An Examination of Comment Letters Filed in the U.S. Financial Accounting Standard-Setting Process by Institutional Interest Groups

Abacus ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgia Saemann
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Accounting Standard ◽  
Setting Process ◽  
Comment Letters ◽  
Accounting Standard Setting ◽  
The U.S

The Determinants and Consequences of Big 4 Lobbying Positions on Proposed Financial Accounting Standards

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian R. Monsen
Keyword(s):  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Financial Statement ◽  
Accounting Standard ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Textual Features ◽  
Comment Letters ◽  
Accounting Standard Setting

Despite the considerable participation of Big 4 accounting firms in accounting standard setting, there is no systematic evidence on what factors shape Big 4 support or opposition toward proposed accounting standards or whether their lobbying positions materially influence standards. Using textual features of Big 4 comment letters on FASB proposals, I find that Big 4 firms' lobbying positions reflect profit motives through support for standards that will generate more fees or are supported by their clients. Big 4 lobbying support is concentrated in proposals exhibiting both characteristics, with some evidence suggesting client agreement dominates fee-generating incentives. Big 4 lobbying positions are significantly associated with standard setting outcomes, both in isolation and relative to other FASB constituents, including financial statement users. Although I primarily focus on Big 4 accounting firms, results indicate the tone of comment letters submitted by users is unassociated with the standard setting outcomes measured in this study.

Articulating accounting principles

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian A. Rutherford
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Accounting Standard ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Accounting Research ◽  
Accounting Principles ◽  
Accounting Theory ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
Accounting Standard Setting

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a soundly based epistemological underpinning for the kind of theorisation in which many classical financial accounting researchers engaged and thus to support a renewal of this programme. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on pragmatist philosophy and, in particular, on Jules Coleman’s theory of “explanation by embodiment”. The applicability of this theory to the world of financial reporting is discussed. Various theorists and schools within classical accounting theory are examined from the perspective of Coleman’s ideas, focusing particularly on A.C. Littleton’s Structure of Accounting Theory. Findings – The paper finds that classical accounting research works such as Structure of Accounting Theory can be interpreted as the search for Colemanian explanation by embodiment and that this provides them with a soundly based pragmatist underpinning for their theorisation. Research limitations/implications – This paper supports the resumption by academics, qua academics, of work to contribute to accounting standard-setting by offering argumentation that addresses accounting principles and methods directly, rather than only via the social scientific investigation of behaviour in the accounting arena. Practical implications – Such a resumption would contribute positively to future standard-setting. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the defence of classical financial accounting research from the charge of lacking theoretical rigour.

The Accounting Standard-Setting Due Process, Corporate Consensus, and FASB Responsiveness: Employers' Accounting for Pensions

1995 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 555-564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgia R. Saemann
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Accounting Standard ◽  
Accounting Standard Setting

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) uses a due process to ascertain the views of its constituents and to build consensus while setting standards based on a sound conceptual framework. This study examines the responsiveness of the FASB and its success in building consensus among corporations in the due process on Employers' Accounting for Pensions. The findings indicate that the FASB is influenced by the number of opposing comments filed by its corporate constituents. Further, there is evidence that consensus was built throughout the due process for the highly controversial standard.

scholarly journals Accounting For OPEBs: Does Better Accounting Serve The Public Interest?

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy A. Pearson ◽  
Scott I. Jerris ◽  
Richard Brooks
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Accounting Standard ◽  
Public Companies ◽  
The Public ◽  
Setting Process ◽  
Sfas 106 ◽  
Accounting Standard Setting

In 1992, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issues Employers Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pensions (SFAS 106). SFAS 106 requires public companies to account for postretirement benefits other than pensions (e.g., health care) on an accrual basis. While SFAS 106 is good accounting, it provides corporations with an excellent excuse to amend or terminate health care coverage for retirees. This paper discusses the economic and social consequences of SFAS 106 as well as the politics of the accounting standard setting process.

Political participation in global accounting standard-setting

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-381
Author(s):  
Toshitake Miyauch ◽  
Masatsugu Sanada
Keyword(s):  
Political Participation ◽  
Narrative Analysis ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Regional Disparity ◽  
Anglo Saxon ◽  
Accounting Standard ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Comment Letters ◽  
Accounting Standard Setting

Purpose This study aims to examine constituents’ political participation in the establishment of an Accounting Standards Advisory Forum (ASAF). Design/methodology/approach Based on a literature review, three hypotheses regarding political participation in global accounting standard-setting are constructed: regional disparity, professional dominance and financialization. These hypotheses are tested through a content and narrative analysis of the comment letters on the establishment of the ASAF. Findings Consistent with the regional-disparity hypothesis, neither Anglo–Saxon nor European Union countries were active advocates or positive supporters of ASAF’s establishment. However, no evidence supporting the professional and financialization hypotheses was found. Narrative analysis suggests a divergence of opinion among vested-interest groups in the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), emerging nations and other groups, rather than the traditional conflicts between Anglo–Saxon and European countries. This suggests the possibility of a future-destabilizing factor in global standard-setting. Originality/value By discussing the IASB’s organizational and strategic changes and the constituents’ responses, this study describes the IASB’s organizational dynamics: how various stakeholders react to each other. Although prior studies primarily focused on comment letters regarding the contents of an accounting standard or the standard itself, this study examines such letters considering the size and composition of, and membership in, the ASAF, an organization within the IFRS Foundation (IFRSF). Therefore, the study reflects constituents’ opinions regarding their participation in the IFRSF/IASB more directly.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document