Since the Enron scandal in 2001 there has been more and more media coverage on the topic of accountancy. The focus shifted from the financial statements and the companies themselves to the audit firms. The big five, and later, after the ending of Arthur Andersen, the big four, are working under significantly more pressure today.
But the audit firms are not the only scapegoats in this matter. People also started to look more and more critically to the accounting standards. Questions have risen on the relevance of the Financial Standards. Also the fact that there are more than one set of Financial Standards is remarkable. Some things that are illegal in the United States of America can be legal in the European Union and the other way around.
Therefore the IASB and the FASB are trying to come together in a process which is called convergence. In their Norwalk Agreement of September 2002, and later on renewed by the FASB-IASB Memorandum of Understanding in February 2006, it is acknowledged that both sides will need to move some way towards each other to come to a unified set of worldwide applicable financial accounting regulations. This resulted in the FASB adopting some IASB regulations, and the IASB adopting some FASB regulations, and in some cases a joint project to issue new and identical regulations on specific matters (Veron, 2007).
This process of convergence has raised criticism and questions. As put in The Global Accounting Experiment by Nicholas Veron (2007):
“The forces driving the Global Accounting Experiment are insufficient to guarantee its continued success. It is bound to face major challenges in the next few years. Two main factors are behind this: the deficit of legitimacy and accountability of the IASB, and the difficulty of ensuring consistent implementation of IFRS across sectors and countries.”
The questions raised in the convergence process, for example, are: which type of regulations on a specific subject is “better”, or more relevant? Are the adopted standards by the FASB of equal importance compared to the adopted standards by the IASB? To put this differently, is there one-way convergence from one side to another? This is namely being criticized in Europe, where critics say that this convergence process is a process of one-way convergence from IFRS towards US GAAP (Camfferman, 2010).
These three questions mentioned above bring me to the main question which I am going to answer with this research: Are the worldwide applicable
Inhaltsverzeichnis
- Preface
- Chapter 1 History FASB / IASB
- The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)
- The FASB
- What is Convergence
- Adoption
- Convergence
- Harmonization
- Adaption
- Informed Deliberation
- The rise of the convereence process
- The rise of the converzence Process (196(Ys— 2001)
- The convergence process todav.
- Discussion on the convereence process
- Challenges and obstacles to overcome in the convergence process
- Arguments against convergence
- Arguments in favor of convergence
- Summarv
- Chapter 2 Standard Setting & Lobbying
- Standard Settinz
- Lobbying
- Chapter 3 Research Outline
- Chapter 4 Research
- General remarks and statistics
- IASB Exposure drafts
- Commenters
- IAS 39 Transition & Initial Recoznition of Financial Assets and Liabilities
- IAS 39 Cash Flow Hedee Accounting of Forecast Intraeroup Transactions
- IAS 39 Fair Value Option
- IAS 39 Financial Guarantee Contracts
- IFRS 8 Issuance of IFRS 8
- IAS 23 Borrowing Costs
- IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation & Disclosure
- IFRS 7 Investment in debt securities
- Conclusions reearding the research on IASB Exposure Drafts
- FASB Exposure drafts
- Commenters
- SFAS 166 Accountinz for Transfer of Financial Assets
- SFAS 165 Subsequent Events
- SFAS 160 Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements
- SFAS 159 The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
- SFAS 154 Accounting Changes and Error Corrections
- Conclusions reearding the research on FASB Exposure Drafts
- Chi Squared Test
- Chapter 5 Conclusion
- Literature
- Appendices
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte
Diese Forschungsarbeit befasst sich mit der Konvergenz zwischen US GAAP und IFRS und untersucht, welcher Standardsetzer die größeren Anpassungen in seinen Standards vornehmen muss. Die Arbeit analysiert, ob der konvertierte Standard eher europäisch oder amerikanisch geprägt ist.
- Die Geschichte der Standardsetzer FASB und IASB
- Der Konvergenzprozess zwischen US GAAP und IFRS
- Die Standardsetzungsprozesse von FASB und IASB
- Lobbying im Standardsetzungsprozess
- Die Analyse von Kommentaren zu Exposure Drafts von FASB und IASB
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel
Kapitel 1 beleuchtet die Geschichte der Standardsetzer FASB und IASB, ihre Entstehungsgeschichte und ihre jeweiligen Missionen. Es wird auch erläutert, was Konvergenz bedeutet und welche verschiedenen Stufen der Konvergenz existieren. Schließlich wird die Entwicklung des Konvergenzprozesses über die Zeit hinweg betrachtet, von den Anfängen bis hin zur heutigen Situation.
Kapitel 2 beschreibt den Standardsetzungsprozess von FASB und IASB. Es werden die einzelnen Schritte der Standardentwicklung erläutert und die Möglichkeiten des Lobbying im Standardsetzungsprozess beleuchtet. Das Kapitel untersucht, welche Formen des Lobbying es gibt und wann Lobbying am effektivsten ist.
Kapitel 3 erläutert die Forschungsmethodik. Es werden die Kriterien für die Auswahl der Exposure Drafts beschrieben, die in der Forschungsarbeit analysiert werden. Die Kapitel gehen auf die Einteilung der Kommentarschreiben in verschiedene Kategorien ein und erklären, wie die Kommentarschreiben bewertet werden.
Kapitel 4 präsentiert die Ergebnisse der Forschung. Die Kommentarschreiben zu den Exposure Drafts von FASB und IASB werden analysiert und die jeweiligen Tendenzen in den Kommentaren werden herausgearbeitet. Es werden die häufigsten Argumente und Vorbehalte der Kommentatoren zu den einzelnen Exposure Drafts dargestellt. Am Ende des Kapitels werden die Schlussfolgerungen aus der Forschungsarbeit zusammengefasst.
Kapitel 5 fasst die wichtigsten Erkenntnisse der Forschungsarbeit zusammen. Es wird beantwortet, ob der konvertierte Standard eher amerikanisch oder europäisch geprägt ist. Die Arbeit diskutiert die Grenzen der Forschungsarbeit und gibt Hinweise auf mögliche weitere Forschungsfragen.
Schlüsselwörter
Die Schlüsselwörter und Schwerpunktthemen des Textes umfassen die Konvergenz von US GAAP und IFRS, die Standardsetzungsprozesse von FASB und IASB, Lobbying im Standardsetzungsprozess, die Analyse von Kommentaren zu Exposure Drafts und die Auswirkungen der Konvergenz auf die weltweiten Rechnungslegungsstandards.
- Quote paper
- Dr Alfred Mully (Author), 2010, America vs. Europe. The battle between accounting standard setters, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/267065
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.