International Accounting Standards Board （IASB） and Financial Accounting Standards Board （FASB） Convergence Project： Where Are They Now？

The convergence project between the International Accounting Standards Board （IASB） and the Financial Accounting Standards Board （FASB） in the United States （US） was signed on September 18, 2002 in Norwalk, Connecticut in the US. The first is responsible for issuing International Financial Reporting Standards （IFRS） nowadays, which were created 40 years ago. More than one century ago, local regulations are used in the US. The boards differ in years of experience. With the signing of the agreement, both institutions are working to reduce the divergence of accounting. Although they have made a significant progress, it is appropriate to examine whether the difference in approaches to accounting will affect the achieved agreements. It is relevant to investigate whether the years leading the standards adopted in different countries will impact the final result. The date of completion of the project has been postponed and still has not indicated the date of termination. This research is an analysis of the importance of the convergence of accounting standards at a global level. The study presents statistics on the status of the adoption of international standards by country. The study shows a summary of the expressions made by the directors of both boards about the future of the project.

Evaluation of the Impact of International Accounting Standards Board （IASB） Framework Concepts on the Public Accounting Profession

Accounting profession has, in recent times, been regulated mainly by the private accounting standard setters mainly the International Accounting Standards Board （IASB）, which has taken a center stage and redefined the accounting information systems beyond the knowledge discernment of the average users and stakeholders. Public accounting profession＇s overreliance on the ever-changing IASB conceptual frameworks and their subsequent publications International Financial Reporting Standards （IFRS） standards has strongly compromised the ethics and objectivity of the profession, especially the accounting fundamental qualitative characteristics of the fair representation. Public accountants are, by ethics, required to issue an accurate, independent, and objective opinion of the financial state of the reporting entity. A review of various literatures from the IASB and the related bodies including independent auditors was employed during the evaluation process so as to minimize bias and evaluate objectively. The results revealed that currently, the IASB conceptual frameworks and IFRS contain inconsistent and opposing objectives including an inconclusive definition of elements and measurement basis mainly of profit and loss transactions and other comprehensive income, and hence the public accounting profession has been ethically challenged and compromised. Financial reporting is now premised on estimates, judgments, and models as opposed to a definitive measurement in accounting. A recommendation of further study on the IASB fundamental qualitative characteristics of decision usefulness should be pursued objectively.

Review of International Accounting Standards Board （IASB） Proposed New Conceptual Framework： Discussion Paper （DP/2013/1）

The International Accounting Standards Board （IASB） is one of the largest independent accounting standard setters whose publications, International Financial Reporting Standards （IFRSs）, have revolutionalized the accounting profession, investors, finance providers, and the entire accounting information stakeholder community. The conceptual frameworks are the theoretical accounting bases that are constituted by a set of principles that underlie as a bedrock foundation cornerstone for the development and updating of IFRSs. The existing conceptual frameworks were issued by IASB in 2010, after long years of protracted and wide consultation and joint project with the biggest American standard setter Financial Accounting Standards Board （FASB）. In year 2013, the IASB embarked on a solo project to update the conceptual framework and issued a discussion paper （DP/2013/1） to its users and stakeholder community for comments. The methodology used in this study of an extensive review of literature （secondary/primary） from the discussion paper, existing conceptual framework, and comment letters from investors, accounting, insurance, and international audit firms has been manipulated. The findings revealed that the existing conceptual framework has opposing objectives especially that of decision usefulness （future-oriented information） and concepts of ＂prudence and stewardship/accountability＂, which are deeply embedded within the framework as subsumed, but their prominence has been overshadowed and watered down by not identifying them as objectives. The finding also revealed that almost all public accounting and audit firms are advocating not only for the reinstatement of the ＂prudence and stewardship/accountability＂ but also for a clear definition of recognition, de-recognition, and measurement of statement of financial position elements （assets and liabilities） and also elements of the comprehensive income statement （revenues and expenses）, which have seriously compromised investors, public accounting profession, learning/teaching of a framework-based understanding, and the entire IFRS user stakeholder community. A recommendation for further studying the abandoned joint IASB/FASB project should be investigated in the best interest of international accounting standards convergence.

On FASB Standard Setting:The Role of Funding Structure and Voting Rule

This study develops and tests hypotheses about organizational characteristics of the Financial Accounting Standards Board(FASB)and captures the effects of some recent changes on the operations of the Board in standard setting.I establish a methodology to quantify the complex work of the FASB through factor analysis and condense various proxies into three meaningful performance metrics:thoroughness,timeliness,and consensus.These performance measures are used as dependent variables in a regression analysis to capture how the work of the FASB varies with respect to funding and voting changes.I find evidence that a change in FASB funding from private donations to mandatory accounting support fees is associated with an improvement in Board consensus but no significant change in thoroughness or timeliness.I also find the change in voting rules from supermajority to simple majority is associated with improvements in timeliness but a decline in thoroughness and consensus.Overall,the results suggest that the work of the FASB is multidimensional and that the improvement of one area may come at the cost of another.