Title: Standards Overseer to Consider Proposal for Private Company Financial Reporting
Abstract: FASB's parent organization, the Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF), this month is expected discuss report recommending new standard-setting board establish exceptions and modifications U.S. GAAP for private companies. This discussion follows the culmination of year's worth of work by blue-ribbon panel, formed in December 2009 as part of joint effort by the AICPA, FAF and the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy, examine private company financial reporting. At the panel's final meeting in December 2010, more detailed outline of its recommendations began take shape. As proposed, new standard-setting board, under FAF's oversight, could have five members with private company financial reporting experience and an estimated $4 million annual budget. It could also face provision of five years or less allow an evaluation of the overall process, under the panel's draft plan. The panel planned deliver its final report FAF by Jan. 20, panel Chairman Rick Anderson said in December. The mission of the proposed new board would be to establish exceptions and modifications U.S. GAAP for private companies, while ensuring that such exceptions and modifications provide decision-useful information and other users of private company financial reports, not issue new standards, according the draft report. That mission is accomplished through comprehensive and independent process that encourages broad participation, objectively considers all stakeholder views, and is subject oversight by the FAF's Board of Trustees. Although this is consistent with FASB's mission, panel members emphasized the word lenders demonstrate how this board would be different from FASB, saying that constitute the largest user base of private company financial reports. As proposed, the new board would have the authority modify existing and future GAAP for private entities, and FASB would consider input from all entities during the standard-setting process. The panel envisions both boards working closely in their endeavors. There was some debate at the December meeting as whether FASB should be able identify potential exceptions and delayed implementation time for private companies--as it does currently--or whether that task should be left the new board alone. Many panel members expressed interest in having an advisory group or groups similar the Private Company Financial Reporting Committee express that constituency's opinions both FASB and the new board. All panel members supported sunset after which the new processes that are adopted could be revisited. The staff's initial suggestion was five years, but many members favored shorter time--some suggested three years--to encourage faster progress. One of the largest remaining unanswered questions is how the new board would be funded. Panel members agreed that revenue from FAF publications could provide part, but not all, of the funding. They reasoned that there are companies and firms that would be willing subsidize the process, but did not decide how secure the funding. Regardless of what the panel, and ultimately FAE recommends, the staff did not recommend returning system where standard-setting bodies would have rely on year-to-year voluntary contributions, due potential independence issues that could arise. Anderson emphasized that FAF must still consider the panel's recommendations and that whatever the foundation decides will be exposed for public comment. A comment period plus the time it takes create new board and the accompanying infrastructure and policies could take a good portion of 2011, according panel staff. One of the top transitional recommendations is fill one or both of the two FASB board positions created in August with individuals who have primarily private company experience. …
Publication Year: 2011
Publication Date: 2011-02-01
Language: en
Type: article
Access and Citation
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot