Commentary: Has Australia (or Any Other Jurisdiction) ‘Adopted’ IFRS?1
نویسندگان
چکیده
A ngus Thomson of the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) states that: ‘Australia definitely adopts IFRSs’ (Thomson 2009, p. 153). This was in response to Nobes (2008, p. 283) who wrote that: ‘Australia has chosen not to “adopt” IFRS, but to converge its standards with IFRS’. The distinction has major legal and political aspects. It can affect preparers, auditors and users. This paper examines the meaning of ‘adoption of IFRS’ in the context of jurisdictions. Before turning to that, the term ‘IFRS adoption’ has also been used in the context of company choices. In the academic literature, in this context, the term has generally been used in a clear way: to mean full-scale voluntary use by a company of IFRS as issued by the IASB, before such use became compulsory in its jurisdiction (for example, Ashbaugh 2001; Ashbaugh and Pincus 2001; Barth et al. 2008; Leuz 2003; Radebaugh et al. 2006; Roberts et al. 2008). This entity-level meaning of ‘adoption’ is also that of the IASB’s own IFRS 1 First-time Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards. A starting point for discussing the approach of jurisdictions to IFRS is that the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has no authority of its own to impose accounting standards. This feature is shared with the generality of standard setters, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) of the United States (US). A set of standards (for example, IFRS) can be accepted into a jurisdiction by several different methods: adopting the standard setter’s process, rubber stamping each standard, endorsing them (with the possibility of some differences), fully converging national standards, partially doing so, or merely allowing use of the IASB’s standards. These methods will be examined. This debate about adopting the process was key at an earlier stage of international standardisation. In the 1990s, the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) put great efforts into trying to persuade the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) to endorse international standards by adopting the IASC’s process rather than by examining its standards one by one (Kirsch 2006, p. 293; Camfferman and Zeff 2007, pp. 323–4). This paper replies to a statement made in this journal that ‘Australia definitely adopts IFRSs’. We analyse and compare the several methods that jurisdictions can use to implement International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). These include adopting the International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB) process of setting standards, as well as various forms of standard-bystandard implementation. We conclude that the Australian method of implementation is different in major ways from those used in such countries as Israel and South Africa, which involve adopting the IASB’s process. By contrast, Australia follows a multi-step process of enrolling each new standard into a category still entitled ‘Australian Accounting Standards’. To refer to the Australian method as ‘adoption’ of IFRS might therefore mislead, even though Australian companies eventually comply with IFRS.
منابع مشابه
IFRS Developments in the USA and EU, and Some Implications for Australia
In the 1990s, the IASC was pointing towards the day when, after the endorsement of its core International Accounting Standards (IAS) by the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), the SEC would drop its Form 20-F reconciliation requirement for foreign registrants using IAS. In May 2000, IOSCO announced its endorsement, yet the SEC declined to act. Fortunately, in June 2000...
متن کاملMethods of implementations of IFRS: Proposition of a classification
The IFRS have been adopted by most countries. This adoption differs in terms of method of implementation from one country to another. In fact, according Zeef and Nobes (2010), the adoption of IFRS in the world by countries to listed companies can be classified in accordance to its level of compliance with the IFRS issued by the IASB into four methods: "due process", "standard by standard", "opt...
متن کاملMandatory Financial Reporting and Voluntary Disclosure: Evidence from Mandatory IFRS Adoption*
Using the mandatory adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as an exogenous improvement to mandatory financial reporting, we document evidence supporting a complementary effect between mandatory and voluntary disclosures. We find that firms in countries that adopted IFRS in 2005 experience an increase in both the likelihood and frequency of management earnings forecasts r...
متن کاملEmpirical Analysis of Retirement Pension and IFRS Adoption Effects on Accounting Information: Glance at IT Industry
This study reviews new pension accounting with K-IFRS and provides empirical changes in liability for retirement allowances with adoption of K-IFRS. It will help to understand the effect of pension accounting on individual firm's financial report and the importance of public announcement of actuarial assumptions. Firms that adopted K-IFRS had various changes in retirement liability compared to ...
متن کاملReview of Evidence between Corporate Governance and Mandatory IFRS Adoption from the Perspective of Agency Theory and Information Asymmetry
Prior studies illustrate the issues of agency theory stemmed from the separation between ownership and management. As such, information asymmetry between the agent and principal is the major reason why agent can take advantages from adverse selection and moral hazard, which is the obvious problem in recent accounting scandals. Boards of directors therefore have fiduciary duties to exercise effe...
متن کامل