FASB Forges Ahead on Three New Frontiers
At its January 9, 2002 meeting, following a rash of well-publicized complaints about the slowness of the accounting standard-setting process, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) decided to forge ahead on three new frontiers. It tentatively agreed to:
1. Issue for public comment a prospectus for a major project to update the concepts and principles of revenue recognition.
2. Undertake a narrowly-defined project on disclosures about intangibles not recognized in financial statements.
3. Refine and prioritize a whole smorgasbord of initiatives designed to modernize accounting literature and address the issue of standards overload.
In a grueling session described by FASB Chairman Ed Jenkins as the "first full-day meeting in four and a half years," FASB Board members reviewed detailed proposals and alternatives for potential projects on all three frontiers.
Despite some initial reluctance to approve projects that were not as fully-researched or crisply-articulated as desired, the prevailing sentiment at the end of the day was one of realism and a need to move forward. As one Board member said in casting his vote on the intangibles project, "At this point, something is better than nothing."
Learn more about these projects and other potential initiatives that the FASB Board may be considering.
Do You Remember When?
An Historical Driven Ode to the FASB and the Woes of Public Accountancy
"Do you remember when we based our GAAP on Concepts Statements (SFAC)?
Where are the concepts in the House of GAAP?
Now our premier auditors excuse poor performance because of the "accounting rules"
Now our former AICPA Chair (thank goodness) can't tell if Enron was a bad audit (too bad). Shouldn't he of all people know better.
Remember when we had relevance and reliability; consistency and comparability; substance over form; conservatism; full and adequate disclosue; meaningfulness?
Where is the fairness in presented fairly?
In whose opinion anyway? We've always been consultants! Trusted Advisors?
Remember when the public interest was the public.
Where is the value in "value added"?
And I always thought pro forma was illegal. Well silly me.
Remember when we had lower of cost or market and not mark to market?
Remember when we had credibility?"
Thomas Goodfellow, CPA