counterpart.
For further information, see
IFRS for SMEs
Additional A&A News
The following links provide a selection of current articles
devoted to highlighting other A&A topics currently making
news.
-
Foot-Dragging on IFRS Decision Could Strip SEC of
Power
-
Canadian Bank IFRS Transition Was Easy Sailing
-
PCAOB Penalizes E&Y $2million for Audit Failure
-
Private Equity Industry Attracts S.E.C. Scrutiny
-
FASB and Japan Accounting Standards Board Meet
-
Groupon CFO Defends Use of Non-GAAP Measures
-
Congress Considers Impact of Accounting on Tax
Reform
-
Snack CEO Ousted in Accounting Inquiry
|