How International Financial Reporting Standards Affect The Quality Of Canadian Accounting Information

Globalization has been changing the world. It has interconnected people, nations, and even businesses. Today´s business can share information to investors around the world thanks to the intelligent software of the actual society. Being more specific, the way in which investors and users evaluate businesses performance is through the information contemplated in their financial statements. These financial statements illustrate the current assets, liabilities, and stockholder equity a company has in order to help users take economic decisions. However, not all the companies are regulated to provide the same structuralized information around the world. Each country possesses its own accounting standard that regulates the preparation of financial statements of a company. In that way, companies’ information might differ between countries making the comparability between financial statements difficult to be implemented by users in order to assess the performance of foreign businesses. In view of the need of a globally accepted accounting standard that promotes uniform standards for worldwide financial reporting, the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC), which then becomes replaced by the International Accounting Standard Board in 2001, was created (Cathey and Schroeder 130). The IASB issues International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) that stands as the set of accounting standards that prepare and present the financial

This research project will inform the reader of the difference between the United States accounting standards and International accounting standards. The United States uses the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) to issue financial reporting procedures. The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). There are proposals for the United States to adopt the International standards. Financial reporting procedures are debated about the United States using the Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) or following the global procedures. This

Since 2002, Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB) have been working toward “convergence” of US General Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). They have made significant progress in efforts to converge critical accounting standards such as those dealing with revenue recognition, financial instruments and leases. Once these projects are complete, the "era" of convergence will be at an end. Nevertheless, the benefits for investors of eventually getting to consistently applied, high-quality, globally accepted accounting

The convergence of two accounting systems, the US GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards, is not a new concept. For many years, the primordial idea of convergence started in the late 1950’s in response to post World War II economic integration and related increases in cross-border capital flows. Initially, the term used was “Harmonization until the early 1990’s the politically correct term is “Convergence”.

Intangible Assets were part of the 2006 “memorandum of understanding” between FASB and IASB. Eventually, intangibles assets were cut from the list of changes to be made. In future years the problems will have to be addressed. As far as research and development costs, IAS 38 will likely be fully adopted. One major problem still being faced is the revaluation of intangible assets. Under GAAP, revaluation is strictly prohibited. Under IFRs, revaluation

Why do we study comparative accounting? Countries around the world have different aspects such as taxation, legal systems, culture and colonial influence that differ the way accounting is reported. Ultimately the need for fair presentation is the final objective to comparative accounting. Thousands of years ago when accounting was first practiced, each country practiced financial reporting according to the power and strengths in their country, regardless of how accounting was reported in neighboring countries. Nowadays, because the world is becoming more globalized and harmonized, standard-setters feel the need to report their accounting in a uniform way. The International Accounting Standards Board [IASB] was formed as a non-for-profit

IFRS 13 determines the extent to which subjectivity can be applied in the measurement of assets using fair value. The standard states the guidelines that should be followed in determining the value of the long-term assets in an active market (Gary John Previts, 2011).

In 2008, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a road map for the United States (US) to implement International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) that would eventually lead to the dissolution of US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US GAAP) (Cox 2008). US GAAP is rules based system of accounting that contains over 25,000 detailed pages of guidance, whereas IFRS is a principles based system of accounting that contains 2,500 pages of guidance. IFRS allows accountants to exercise professional judgment when making many decisions. This paper will compare and contrast US GAAP with IFRS on Intermediate Accounting Topics.

The joint standards board analyzed IAS 18, Revenue, and IAS 11, construction contracts. Trying to go through financial statements that do not use the same standard may be time consuming for auditors, so IASB and FASB deciding to combine those standards and redefine how to record revenue under a new joint standard may be the better option. In 2009 the IASB announced the decision to issue a joint standard with the FASB on revenue recognition. For the past five years, the IASB and the FASB periodically announced updates to the standard previously issued. The businesses and industries that use this revenue recognition standard should constantly watch for updates to existing standards, along with issuance of additional conjoint standards by the FASB and IASB. After thoroughly evaluating existing differences between GAAP and IFRS, recommendations for future joint standards will be discussed.

Single sets of accounting reports incentivise companies to lower reported profits as high profits attracts higher tax . This leads to conservative accounting values and understatement, lowering comparability and quality of annual reports. Thus, BHP Billiton, Suncor and Statoil’s annual reports provide better quality by separating accounting profit and taxable income

For nearly half a century, a movement has been underway to establish a high-quality, comprehensive set of international accounting standards, with the goal of facilitating international trade and investment. In the global capital market, differences in the rules of accounting for the purposes of recognition, measurement, and reporting of financial results have impaired the smooth transfer of information across borders. Given that it accounts for nearly a third of the global market, there is considerable pressure for the United States to conform to the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), as promulgated by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). While moving to a single set of accounting standards could create

International comparability of financial statements attracts capital from foreign investors and reduces the barriers to cross-border capital flows. When international accounting standard replace domestic accounting standard, corporate discourse is reduced. This enables investors to monitor managerial performance better because information asymmetry is reduced. IFRS adoption made it easier for companies in U.K to access the capital markets (Lee, 2008).

With the number of countries that have switched to the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) for their financial reporting, as well as the continued efforts made between the IFRS and US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US GAAP), it is evident that international convergence is an overall appealing idea for global reporting. With that said, for decades now US GAAP has worked with IFRS to create a universal standard; and while progress has been made to diminish variances between the standards, there are still large, if not unattainable efforts ahead of us. The hype over a proposed uniform set of global accounting standards appears to be stunted by the lost efforts in the convergence project between the US GAAP and IFRS. As the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) moves forward with its standards setting, there must be a reevaluation of the goal for reporting standards and efforts with the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB).

In 2006, the FASB issued Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS 157), and in 2007 issued Statement No. 159. The objective of SFAS 157 is to increase the consistency, comparability and transparency of fair value measurements used in financial reporting by establishing “a single authoritative definition of fair value, a framework for measuring fair value, and fair value financial statement disclosure requirements”(http://www.iasplus.com/en/binary/usa/0808fairvalueupdate.pdf).

The purpose of this report is to research the principle based International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRs and its United States counterpart, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). I will analyze how they would affect the financial reporting for a corporation that is publicly traded and operates internationally. In the report, I will analyze three topics that contain reporting differences between United States GAAP and IAS/IFRS. Following the analysis, three recommendations regarding changes that will need to be made in order to adhere to the IFRS guideline will be provided.