10 May 2011
CRITICS believe a number of European governments are having second thoughts about the adoption of full International Financial Reporting Standards, and the doubts are evidenced by moves to establish a parallel accounting system.
This is according to experts close to accounting standards, who said the evidence is mounting that a number of governments believe that switching to the global guidelines may have been too hasty.
Further reading
A bill requiring companies to prepare accounts in both IFRS and UK GAAP is soon to be presented in the House of Commons; if it passes, it will mean some financial institutions are obliged to report in parallel, potentially indicating unease with IFRS.
Italy recently passed a ruling that all new IFRS standards have to be endorsed by the Ministry of Justice before being applied to company accounts.
By law, group accounts - prepared by corporates with multiple sub-divisions - must be prepared under IFRS, but the company accounts of individual entities may be reported according to Italian GAAP.
Officials said the endorsement is designed "to verify the compatibility of each newly published IFRS with the Italian accounting principles". Government interest stems from the fact that tax and dividend issues - which are of most interest to shareholders - apply to company rather than group accounts, and companies are subject to greater legal control.
France's standard setter, the ANC, has proposed a duel reporting system, in which listed companies prepare accounts under IFRS, while non-public entities stick to the national GAAP. This is in contrast to the UK's Accounting Standards Board, which recently ran a consultation on the transfer of SMEs to global standards.
One expert told Accountancy Age that these cases show the international model "is beginning to fall apart", arguing that post-crisis, the cracks in IFRS are starting to appear.
However, Kathryn Cearns, technical accountant at Herbert Smith, disagrees. Speaking of Italy's decision, she said: "There is nothing in it - all countries do it differently". Reserving the right to endorse new standards means that if one is presented that might cause a dividend block or skew the tax system, the ministry could pre-emptively decline it; "the government has the option to say no, but it's bureaucracy rather than anything else."
Critics say the global standards are out of step with national laws. Stella Fearnley, accounting professor at Bournemouth University, said the compatibility problems between IFRS and the Companies Act "have not been recognised quite as carefully as they should have been".
Further details on the bill forcing some UK companies to report in parallel are expected later this week.
You may also like
Careers
Search for jobs
Click to search our database of all the latest accountancy roles
Create a profile
Click to set up your profile and let the best recruiters find you
Jobs by email
Sign up to receive regular updates with the latest roles suitable for you
Briefings
By looking at the reasons supplier statements became unfashionable, and the reasons why it is different today, this paper delves into the many benefits that can be obtained by automating the process.
Having a real and true view of your organisation’s current financial position, and having the right systems and processes in place, will ensure that you can make strong choices and are ready to capitalise on opportunities
Visitor comments Add your comment
Non-story
The European Commission from time-to-time prepares a table showing where each EU member state is in terms of implementation of IFRS for non-IFRS regulation companies (ie unlisted companies and subsidiaries of listed companies) and that table shows that member states have taken up a range of positions on such companies. Italy, for example, initially went much further than the UK and required IFRS for subsidiaries of listed companies, but is now moving to a position that is closer to other parts of the EU. Countries whose tax systems are closely aligned with the accounts have also typically not taken the final step towards IFRS. The activity you report is wholly in line with all of this and does not, in my view, deserve the headline it has been given.
Posted by: Tam McCoy, 10 May 2011 | 07:41
Who is going to say it first!
IFRS in their current form is the equivalent of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. It sounds like it should be easier to understand than the "Special" theory (AKA local GAAP) but you need to be on another planet to make sense of it. Just look at how the operating lease for a building is supposed to be accounted for under IFRS - utter b*****ks.
IFRS makes financial statements only understandable by experienced, highly trained and elitist people. They are not understood by general users of accounts, bankers, investment mangers, journalists, politicians and, more importantly, business people.
Get real. Unless they are easily understood, easily applied and accepted by tax authorities and all other regulators and stakeholders they are dead in the water.
Posted by: Beastoe, 10 May 2011 | 18:42