Expected-loss-based Accounting for Impairment of Financial Instruments: The FASB and IASB Proposals 2009–2016

The financial and banking crisis of the late 2000s prompted claims that the incurred-loss method for the recognition of credit losses had caused undesirable delay in the recognition of credit-loss impairment. In the wake of the crisis, the US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) worked towards the development of expected-loss-based methods of accounting for credit-loss impairment. Their work included an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to develop a converged FASB/IASB standard on credit-loss impairment. The FASB and IASB eventually developed their own separate expected-loss models to be included, respectively, in a 2016 FASB standard and in the IASB’s 2014 final version of IFRS 9 Financial Instruments. The failure to achieve convergence on an issue of such high profile and materiality has generated some controversy, and it is claimed that it will impose significant costs on the preparers and users of the financial statements of banks. This paper examines the various sets of expected-loss-based proposals issued separately or jointly since 2009 by the FASB and the IASB. It describes and compares key features of the different approaches eventually developed by the two standard setters, referring to issues that arose in arriving at practically workable solutions and to issues that may have impeded FASB/IASB convergence. It also provides information indicative of the possible effect of differences between the two approaches.     

FASB与IASB联合趋同框架(初步意见)的评介

首先,本文对FASB与IASB于2006年7月6日发布的联合趋同框架(关于目标和信息质量特征的初步意见)的制定背景、主要内容(包括财务报告的目标和信息质量特征的相关内容)进行了简要的介绍和评价,着重强调了联合框架与FASB概念框架和IASB概念框架的区别。其次,本文对联合框架提出了两点整体性看法:一是是否应该由IASB和FASB联合制定联合框架;二是是否应该将受托责任观隶属于决策有用性。最后,本文分析了联合趋同框架对我国新会计准则《基本准则》的影响。     

试评IASB/FASB联合概念框架的某些改进——截至2008年10月16日的进展

本文试图讨论IASB与FASB联合概念框架项目若干改进(截至2008年10月16日的进展)。现在,两个理事会已经颁发了三份讨论稿(初步观点),一是关于《财务报告的目标与财务报告对决策有用的信息质量特征》,二是关于《报告主体》,三是关于《财务报表列报》。还有《财务报告目标与决策有用信息质量特征》的一份征求意见稿(ED),此外还有一些两个理事会工作人员关于财务报表要素如资产及其定义、计量的基础等新闻公告。虽然上述文献是不完整且是初步的,但我们已能发现若干新的观点,例如在两个基本的质量特征中,"可靠性"已被"如实反映"所取代,理事会的工作人员还给出新的资产定义,而且在现有的概念框架中,第一次提出有关《报告主体》的讨论稿(初步观点)。本文主要介绍上述文稿的基本观点,同时也试图提出若干意见。     

Does the Control-based Approach to Consolidated Statements Better Reflect Market Value than the Ownership-based Approach?

Motivated by the recent Discussion Paper (DP) issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) on how to define reporting entities, this study investigates the value relevance of consolidated statements under the ownership-based approach of U.S. Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51 (ARB 51) and the control-based approach of International Accounting Standard No. 27 (IAS 27). The results show that consolidated financial statements based on a broader definition of control provide more useful accounting information than those based only on majority-ownership control. We also address one concern raised in the DP, namely, whether a reporting entity should use the common control model to include entities that are under common control of an individual investor or family. The results suggest that accounting standard boards should include the common control model in defining the group reporting entity for firms with complex ownership structures.     

Accounting for government guarantees: perspectives on fiscal transparency from four modes of accounting

Government guarantees are increasingly important as a policy instrument in public infrastructure investment and to assist the banking and financial sectors following the global financial crisis. This paper analyses how different modes of accounting characterize such guarantees in the contexts of public sector financial reporting, statistical accounting, budgeting and long-term fiscal projections. Guarantees are difficult to specify for accounting treatment and consistent conceptualization of liabilities. These difficulties make it attractive for governments to treat obligations as off-budget and off-balance sheet contingent liabilities, rather than recognize them in financial statements and statistical accounts. Miller and Power’s territorializing, mediating, adjudicating and subjectivizing roles of accounting are utilized to analyse the reporting of UK government guarantees. Provisioning for guarantees is complex in financial reporting statements and often absent in national accounts, a deficiency which Eurostat has attempted to address by devising the concept of standardized guarantees and by securing more disclosure of contingent liabilities. There is potential for future research especially where there is greater mediation between the four modes of government accounting.     

Fair value accounting and the present value fallacy: The need for an alternative conceptual framework

The major functions of company accounting identified by the IASB and the FASB are (1) reporting on ‘the custody and safekeeping’ of the company's resources and (2) reporting on ‘their efficient and profitable use’. The joint IASB/FASB project for improving the conceptual framework for financial reporting is directed towards better performance of both functions within the conventional ‘accrual’ system of accounting through the use of ‘fair value’. Although the disclosure of fair values is a development to be welcomed, the requirement that changes in fair value should be reported as ‘gains’ or ‘losses’ appears to rely on the ‘Hicksian’ concept of income as a theoretical ideal.The object of the present paper is to establish that this concept is fundamentally flawed by what may be called the ‘present value fallacy’. Even in an economic utopia of perfectly competitive markets (with no discrepancies between objective market values and subjective present values), the concept of income or profit as value growth can be seriously misleading.If the prevailing Hicksian conceptual framework is discarded in favour of an alternative based on Fisher's theory of income, the two major, but incompatible, functions of financial reporting can be carried out independently and without compromise. The conventional ‘hybrid’ system of accrual accounting, in which backward-looking measures of volume and forward-looking measures of value are mixed together, would be replaced by a ‘segregated’ system in which they are kept strictly apart. A logical extension of Fisher's theory suggests the disclosure by agent/managers of the return on investment that they are planning to deliver to their principal/owners. This type of ‘decision-useful information’ is vital for the efficient operation of capital markets and for removing the accounting incentive to short-termism.     

Fair Value and the IASB/FASB Conceptual Framework Project: An Alternative View

This paper analyses various controversial issues arising from the current project of the IASB and FASB to develop a joint conceptual framework for financial reporting standards. It discusses their possible implications for measurement and, in particular, for the use of fair value as the preferred measurement basis. Two competing world views are identified as underlying the debate: a Fair Value View, implicit in the IASB's public pronouncements, and an Alternative View implicit in publicly expressed criticisms of the IASB's pronouncements. The Fair Value View assumes that markets are relatively perfect and complete and that, in such a setting, financial reports should meet the needs of passive investors and creditors by reporting fair values derived from current market prices. The Alternative View assumes that markets are relatively imperfect and incomplete and that, in such a market setting, financial reports should also meet the monitoring requirements of current shareholders (stewardship) by reporting past transactions and events using entity-specific measurements that reflect the opportunities actually available to the reporting entity. The different implications of the two views are illustrated by reference to specific issues in recent accounting standards. Finally, the theoretical support for the two views is discussed. It is concluded that, in a realistic market setting, the search for a universal measurement method may be fruitless and a more appropriate approach to the measurement problem might be to define a clear measurement objective and to select the measurement method that best meets that objective in the particular circumstances that exist in relation to each item in the accounts. An example of such an approach is deprival value, which is not, at present, under consideration by the IASB.     

Disclosure of contingent legal liabilities

There has long been user dissatisfaction with firm’s disclosure of contingent legal liabilities, and the FASB, IASB, and SEC have all considered compliance issues and standard amendments on this topic in recent years. This study uses a sample of employment discrimination cases to provide evidence on the extent to which current contingent legal liability disclosures provide useful contingency evaluations. Consistent with legal concerns influencing reporting decisions, I find that current disclosure practices provide limited quantitative detail regarding the magnitude of the expected loss. However, the text of the disclosures does provide qualitative indicators of the probability of loss. I find evidence that statements about the inestimable nature of the loss and statements about the firm’s willingness to consider a settlement are related to higher probabilities of loss and higher loss amounts. I also find evidence that statements regarding an existing accrual for losses and warnings about materiality reflect a higher likelihood of a nontrivial loss. These results emphasize firms’ strong resistance to quantitative disclosures of legal contingencies but suggest that existing SFAS 5 disclosures do contain qualitative information useful for evaluating the loss contingency.     

An examination of the perceptions of auditors and chief financial officers regarding principles versus rules based accounting standards

The debate over the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by United States issuers, or its convergence with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) has been going on for several years now. However, as of this writing, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has still not taken a definitive position on the issue. This is in part due to issues involving the cost of adoption, independence concerns relating to the IFRS promulgation body, the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), and the debate over which type of accounting standards is superior for financial reporting: IFRS, which are said to be “principles-based,” or U.S. GAAP, which are said to be “rules-based.” In this paper we examined the views of two stakeholders in the U.S. financial reporting system, auditors in large public accounting firms and Chief Financial Officers in the Fortune 1000. We elicited their perceptions involving ten situations where specific rules are incorporated in U.S. GAAP. We asked if the elimination of the specific rule would be likely to better achieve the “qualitative characteristics of useful financial information” as defined by the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting adopted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) in 2010 (FASB 2010) and the similar document adopted by the IASB at the same time (IASB 2010). We found that in eight of the ten situations both groups preferred the rules-based accounting regime (the current U.S. GAAP rules) over a principles-based approach.     

如何评价美国FASB的财务会计概念框架?

总体上来看, 美国财务会计准则委员会的财务会计概念框架的内容是详细、充实和严谨的, 基本上能自成一个完整的体系并符合佩顿和利特尔顿提出的连贯、协调、内在一致的理论体系的要求。本文肯定FASBCon cepts具有许多独创性, 值得借鉴学习。例如, 第 1号概念公告提出用财务报告代替财务报表, 发展了财务会计;第 5号概念公告提出四项确认的基本标准等等。但FASBConcepts仍有弱点和不足之处。因此, 本文提出若干建议, 试图说明它的不足和如何加以改进。     

Gaps in the IFRS Conceptual Framework

Abstract

The stated purpose of the IFRS Conceptual Framework is to assist the IASB to develop Standards that are based on consistent concepts, and also to assist preparers to develop consistent accounting policies when Standards either do not apply or allow a choice of accounting policy. Yet, the Framework actually does surprisingly little to help the IASB (or preparers) determine which assets, liabilities, income and expenses should be recognised, and how they should be measured. The Framework’s focus on assets and liabilities implies that the accounting can, and should, be determined from the balance sheet. Yet, many current financial reporting requirements focus initially on the income statement, and so they are not so much derived from the Framework as instead in need of being reconciled back to it. At its heart, the problem here is that, while the Framework states that accrual accounting provides a better basis for assessing past and future performance than cash-based information, it does not explain why. To do so would require a conceptualisation of how entities’ business models are employed to create value, and of the strengths and limitations of accounting data in enhancing investors’ understanding of that value-creation. The lack of explanation of the purpose and informational objectives of accruals, how they relate to business models and how they cause the income statement and the balance sheet to interact are gaps in the Framework. Filling those gaps would provide a more robust, and natural, way for the IASB to develop recognition and measurement requirements in its Standards.     

Revisiting the Concepts: Time to Challenge the Asset-Liability View

The IASB and the FASB are in a joint project to update, complete and converge their conceptual frameworks. The two standard-setters have not identified the merits of the asset-liability view as a cross-cutting issue. This paper suggests that the relationship between the objective of financial reporting and the asset-liability view is not substantiated, and that there is little evidence that the frameworks and the asset and liability definitions have been useful in establishing objective recognition criteria. Hence, there are reasons for the FASB and the IASB to challenge the asset-liability view.     

The information compliance indexes. The illustrative case of income taxes

The adoption of IASB’s standards has represented, in the European Union, an important effort of harmonization towards the financial reporting comprehensiveness, reliability, relevance and comparability. This paper seeks to highlight the importance of Information Compliance Indexes (ICI), based on the accounting standards, as a proxy for reporting quality awareness. This approach is evidenced through an illustrative example about disclosures on deferred taxes, as required by IAS 12. This standard prescribes the accounting treatment for current taxes, deferred assets and liabilities. These issues are usually perceived by stakeholders as indicators of companies’ continuity and potential future returns. Based on non-financial listed companies of Euronext Lisbon regulated market, with reference to the end of fiscal years 2008 and 2012, an information compliance index was performed, based on that accounting standard. Then, this index was regressed with a set of performance and control indicators. Evidences have provided several statistical significant insights, which corroborate the findings that information compliance and disclosure levels depend from several performance and control indicators.     

Why is there inconsistency in accounting for liabilities in IFRS? An analysis of recognition,measurement, estimation and conservatism

We report that International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are inconsistent with respect to the recognition and measurement of liabilities, both in the conceptual framework for financial reporting and in accounting standards themselves. We demonstrate that this arises in part because the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) does not make a conceptual distinction between the process of measurement, which requires a currently observable measurement attribute, and the process of estimation, which is inherently subjective. The IASB employs only the logic and language of measurement, while actually requiring entities to report both measurements and estimates in financial statements. Our contribution is to identify and interpret this conceptual conflict, to demonstrate that this has particular relevance to accounting for liabilities, and to draw implications for accounting research and policy with respect to recognition, measurement and conservatism.     

Is Financial Reporting Still Useful? Australian Evidence

There has been recent and growing criticism of the usefulness of financial reporting for investors, particularly the annual financial statements. In response, the IASB is pursuing several projects aimed at improving the relevance of financial information. To inform the IASB’s work, we investigate, using a mixed-method approach, the extent and nature of the use of annual financial statements by equity investors. We examine the relevance of financial reporting for equity valuation in Australia across time. We find that financial reporting (specifically, reported net income, shareholders’ equity, and operating cash flows) remains relevant for investment decisions. We further support this finding with evidence from field interviews that provide insight into how and why financial statements are used by equity investors. The field evidence also demonstrates that no one financial statement dominates in investor decision making. Given the increasing availability of more timely, forward-looking information from alternative sources, we examine the relevance of non-GAAP financial information and other non-financial information for investor decision making. We find that non-GAAP financial information (as proxied by EBIT and EBITDA) is more value relevant than statutory measures. We further find a broad range of non-financial information is utilized by investors in making investment decisions both as a ‘screen’ and for valuation purposes. Our findings inform regulators and other stakeholders as we provide evidence of the continuing relevance of financial statements and the complementary role of non-GAAP financial and other information. Our evidence provides a rebuttal to the recent criticism.     

合并会计报表若干理论问题探讨

作为财务会计三大难题之一 ,合并会计报表理论最近几年经历了重大变化。继美国财务会计准则委员会(FASB) 1995年颁布《合并财务报表———政策与程序》征求意见稿拟以主体观念取代母公司观念之后 ,其他发达国家的会计准则制定机构也纷纷对合并报表的编制观念进行反思。我国关于合并报表的规定也面临着修订和完善。基于此 ,本文拟从理论渊源、合并理念两个角度 ,论述合并报表的三种基本观念———所有者观、主体观、母公司观 ,并进行必要的评述。以此为基础 ,本文还将对我国合并会计报表的理论选择进行探讨。     

Derivative accounting and financial reporting quality: A review of the literature

The financial crisis of 2008 increased the call for standard setters and financial regulators to review the effectiveness of derivative regulation in improving financial reporting quality. Prior literature defines financial reporting quality as the extent to which financial statements provide information that is useful to investors and creditors in their investment decisions (Schipper, 2003; Schipper & Vincent, 2003). This review summarizes the empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of derivative regulation in achieving its stated objective. Extant literature shows that although derivative regulations have improved information provided to investors, there is still room for improvement. Recommendations from this stream of literature suggest that the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) require managers to provide more complete, transparent, and forward-looking disclosures surrounding their derivative positions (Campbell, 2015; Franco-Wong, 2000). This review may be useful to standard setters, practitioners, and accounting academics by providing a synthesis of extant academic literature on the effectiveness of current derivative regulation. As the FASB and International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) continue to expand derivative accounting rules, this review may also be useful in identifying areas for future academic research.     

Advances in the Financial Reporting of Mexican Banks: An Evaluation of Post-Devaluation Reporting Practices

In 1994, Mexico underwent a severe peso devaluation. Thereafter, the country’s financial system experienced severe financial stress as loan defaults forced the government to undertake a program to rescue the country’s banks and obtain international financial assistance. One of the measures involved the reformulation of the financial reporting principles used by the country’s banks. The standards, which are contained in the Mexican National Banking and Securities Commission’s Circular 1343 (1997), were designed to provide Mexican banks with a comprehensive set of financial reporting standards and to bring the financial reporting practices of Mexican financial institutions closer to international standards. However, while the standards contain several improvements in the fundamental aspects of financial reporting for Mexican banks, they lack some important measurement and disclosure provisions contained in international standards. Given this tendency, this paper examines the post-devaluation (1998) financial reporting practices of Mexican banks. Emphasis is placed on comparing the reporting practices contained in the banks’ 1998 financial statements with the requirements of Circular 1343, the standards published by the Mexican Institute of Public Accountants (MIPA), International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) standards, and Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rules.     

资产弃置义务会计:理论诠释与准则展望

结合FASB对环境会计相关规范的发展历程,重点对美国在资产弃置义务会计准则制定、环境负债的确认、计量及弃置成本资本化的相关问题进行研究,进而考察了FASB和IASB在资产弃置义务会计规范上的差异根源,以期把握环境财务会计发展的内在规律。在上述基础上,分析我国资产弃置义务会计所面临的经济法律环境与市场需求,提出了我国资产弃置义务会计规范的改进建议。