To make sure you receive future emails,
please add {[EM-EMAIL ADDRESS]} to your address book or safe list.
|
|
Issue 7 | September 2016
|
At-A-Glance
The push towards global financial
reporting standards continues to gain
ground. However, that success may prove
futile in the long run, if investors and
others go elsewhere for the critical
data needed for informed decision
making. Our first article illustrates
the rising call for more innovative
thinking in the financial reporting
arena.
Establishing internationally
recognized audit standards presents
another challenge for the accounting
profession. Various jurisdictions have
identified audit quality indicators
(AQI) as guides for directing standards
development. The Federation of European
Accountants analyzed the AQI initiatives
from a diverse group of authoritative
bodies. Our second article describes the
resulting findings, where there is
commonality, yet significant differences
as well.
Finally, our quarterly Worldwide
Update covers news from organizations
across the globe.
Editor Gerald E. Herter, CPA |
|
In This Issue
|
|
Facing the Challenge of Financial Reporting
Obsolescence
Current financial reports continue to lose
relevance
Over recent years, we have followed the
relentless pursuit of global financial reporting
standards. From the latest analysis as of July
25, 2016, the International Accounting Standards
Board (IASB) reported that just over half of all
listed companies worldwide now use International
Financial Reporting Standards.
Proceeding on a similar, if not more rapid
pace, is the growing perception, to the
investing public, that those financial reporting
practices are losing relevance. This condition
is most starkly personified in The End of
Accounting and the Path Forward for Investors
and Managers, a new book by New York accounting
professors Baruch Lev and Feng Gu. As stated in
the book, “corporate financial reports--balance
sheets, income and cash flow statements, as well
as the numerous explanatory footnotes in
quarterly and annual reports and IPO
prospectuses--form the most ubiquitous source of
information for investment and credit
decisions.” But, “despite all of regulators’
efforts to improve accounting and corporate
transparency, financial information no longer
reflects the factors—so important to
investors—that create corporate value and confer
on business the vaunted competitive advantage.
In fact…today’s financial reports provide a
trifling 5% of the information relevant to
investors.”
The authors do not deny the importance of the
accounting function. They just point out the
inadequacy of the information reported and the
futility of how the information is required to
be reported. The three major concerns put
forward are the expensing of intangibles (which
often represent more valuable resources than
reported assets), use of estimates (which can be
erroneous and manipulative), and unrecorded,
non-accounting events (such as the approval of a
drug, or change in number of subscribers).
The solution presented is the “Strategic
Resources & Consequences Report” which focuses
“on the strategic, value-enhancing resources
(assets) of modern enterprises, like patents,
brands, technology, natural resources, operating
licenses, customers, business platforms
available for add-ons, and unique enterprise
relationships, rather than on the commoditized
plant, machines, or inventory, which are
prominently displayed on corporate balance
sheets…to provide investors and lenders (and
managers, too) with actionable, up-to-date
information.”
The challenge with the well thought out
analysis in the book is the current lack of a
standardized generally accepted approach that
can be consistently and widely applied to the
information the authors deem relevant. The
advantage of “flawed” international accounting
standards is their widespread acceptance and
use. The various promulgators of accounting and
reporting standards would be wise to embrace the
shortcomings of the current backward looking
structure of standards and evolve toward a
methodology that robustly addresses factors that
are more useful for users at all levels.
Preparers of financial reports also face a
daunting task. In a recent Ernst & Young report,
Are you prepared for corporate reporting’s
perfect storm?, one thousand CFOs and
controllers were surveyed, along with in-depth
interviews of seventeen corporate and EY
executives. The major findings, as summarized in
the report, were:
- Heightened complexity and demand
remain significant challenges to effective
corporate reporting;
- The needs of audit committees and
supervisory boards are increasing, and
better relationships between finance
functions and these key stakeholders are
critical;
- While the expectations and scope
of corporate reporting have increased,
finance leaders’ confidence in reporting is
falling. They are also concerned about
reporting effectiveness; and
- Advanced technologies, data
analytics and a new skills mix are critical
for meeting demands, but significant
challenges stand in the way.
Companies often have various diverse systems
that need better inter-connectivity, while the
demand for a greater number of reports is
increasing. Consequently, audit committees,
boards and financial managers are required to
work more closely. At the same time, reporting
required for regulators is diverging more from
investor needs, and the essential technology
necessary to produce accurate and useful data is
increasingly costly and more difficult to
master.
In sum, the study states that “three areas
are essential to delivering the strategic
insight that today’s stakeholders demand:
trusted relationships, innovative technology,
and talent and skills development. Considering,
as well, the substantial challenges facing CFOs,
controllers and auditors in the next 36 months
as they strive to implement the new lease
accounting and revenue recognition standards,
time is at a premium now more than ever.
For further information, see
The End of Accounting and the Path Forward for
Investors and Managers
and
Are you prepared for corporate reporting’s
perfect storm?
|
A European Perspective on Audit Quality
Indicators
Federation of European Accountants compares wide
range of studies
Previous editions of the Audit &
Accounting Alert have covered various aspects of
audit skills, traits and technology needs facing
the audit firm of the future. With the
International Auditing and Assurance Standards
Board (IAASB) leading the way with its
Framework For Audit Quality
published in February 2014, a variety of
regulatory and other authorities around the
world have tackled the subject of audit quality
indicators (AQI). In July, 2016, the Federation
of European Accountants (FEE) issued an
information paper, Overview of Audit
Quality Indicators Initiatives,
summarizing the findings of nine of these
agencies. Also in July, the Association of
Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), in
conjunction with Macquarie University, Sydney,
reported in Directors’, CFOs’ and
auditors’ perceptions of audit quality
attributes: a comparative study, survey
results from the three groups on this issue.
The FEE paper analyzed initiatives from three
European agencies, two from the United States of
America, one each from Canada, Australia/New
Zealand, Singapore, and the International
Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO).
The FEE emphasized the benefits of AQIs in
providing “a basis for comparison across
different audits and audit firms,” while also
enhancing “the transparency of information
available for discussion with those charged with
governance and audit committees, for instance
when selecting an audit firm”. Unfortunately,
the overall results of the analysis showed
“significant differences” in the AQI approaches
and specifics of the nine initiatives.
To establish context, the FEE listed the “key
elements of audit quality” from the IAASB
Framework, which the paper described as follows:
- Inputs covering such factors as
values, ethics, and attitudes which are
influenced by the culture of a firm; also it
covers knowledge, skills, and experience of
auditors as well as allocated time to
complete the audit. These apply at both the
engagement and firm levels as well as at
national level;
- Process covering audit processes
and quality control procedures and their
effect on audit quality;
- Outputs including reports and
information that are formally prepared for
the purposes of audit;
- Key interactions within the
Financial Reporting Supply Chain covering
formal and informal communication between
stakeholders and the context which may
influence those interactions; and
- Contextual Factors including a number of
environmental factors that might affect
audit quality.
A basic difference between the initiatives
was that roughly half “suggested a more
flexible, principles-based approach while others
have published a mandatory, rules-based list of
AQIs.” The number of AQIs varied from less than
10 to 28 (PCAOB). Following is a list in
descending order of AQIs that were found in at
least three of the initiatives (with the number
of instances in parentheses):
- Training hours per audit personnel
(8)
- Internal engagement quality views
(6)
- External inspections (6)
- Number of audit staff per audit
partner (5)
- Years of experience (5)
- Partner workload (5)
- Industry expertise of audit
personnel (5)
- Staff workload (4)
- Investment in development of new
audit methodology and tools (4)
- Staff turnover (4)
- Independence (4)
- Technical resources support (4)
- Staff satisfaction survey (3)
- External investigations (3)
- Tone at the top (3)
While training and assessments, internal and
external, were widely acknowledged, tone at the
top and staff satisfaction were given less
attention. The paper points out, however, that
the number of instances “does not mean that
these indicators are ‘better’ than those
appearing less frequently.” Also, some
initiatives focused on the more quantitative
measures, while others were more qualitative in
nature. The PCAOB was the only one to include
all 15 from this list.
The overriding conclusion from the paper was
that since approaches and specific AQIs differ
so widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, a
meeting of the minds is needed. Since many firms
now perform audits on a global scale,
consistency in audit quality accountability is
more important than ever. Consequently, the FEE,
in this paper, is calling for establishment of a
process of international collaboration “to agree
on a globally accepted set of audit quality
indicators.”
Next month, we will look at the ACCA survey
which considered the implications of ten
designated audit quality attributes from the
perspective of three stakeholder groups:
directors, CFOs and auditors.
For further information, see
Overview of Audit Quality Indicators.
|
Worldwide Update
Quarterly roundup of recent and upcoming actions
and activities by audit and accounting
organizations throughout the world
International
IASB –
International Accounting Standards Board
(www.ifrs.org)
- Amendments to IAS 15 Revenue from
Contracts with Customers – issued on April
12, 2016, ---Effective beginning in 2018,
with early application permitted?
IFAC
– International Federation of Accountants
(www.ifac.org)
- The Relationship between
Accountancy Expertise and Business
Performance – IFAC report published
July 21, 2016, “summarizing and discussing
findings of more than 90 academic research
papers on the relationship between accessing
accountancy expertise and business
performance to gain insight.
- International Auditing and
Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) - ISA 810
(Revised), Engagements to Report on Summary
Financial Statements – published
Mar 24, 2016, expands the new and revised
auditor reporting standards issued in
January, 2015, to these summary financial
statements. Effective for audit periods
ending on or after December 15, 2016.
- International Public
Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) -
Impairment of Revalued Assets (Amendments to
IPSAS 21, Impairment of Non-Cash-Generating
Assets, and IPSAS 26, Impairment of
Cash-Generating Assets), issued
July 28, 2016, to address property and
intangible asset revaluation, and a variety
of minor improvements of standards.
Effective January 1, 2018.
- International Public
Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) -
IPSAS 39, Amendments to IPSAS 25, Employee
Benefits - issued July 28, 2016, to
address terms of IAS 19, Employee Benefits,
concerning recognition, presentation and
disclosure of defined benefit plans.
Effective January 1, 2018, with early
adoption encouraged.
- International Public
Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB)
– Consultation Paper published July 27,
2016, covers three previously unaddressed
topics related to accounting for public
sector financial instruments: currency in
circulation, monetary gold, and
International Monetary Fund (IMF) Quota
Subscription and Special Drawing Rights
(SDRs). Comment period ends December 31,
2016.
- International Auditing and
Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) -
Supporting Credibility and Trust in Emerging
Forms of External Reporting.-.
Discussion Paper published August 17, 2016,
“intended to facilitate an open discussion
about the IAASB’s potential role and where
others can or need to play a role in a
holistic and interactive process to support
credibility and trust in these reports.”
Comment period ends December 15, 2016.
ACCA
– Association of Chartered Certified
Accountants (www.accaglobal.com/)
- Factors Affecting
Preparers' and Auditors' Judgements About
Materiality and Conciseness in Integrated
Reporting – research report issued
August 9, 2016, drawing evidence from early
emerging practices involving integrated
reporting in 28 countries.
- Professional accountants –
the future - research report issued
June 1, 2016, “based on a global survey of
over 2,000 professional accountants,
executives and experts…identifies the main
drivers for change that will have the most
impact on the profession, plus the
technical, ethical and interpersonal skills
and competencies that will be required in
the future.”
- Mapping the sustainability
reporting landscape: Lost in the right
direction – report issued May 12,
2016, “explores the changing corporate
sustainability reporting landscape, outlines
its components, addresses current challenges
and proposes development opportunities. It
provides a considered overview of the
trends, levers and drivers influencing the
reporting landscape. It also proposes ideas
to prompt discussion among professionals
involved in reporting who seek
standardisation, rationalisation and order.”
- Profitability and Cost
Analysis: an Eye on Value – global
report with KPMG issued April 29, 2016, with
data from over 1,100 finance professionals
worldwide, “evaluates how the enterprise
performance management capability within
finance functions is providing the business
with insightful profitability and cost
analysis through appropriate people,
processes and technology.”
CIMA
– Chartered Institute of Management
Accountants (www.cimaglobal.com)
- CIMA and AICPA members
approve new joint association -
June 18, 2016. Carrying forward the
AICPA/CIMA joint venture known as the
Association of International Certified
Professional Accountants, the new
association will be “representing the entire
accounting profession, while preserving the
AICPA and CIMA membership bodies. The
organizations would integrate operations to
strengthen advocacy and have more agility in
responding to evolving member needs.”
- Thinking the unthinkable:
Joining the Dots in today’s best thinking
and practice: What Next? – report
issued in May, 2016. “Top decision makers in
business and other sectors increasingly
recognise the need to work together to find
innovative and practical solutions to the
challenges presented by the growing range of
complex risks, disruption and ‘unthinkable’
issues that they now face. This report
explores these challenges in detail'.”
Africa, Europe,
India, and the Middle East (AEIME)
FRC
– Financial Reporting Council of the UK
(www.frc.org.uk)
- Skills, competencies and
the sustainability of the modern audit
– research report issued jointly with the
Institute of Chartered Accountants of
Scotland on April 6, 2016. See May 2016 A &
A Alert for discussion.
- The capability and
competency requirements of auditors in
today’s complex global business environment
– research report issued jointly with the
Institute of Chartered Accountants of
Scotland on April 6, 2016. See May 2016 A &
A Alert for discussion.
- Revised UK Corporate
Governance Code, Guidance on Audit
Committees, and Auditing and Ethical
Standards – issued on April 27,
2016. “The changes strengthen auditor
independence by applying prohibitions to a
range of engagements that could result in an
auditor facing a conflict of interest.
Reflecting the FRC’s commitment to
proportionate regulation, the revised
standards contain some reliefs which will
allow, in certain circumstances, an auditor
to provide additional assistance to smaller
and medium sized entities.”
- Amendments to FRS 105 :
The Financial Reporting Standard applicable
to the Micro-entities Regime - Limited
Liability Partnerships and Qualifying
Partnerships, issued May 17, 2016.
These amendments reflect “a change in the
law, which makes the simplified
micro-entities regime that is already
available to the smallest companies, also
available to eligible LLPs and qualifying
partnerships.” Effective generally in 2016,
with early application to 2015 permitted.
- Developments in Audit: An
Overview 2015/16 - published on
July 14, 2016, notes that “confidence in
audit has grown, but more needs to be done
in terms of market competition and improving
good practice in the profession.”
ICAEW
– The Institute of Chartered Accountants in
England and Wales (http://www.icaew.com)
- Incentives and institutions in
accounting: thinking beyond standards –
Public policy paper published in July 2016,
looks at “the principal factors that affect
financial reporting outcomes and the degree
to which these are the product of the
surrounding institutions and on the
incentives that affect individual firms and
their managers,” concluding that there is a
“need to focus on the incentives and
institutions that support financial
reporting quality as well as on accounting
standards.”
Americas,
Asia, Australia and New Zealand (AAANZ)
FASB
– Financial Accounting Standards Board
(www.fasb.org)
- Not-for-Profit Entities:
Presentation of Financial Statements of
Not-for-Profit Entities - ASU 2016-14,
issued August 18, 2016, simplifies and
improves how a not-for-profit organization
classifies its net assets, as well as the
information it presents in financial
statements and notes about its liquidity,
financial performance, and cash flows. See
article in June 2015 A & A Alert for
discussion. Effective generally in 2018,
with early application permitted.
- Exposure Draft -
Conceptual Framework for Financial
Reporting: Chapter 7: Presentation
– issued August 11, 2016, “with the
objective of providing a foundation for
future standards that enhance financial
statement users’ abilities to assess
prospects for future cash flows by
addressing how to group individual
recognized items into line items and
subtotals,?and clarify the relationships
among an entity’s assets, liabilities, and
equity, and the effects of related changes
of those assets and liabilities on
comprehensive income and cash flows. The
comment period ends November 9, 2016.
- Exposure Draft -
Not-for-Profit (NFP) Entities—Consolidation:
Clarifying When a Not-for-Profit Entity That
Is a General Partner Should Consolidate a
For-Profit Limited Partnership or Similar
Entity – issued 08/03/16, maintains
“how NFP general partners currently apply
the consolidation guidance in Subtopic
810-20 by including that guidance within
Subtopic 958-810. The comment period ends
October 3, 2016.
- Exposure Draft - Plan
Accounting.—.Employee Benefit Plan Master
Trust Reporting (a consensus of the Emerging
Issues Task Force) - issued
07/28/16, “to improve the usefulness of the
information reported to users of employee
benefit plan financial statements,”
regarding a plan’s interest in a master
trust. The comment period ends September 26,
2016.
- Exposure Draft - Income
Taxes: Disclosure Framework—Changes to the
Disclosure Requirements for Income Taxes
- issued July 26, 2016. Intending to enhance
disclosures, the proposal “would both modify
existing disclosure requirements and provide
additional disclosure requirements for
income taxes. These modifications and
additions include describing an enacted
change in tax law, disaggregating certain
income tax information between foreign and
domestic, and explaining the circumstances
that caused a change in assertion about the
indefinite reinvestment of undistributed
foreign earnings. It also will require
disclosing the aggregate of cash, cash
equivalents, and marketable securities held
by foreign subsidiaries.” Also, differences
in disclosure requirements between public
and private entities would be described. The
comment period ends September 30, 2016
- Financial
Instruments—Credit Losses: June 2016
Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial
Instruments – ASU 2016-13 – issued
June 16, 2016, “requires organizations to
measure all expected credit losses for
financial instruments held at the reporting
date based on historical experience, current
conditions and reasonable and supportable
forecasts.” Effective generally in 2020 for
public companies and 2021 for private
companies and organizations, with early
application to 2019 permitted.
- Revenue from Contracts
with Customers: Narrow-Scope Improvements
and Practical Expedients – ASU 2016-12
– issued April 14, 2016, provides
clarification and practical expedients in
the areas of assessing collectability,
presentation of sales and other taxes,
noncash transactions, contract
modifications, completed contracts, and
technical corrections. Effective dates are
the same as for ASU 2015-14, Revenue from
Contracts with Customers: Deferral of the
Effective Date.
- Revenue from Contracts
with Customers: Identifying Performance
Obligations and Licensing – ASU 2016-10
– issued April 14, 2016, to clarify the
identification of performance obligations
and licensing implementation guidance, while
not changing the basic principles of the
standard. Effective dates are the same as
for ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with
Customers: Deferral of the Effective Date.
- Compensation—Stock
Compensation: Improvements to Employee
Share-Based Payment Accounting –ASU 2016-09
issued March 30, 2016, “to reduce cost and
complexity and improve the accounting for
share-based payment awards issued to
employees for public and private
companies”...”including the income tax
consequences, classification of awards as
either equity or liabilities, and
classification on the statement of cash
flows.” Effective generally in 2017 for
public companies and 2018 for private
companies and organizations, with early
application permitted.
- Exposure Draft –
Consolidation: Interests Held through
Related Parties That Are under Common
Control - issued June 23, 2016,
provides that a single decision maker
considering qualification as the primary
beneficiary of a variable interest entity
(VIE) “would no longer be required to
consider indirect interests held through
related parties that are under common
control with the single decision maker to be
the equivalent of direct interests in their
entirety and, instead, would include such
interests on a proportionate basis
consistent with indirect interests held
through other related parties. If, after
performing that assessment,…the single
decision maker of a VIE concludes it does
not have the characteristics of a primary
beneficiary, the proposed amendments would
continue to require that reporting entity to
evaluate whether it and one or more of its
related parties under common control, as a
group, have the characteristics of a primary
beneficiary. If the single decision maker
and its related parties that are under
common control, as a group, have the
characteristics of a primary beneficiary,
then the party within the related party
group that is most closely associated with
the VIE is the primary beneficiary.” The
comment period ended July 25, 2016.
- Exposure Draft – Other
Income—Gains and Losses from the
Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets:
Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition
Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of
Nonfinancial Assets - issued June
5, 2016, provides clarification on guidance
for derecognition of nonfinancial assets
that arise from the issuance of ASU Update
2014-09,Revenue from Contracts with
Customers. The comment period ended August
5, 2016.
- Exposure Draft - Technical
Corrections and Improvements to Update No.
2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with
Customers - issued May 18, 2016,
covers clarifications for various contract
and preproduction cost and other issues. The
comment period ended July 2, 2016.
- Exposure Draft -
Intangibles—Goodwill and Other: Simplifying
the Accounting for Goodwill Impairment
- issued May 12, 2016. In order “to simplify
the subsequent measurement of goodwill, the
Board proposes to remove Step 2 from the
current goodwill impairment test, which
includes determining the implied fair value
of goodwill and comparing it with the
carrying amount of that goodwill…Instead, an
entity would perform its annual, or any
interim, goodwill impairment test by
comparing the fair value of a reporting unit
with its carrying amount. An entity
generally would recognize an impairment
charge for the amount by which the carrying
amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair
value. However, that amount should not
exceed the carrying amount of goodwill
allocated to that reporting unit. An entity
would still have the option to perform the
qualitative assessment for a reporting unit
to determine if the quantitative impairment
test is necessary.” The comment period ended
July 11, 2016.
GASB
– Governmental Accounting Standards Board
(www.gasb.org)
- GASB Statement No. 82 –
Pension Issues, issued on April 11,
2016, provides “guidance addressing practice
issues raised by stakeholders during
implementation of the Board’s pension
accounting and financial reporting standards
for state and local governments.”. Effective
for periods beginning after June 15, 2016,
with earlier application permitted.
- Implementation Guide No.
2016-1, Implementation Guidance
Update–2016, issued March 24,
2016, “primarily addresses questions that
have been raised relative to the Board’s
recently issued standards on fair value and
tax abatement disclosures.” Effective
generally for periods beginning after June
15, 2016.
AICPA
– American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants (www.aicpa.org)
- AICPA and CIMA members
approve new joint association -
June 18, 2016. Carrying forward the
AICPA/CIMA joint venture known as the
Association of International Certified
Professional Accountants, the new
association will be “representing the entire
accounting profession, while preserving the
AICPA and CIMA membership bodies. The
organizations would integrate operations to
strengthen advocacy and have more agility in
responding to evolving member needs.”
- Accounting and Review
Services Committee (ARSC)
a. Exposure Draft – Amendment to Statement
on Standards for Accounting and Review
Services No. 21 Section 90, Review of
Financial Statements - issued July 6, 2016,
represents a technical correction. The
comment period ends September 2, 2016.
- Auditing Standards Board
(ASB)
a. Exposure Draft – The
Auditor's Consideration of an Entity's
Ability to Continue as a Going Concern -
issued July 8, 2016, to address the changes
instituted by FASB Accounting Standards
Update 2014-15, GASB Statement No. 56 and
IAASB International Standards on Auditing
570. The comment period ends September 5,
2016.
b. Exposure Draft – Auditor
Involvement With Exempt Offering Documents -
issued July 8, 2016, specifies “performance
requirements when the auditor is involved
with an exempt offering document. Exempt
offerings are defined as securities exempt
from registration under the Securities Act
of 1933, as amended, or franchise offerings
regulated by the FTC.” The comment period
ends October 13, 2016.
c. SSAE No. 18,
Attestation Standards: Clarification and
Recodification - issued April 5, 2016,
represents the final step in the ASB’s
objective to “address concerns over the
clarity, length, and complexity of its
standards,” by establishing “clarity
drafting conventions” and formats. The
attestation standards apply to examination,
review and agreed-upon procedure engagements
for other than historical financial
statements. The ASB also made an effort to
converge where possible with standards
issued by the International Auditing and
Assurance Standards Board. Effective for
reports dated on or after May 1, 2016.
- Peer Review Board
a. Exposure Draft – Modifying Peer Review
Report and Firm Representation Letter -
issued August 17, 2016, specifies
modifications to the peer review report to
specifically disclose that a single audit
was selected and reviewed in the scope of a
peer review, if applicable, and
modifications to the representation letter
to reflect the scope of engagements
performed including all must-select
engagements, such as single audits. The
comment period ends September 30, 2016.
PCAOB –
Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (www.pcaob.org)
- Staff Audit Practice Alert No. 14,
Improper Alteration of Audit Documentation,
released April 21, 2016, reports on observed
improprieties where audit work papers have been
changed after the fact to avoid assessment of
deficiencies during inspection. See the June
2016 Audit & Accounting Alert for a discussion
of this issue.
SASB –
Sustainability Accounting Standards
Board (http://www.sasb.org)
- Infrastructure Sector Provisional
Standards – issued March 30, 2016, to address
sustainability disclosure topics relevant for
companies in the following industries: 1)
Electric Utilities, 2) Engineering &
Construction Services, 3) Gas Utilities, 4) Home
Builders, 5) Real Estate Owners, Developers &
Investment Trusts, 6) Real Estate Services, 7)
Waste Management, and 8) Water Utilities.
- Engagement Guide for Asset Owners & Asset
Managers - issued July 19, 2016, “provides
industry-by-industry guidance on how asset
owners and asset managers can use the SASB
standards to inform and enhance their engagement
with` companies. SASB standards identify the
sustainability issues most likely to impact
financial performance of companies in 79
industries. For every industry, the Guide poses
questions investors can ask to facilitate a more
complete and robust assessment of long term
risks and value creation.”
COSO -
The Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(www.coso.org)
- Exposure Draft - Enterprise
Risk Management — Aligning Risk with Strategy
and Performance, issued June 14, 2016, as an
update to the original issued in 2004, “designed
to address the needs of all organizations to
improve their approach to managing new and
existing risks as a way to help create,
preserve, sustain and realize value.” The
comment period ends September 30, 2016.
|
|
Audit & Accounting Alert
is a publication of Integra International intended
to highlight emerging issues in the profession.
The goal is to give Integra members an awareness
of developments impacting the practice of Audit &
Accounting, enabling them to stay on the forefront
of industry trends.
|
Editor Gerald E. Herter •
HMWC CPAs & Business Advisors, 17501 E. 17th
Street, Suite 100, Tustin, CA 92780-7924
• Tel: 1 714 505-9000 • Fax: 1 714 505-9200 •
Email:
[email protected]
|
|
|
|