The International Accounting Standards Board

As the responsibilities of the global harmonization of accounting standards IFRS and GAAP transfer to IASB, FASB’s influence is waning. Advantages of the convergence include high quality financial reporting, which lowers cost of capital for investors and the cost of borrowing for companies. However, there are disadvantages to be noted, such as the costs of introducing IFRS to current and potential accountants and the risk of reducing the uniformity of financial reports due to the lax rulings of IFRS, which promotes earnings management amongst companies. Although arguments regarding the convergence remain prevalent, the completion of IFRS and GAAP is inevitable. Come year 2015, accountants, investors, and companies alike will discover whether or not the pros outweighed the cons; or vice versa.

The U.S is moving toward IFRS (Forgeas, 2008). In the near future, all US company may need to report financial statements under IFRS. This makes the adaptation of IFRS unavoidable. Recently, some large multinational

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

Although the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) have a lot of similar guidelines and expectations, they also differ in many ways. The IFRS employs more of a “principles based” accounting standards whereas GAAP utilizes more of a “rules based” approach. Even though there are differences between terminology, revenue recognition, gains and/or losses, and statement presentation, both standards do follow the same conceptual guidelines. With the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) of 2002, the standards expected of foreign countries are significantly less than those that reside as publically

Standardized reporting across firms from different countries would facilitate cross-border investment and the integration of capital markets (Hail, Luzi, et al). According to Beke (2011), Standardization implies the “elimination of alternatives in accounting for representing economic transactions and other events” (Angeloni). In essence, similar events and transactions would be reported in a similar manner, and vice versa. Having more comparable reports allows firms to make better-informed investment choices due to a better understanding of competing firms, which can lead to cost savings. Moreover, firms that have more comparable reports can better contract with suppliers and firms in other countries, and these contracts are more likely to be fully specified and enforceable. Studies also show that the adoption of IFRS reporting should be associated with an increase in market liquidity, as well as a decline in firms’ cost of capital (Hail, Luzi, et al.).

The SEC has several aspects to consider when it comes to the adoption of IFRS in the United States. First, the SEC should consider the overall costs impact this will have on businesses. It is likely that it would cost billions of dollars in new reporting expenses for U.S corporations to implement IFRS. It would also require accounting firms to vastly change their education requirements. Second, the SEC’s main job is to protect investors from fraud on public exchanges. The commission must determine whether IFRS does a better job of protecting investors from unlawful activity.

Additionally, there will be a need for a global security force to apprehend offenders of the new standards. This could be a controversial problem in itself. The main issue, is to establish the standards first and get every public trading company to buy in on the idea of implementing the standards. Currently, many countries have agreed to adhere to the international standards. As more countries are adopting the IFRS, the U.S. has yet to agree to the standards. Even though the GAAP and IFRS resembles closely, there are still some issues to be worked out (Street, 2012). Eventually the U.S. will agree to the terms of the IFRS, once all the terms and conditions are in balance (Zeff,

This paper examined the relationship between U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and found that merging both accounting standards into one “worldwide” standard would be ideal for all investors. This paper analyzed GAAP and IFRS differences and similarities. A comparison and contrast of GAAP and IFRS was conducted. Discuss roadblocks to achieve “worldwide” accounting standards. GAAP and IFRS have to

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) are working together to eliminate a variety of difference between the United States generally accepted accounting procedures (U.S. GAAP or GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). This convergence project grew out of an agreement reached by the two boards in 2002 (Deloitte, 2004).

The IFRS are superseding GAAP as the official reporting structure of many countries and as of July 2014, 283 have adopted the IASB’s new rule book (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2014). The transition to IFRS has spawned a worldwide dialog of investors and analysts discussing the effects it will have on reporting and the implications this move carries into the future. This paper will review some financial reporting standards, the major distinctions between the U.S. GAAP and IFRS, and the competitive advantages and disadvantages of altering the U.S. reporting structure.

The Financial Accounting Standards Board has issued for public comment two Exposure Drafts related to its disclosure framework project. The first exposure draft proposes amendments to Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts - Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting, Chapter 3 – Qualitative Characteristics of Useful Financial Information. The purpose of this proposed amendment is to clarify the concept of “materiality”. FASB defines materiality as, information is material if omitting it or misstating it could influence decisions that users make on the basis of the financial information of a specific reporting entity. In other words, materiality is an entity-specific aspect of relevance based on the nature or magnitude or both of the items to which the information relates in the context of an individual entity’s financial report. Consequently, the Board cannot specify a uniform quantitative threshold for materiality or predetermine what could be material in a particular situation.

With complete notion and awareness of how each country has their set of rules, “the goal of IFRS is to provide a global framework for how public companies prepare and disclose their financial statements” (Rouse, 2011). This view is meant to provide general guidelines, as well as international comparisons through conventional and edifying means. To bring broader and vivid objectives, IFRS replaced IAS, the older standards, in order to bring a more comprehensive and simplified accounting procedures.

First, The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) issues The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) on U.S securities and exchange companies listed.

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are a set of accounting standards that are developed by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). This accounting standard is followed by approximately 130 countries as propagated by IASB. IASB is an independent accounting setting body that is based in London. It consist of 14 voters from multiple countries, including United States. Another accounting standard that is being followed is USGAAP that was promulgated by International Accounting Standard Committee (IASC). There has been a serious project going on for the convergence between IFRS and USGAAP from the very beginning of formulation of IFRS in 2001.

Thus allowing easier comparability between home-based operations and in international financial markets, (Jordan, 2013). Furthermore, Fujitsu has subsidiaries located globally that may require or permit the use of IFRS and will highly benefit from the use of one method of reporting the standards. In turn allowing improvements in efficiency of corporate decision-making and optimal allocation of the company’s scarce resources, (Hicks, 2012). Further, the adoption of IFRS will allow Fujitsu to gain global investment opportunities, where “institutional investors increase holdings in firms that have adopted the IFRS”, (Brown, 2010). Investors will be more willing to “provide financing with greater transparency amongst different firms’ financial statements”, in saying so, it will allow Fujitsu to increase the accumulation of foreign capital through improving the quality of financial reporting and allowing greater transparency when recording the financial performance of the corporation, (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, 2014). Hence reinforcing that multinational conglomerates are economically advantaged when using only 1 reporting standard, (Dumont, 2012). In addition the IFRS ensures to provide companies, such as Fujitsu with more “accurate, timely and comprehensive financial information” as it abides by national reporting standards (Jordan, 2013).