This blog has moved to:

« IAS 24: Related Party Disclosures Are Too Transparent to Suit China | Main | The Anti-Fair Value Lobby Has a Point (Even if They Don't Know It) »

September 16, 2008



This is a GREAT and informative article that I've just accidentally come accross. I have worked in a foreign country (for 7 years) where IFRS is being required over the host country GAAP. My background in U.S. GAAP accounting goes back to 1970, and without any doubt in my mind, the U.S. DOES NOT NEED IFRS. As a manner of fact, that would destroy financial reporting in the U.S., and make a total joke out of the process of putting numbers together. Our legal and corporate governance systems would explode with controversities and indecision.


To make my comment more clearly understood as to why I'm so conclusive about not needing IFRS in the U.S.................

Can anyone possibly imagine defining transactions according to the essence or true meaning of the event, disregarding the legal status/position.

Or, getting your arms around 'fair value' of assets, while disregarding actual cost.

That can work well in undeveloped countries where laws and legalities of events are either non-existant/ignorned or in direct conflict with norms of any possible civil world GAAP.

We've spent decades in the U.S. creating/defining and adjudicating laws and corporate governance rules, however imperfect some may still be, why throw out the baby with the bath water ?


I'm an accounting major and I agree that the conversion to IFRS is a terrible idea.

Companies wouldn't have less flexibility under it such as no LIFO and no Conservatism.

The comments to this entry are closed.

This blog has moved to: