This blog has moved to:

« Reforming the Market for Audit Services: Some Advice for the EC | Main | On the New Conceptual Framework - Part 2 »

October 27, 2010


Mark Goldstein

This article is interesting, but I strongly disagree with the arguments made in it. You argue that it is not in the best interest of the American public for the U.S. to adopt IFRS due to the SEC having a duty to the United States before anything else and the IASB having a duty to the overall public interest... beyond any national interest. However, one needs to consider that when the SEC. was established, the U.S. was not engaged in a strong global economy. The fact of the matter is that from an economic standpoint, the the interests of U.S. investors are very similar to the interests of investors worldwide, and it is becoming increasingly imperative that a global standard becomes available to communicate financial information. Furthermore, I believe it is time that the SEC revises its definition of public interest to consider the fact that the very nature of our economy has changed considerably since the 1930s.

Warren Miller

"Increasingly imperative," my foot. I can only conclude that Mr. Goldstein works for one of the Big Four accounting firms. THEY are the ones pushing so hard for this abrogation of U.S. sovereignty. It's all about fees for them. They couldn't care less about U.S. sovereignty or our standard of living. It's about lining their pockets.

The idea of "uniform international financial reporting standards" is the greatest hoax since "one size fits all." IASB's processes are opaque and covertly political. IASB's website trumpets that over 100 countries have adopted IFRS. What IASB DOESN'T say, however, is that few of those countries have adopted IFRS completely. They've picked out what they liked and adopted that.

So, on its face, IASB is lying. If that's in the U.S. public interest, well, Barack Obama is Ronald Reagan.

The comments to this entry are closed.

This blog has moved to: