The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Accounting Standards Board: Regulation Through Veto-Based Delegation

1994 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nahum D. Melumad ◽  
Toshiyuki Shibano
Keyword(s):  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board

Viewing the 1996 FAF Restructuring as Policy Making without a Formal Due Process

2002 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul B. W. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Sole Source ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Perceived Threat ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Public Accounting

In 1996, a major financial reporting controversy emerged, escalated, and was resolved without substantial exposure or a formal due process. Specifically, a committee of the Financial Executives Institute (FEI) sent a letter to the chair of the Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF) asserting that the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) “process is broken and in need of substantive repair.” When Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Arthur Levitt determined that neither FAF nor public accounting leaders were dealing with the FEI proposals to his satisfaction, he acted to defeat this perceived threat to FASB's independence, focusing on the composition of the FAF. In response, the FAF trustees resisted because they viewed his intervention as a threat to FASB's independence. When the trustees did not voluntarily change, Levitt proposed reconsidering Accounting Series Release No. 150, which designates FASB as the sole source of GAAP for SEC filings. Eventually, Levitt prevailed. This paper describes this intervention as a case of policy making without a formal due process and adds to the already weighty evidence that accounting standards are political.

A HISTORY OF POOLING OF INTERESTS ACCOUNTING FOR BUSINESS COMBINATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES

1991 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank R. Rayburn ◽  
Ollie S. Powers
Keyword(s):  
Accounting Standards ◽  
The United States ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Business Combinations ◽  
Accounting Principles ◽  
History Of ◽  
Business Combination ◽  
The Subject

This paper traces the development of pooling of interests accounting for business combinations from 1945 to 1991. The history of the pooling concept is reviewed chronologically with particular emphasis on the events of 1969–1970 that were related to the most recent pronouncement on the subject, Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 16. Early in its life (1974), the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) placed a project on its agenda to reconsider pooling of interests accounting. That project was removed from the FASB's agenda in 1981. APB Opinion No. 16 has gone essentially unchanged as it relates to the accounting for a business combination as a pooling of interests. Resolution of implementation issues has been left largely to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the accounting profession. The FASB has a project on its agenda on Consolidations and Related Matters that may impact pooling of interests accounting. There also is some pressure for the FASB to revisit accounting for business combinations.

Financial Disclosure and Toxic Products: Encouraging Wall Street to Anticipate Product Risk and Exercise Precaution

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-58
Author(s):  
Sanford Lewis ◽  
Margaret Byrne
Keyword(s):  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Financial Disclosure ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Wall Street ◽  
Financial Reports ◽  
Product Risk ◽  
Current Financial Crisis

Amidst discussion by policymakers about how regulators' failure to ensure disclosure of risks contributed to the current financial crisis, we assess how emerging product toxicity risks are addressed in companies' financial reports. Will corporations blindside investors with “the next asbestos?” Existing disclosures are found lacking in the specificity needed to forewarn of liabilities and reputational damage from the use of potentially harmful materials—from nanotechnologies, to asthmagens, to perfluorinated compounds. Improved standards could protect investors while also enhancing corporate incentives to use safer materials. Reforms by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Accounting Standards Board are recommended.

scholarly journals Materialidade aplicada a relatórios de sustentabilidade assegurados: uma abordagem crítica à luz da pesquisa contábil

2019 ◽  
pp. 50
Author(s):  
Estephanye Paganotti Da Cunha ◽  
Ivone Fiorin ◽  
Renato Loureiro Faller
Keyword(s):  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
International Accounting ◽  
International Accounting Standards ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Public Company ◽  
International Accounting Standards Board

Este ensaio teórico aborda lacunas quanto à pesquisa contábil ambiental e as limitações apresentadas por relatórios socioambientais. Indagam-se alguns pontos ainda não respondidos sobre sustentabilidade, como o fato de o assunto ser pouco pesquisado no Brasil. Isso posto, observa-se em foco o que é chamado na literatura de Ciência da Sustentabilidade, uma linha de conhecimento multidisciplinar que envolve diversas áreas de conhecimento, permitindo a experimentação e testes, em vez de apenas fazer uma seleção de ciência específica para encontrar a solução mais acertada. A materialidade contábil no âmbito da pesquisa ambiental, tendo em vista as óticas dos organismos mundiais, tais como, Financial Accounting Standards Board (Ffasb), Securities And Exchange Commission (Sec), International Accounting Standards Board (Iasb), Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), que, apesar de ter como ponto positivo ser flexível, apresenta, ao mesmo tempo, como ponto negativo, essa mesma flexibilidade, que permite aos relatórios ambientais maior subjetividade e baixa objetividade. A referida flexibilidade pode fazer com que a empresa demonstre o que foi considerado bom, omitindo o que a instituição considere ruim na sua visão. Sendo assim, questionamentos são levantados sobre o escopo da Ciência da Sustentabilidade, da efetividade dos relatórios socioambientais apresentados e da clareza das demonstrações socioambientais, mediante a presença, ou não, de dispositivos legais.

scholarly journals US GAAP en convergentie met IFRS. Een overzicht van ontwikkelingen sinds Enron en Norwalk.

2014 ◽  
Vol 88 (5) ◽  
pp. 166-175
Author(s):  
Ralph ter Hoeven
Keyword(s):  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
International Accounting ◽  
International Accounting Standards ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Us Gaap ◽  
International Accounting Standards Board

In dit artikel worden de ontwikkelingen binnen US GAAP beschreven sinds het Enron-schandaal en de Norwalk-overeenkomst tussen de Amerikaanse Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) en de International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). Deze twee gebeurtenissen, die beide rond 2002 plaatsvonden, hebben grote invloed gehad op de structuur en de inhoud van US GAAP. In dit artikel worden deze invloeden beschreven en geanalyseerd waarbij nadrukkelijk de resultaten van de door de IASB en FASB gezamenlijk opgestarte convergentieprojecten worden besproken. Tevens wordt aandacht besteed aan de toekomst van US GAAP zoals blijkt uit publicaties van de Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) mede in verband met het feit dat de Norwalk-overeenkomst zijn laatste fase ingaat. In dit laatste kader ga ik met name in op de vraag of en in hoeverre US GAAP vervangen zal worden door IFRS.

scholarly journals Changes To Accounting For Defined Benefit Postretirement Plans: Discussion And Illustration

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman H. Godwin ◽  
Arlette C. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Pension Benefit ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Font Size

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Requests that the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) address issues related to employers&rsquo; accounting for defined benefit postretirement plans have increased in recent years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Those requests have been made by users of financial statements and others, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) staff and representatives of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Constituents are interested in improved transparency and understandability.</span></span></p>

Standardizing oil and gas accounting in the US in the 1970s: Insights from the perspective of regulatory capture

2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinne Cortese
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Regulatory Process ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Regulatory Capture ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Method Choice ◽  
The Us ◽  
Oil And Gas Companies

Attempts by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) to standardize oil and gas accounting in the 1970s has been referred to as the “most politicised accounting argument ever” ( Van Riper, 1994 , p.56). Marking the only instance in which the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has declined to support the FASB’s standards, the failure of the FASB to limit accounting method choice has had lasting implications with divergent methods still practised by oil and gas companies today. This study presents a narrative of this development and specifically examines the events through the lens of regulatory capture theory to show that the industry was successful in capturing the regulatory process and securing its preferred outcome.

scholarly journals The Positive Outlook Of The Last In First Out Inventory Methods

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Peter Harris ◽  
Anthony Harris
Keyword(s):  
Transition Period ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Us Congress ◽  
Positive Outlook

Until very recently, the Last In First Out method (LIFO) was under severe scrutiny from the financial community, and its repeal as an acceptable accounting method seemed imminent. There were pressures from the Securities and Exchange Commission and the International Financial Accounting Standards Board to standardize accounting standards worldwide. In addition, there were political pressures imposed by US Congress to raise additional revenues.  Both groups strongly oppose LIFO. However, an SEC Report issued in July 2012 has greatly renewed the lifeline of LIFO indefinitely. In the unlikely case of its ultimate repeal, the author presents some tax opportunities available in this transition period.

scholarly journals Cryptocurrencies for the Payment of Products or Services: Risks, Accounting Practices and Regulations

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
David Allen ◽  
James Aselta ◽  
Russell Engel
Keyword(s):  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Accounting ◽  
Internal Revenue Service ◽  
Financial Accounting Standards Board ◽  
Internal Revenue ◽  
Blockchain Technology ◽  
History Of ◽  
Regulatory Bodies ◽  
The Subject

This paper examines the risks, accounting practices and disclosures of companies who accept cryptocurrency for the payment of products or services. We provide a brief history of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology that allows the reader to deepen their understanding of the subject before moving on to a discussion of how regulatory bodies such as the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) are treating the accounting for cryptocurrency transactions. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document