Search results

This commissioned paper reviews literature outlining reasons for a perceived gap between academics and standard setters as policy makers. The aim of this paper is to emphasise how academics and standard setters can collaborate on accounting and audit research and assist standard setters to act in the public interest.

The approach is primarily a literature and document review of relevant issues, summarising New Zealand’s standard setting arrangements, providing examples of successful policy-changing research, and making recommendations on future research topics.

Despite the long-held views of a gap between academic researchers and standard setters, increasingly standard setters utilise research and request input from academics in their deliberations. Standard setters can increase the likelihood of relevant research by promoting critical issues for research and connecting their practitioner networks with academics. Academics can bridge the gap by selecting topics of mutual interest and by communicating their findings extensively and well.

Increasing collaboration should lead to better accounting and audit standards.

This paper highlights matters of concern in the New Zealand standard setting environment where there is a strategic objective to undertake research.

This study extends the study by Laswad and Mak (1997) on the interpretation of probability expressions used in accounting standards by New Zealand standard setters, by comparing the interpretations of standard‐setters with practicing accountants. The results generally show that the ranking of phrases of probability expressions by accountants is similar to standard‐setters. Further, similar to standard‐setters, accountants interpret many different probability expressions used in accounting standards as if they denote similar probability levels. This suggests that some probability expressions are redundant. The reduction of probability expressions may facilitate greater consistency in the application of accounting standards and consequently greater comparability in financial reporting. The results also indicate that, similar to standard‐setters, there is considerable disagreement among accountants in the interpretation of probability expressions, which suggest that to enhance comparability in financial reporting, guidance in the interpretation of such phrases is needed.

The purpose of this paper is to locate the role of local standard setters in institutional complexity, where multiple sources of pressure for change and continuity coexist. The existing research does not fully explore this since it tends to illustrate the way in which a particular interpretation concerning certain accounting standards prevails over time (Archel et al., 2011; Murphy and O’Connell, 2013; Pelger, 2016; Young, 2014).

It empirically examines and critiques the Japanese experience through the concepts of institutional complexity and translation that specify the relationship between the name and types of practice of accounting standards in the local context (Czarniawska and Sevón, 1996, 2005; Erlingsdóttfr and Lindberg, 2005; Røvik, 2016; Sahlin and Wedlin, 2008). Data sources are texts produced (between 2001 and 2015) by the local accounting standard setter and relevant organisations that represent firms, the certified public accountants and regulatory agency, respectively.

The local accounting standard setter in Japan was exposed to competing pressures between change and maintenance, which was translated by the standard setter in Japan. Consequently, the translation led to an “explosion” of local accounting standards (“pure” International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), Japanese Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), modified IFRS and US GAAP).

This paper is the first attempt to systematically examine the role of a local standard setter under institutional complexity. It illustrates how institutional complexity is turned into divergent outcomes against the assumption of previous research that indicates multiple interpretations of particular accounting standards finally merging into a specific one.

This paper explores how the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has dealt with the emerging issue of accounting for cryptocurrencies by investigating its constituents' expectations and the motivations underlying its regulatory response.

The theoretical lens of regulatory space is used to analyse the four-year debate around cryptocurrency holdings and informs the extensive thematic analysis of public documents, meetings recordings and comment letters on the topic.

Facing national standard setters' initiatives to regulate accounting for cryptocurrency, the IASB defended its position in the regulatory space through an agenda decision based on ewct 2xisting standards, which was finalised by the International Financial Reporting Standards Interpretation Committee (IFRS IC) despite criticism from constituents and Board members.

The paper provides insights into the IASB approach to a regulatory vacuum regarding a new class of items, which derive from a new and rapidly-evolving technology. Disruptive technology impacts the contested arena of accounting regulation, in which the constituents ask for new solutions and the IASB tries to resist such pressures, while defending its position.

The paper sheds light on the growing importance of agenda decisions in the IFRS environment and on the limits of the IASB long regulatory process in the circumstance of emerging accounting issues deriving from rapidly-evolving technology.

This investigation is timely and relevant as it considers the regulatory issues arising from disruptive technological innovations (i.e. cryptocurrency), shedding light on the limits of regulatory processes in times of technological change.

The objective of this paper is to critically examine the Canadian Accounting Standards Board's (AcSB) legitimacy management strategies directed toward financial statement users.

Suchman's legitimacy typology is used as a lens through which the AcSB's legitimacy management strategies directed toward users are analyzed. The data sources consist of documentary public information available for the overall Canadian standard‐setting process and for a sample of standard‐setting projects.

The results indicate that the AcSB devotes much more efforts to symbolic features and cultural accounts than to pragmatic concerns to ensure its legitimacy toward financial statement users. The legitimacy management strategies used mimic those in the USA and at the international level. Such an isomorphism contributes to the AcSB's cognitive legitimacy and overall cultural legitimacy.

Future research could assess a standard‐setting institution legitimacy management strategies directed to other audiences such as preparers, auditors, or other groups that fall under a broader public interest umbrella.

The results provide Canadian users with a general picture of the AcSB's efforts in their regard and invite them to be sceptical and critical about the so‐called user perspective in standard setting. It also provides standard setters with a legitimacy framework that they can use to identify areas for improvement to enhance users' view of their legitimacy and to help them better fulfil their mission statement.

This paper innovates by studying a standard‐setting institution legitimacy management strategies directed toward a specific audience, financial statement users.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse stakeholders’ perceptions on the accounting of crypto-assets. They also look at the need to amend/clarify existing accounting standards or develop new accounting standards.

The authors use a qualitative approach featuring interviews with four stakeholder groups including academics, professional bodies, standard setters and accounting practitioners. Interview recordings are transcribed and then analysed through NVivo.

The interviewees identify various issues in the application of current accounting standards to crypto-assets. The interviewees perceive that the rapid development of crypto-assets and fluidity hinder the development of accounting guidance. Hence, continuous monitoring by standard-setters is required. The general consensus is that unless there are crypto-assets with economic characteristics and functionality that are pervasive enough to warrant a new accounting standard, principles of current accounting standards are robust to address gaps in accounting requirements for crypto-assets.

This study adds to the discussion on harmonising the current practices in accounting of crypto-assets. By examining perceptions of multiple stakeholder groups, this study provides insights into the applicability of current accounting standards to the classification, measurement and disclosure of crypto-assets. The findings will inform standard setters and aid their efforts towards providing formal guidance on the accounting of crypto-assets.

This paper aims to draw on the potential behavioural implications of the new (economic) measurement attributes initiated recently by the International Accounting Standard Board (IASB) in their efforts to reflect more relevant, “true” underlying economic values as opposed to historical.

Owing to lack of readily observable market prices (market values) for loans (retail and commercial operations) for statistical testing and initial conservatism on the part of banks for a survey to be conducted, 15 interviews were employed (from October 2005 to November 2006) with major bankers (CEOs and CFOs of major banks) and standard setters. The paper analyses the perceived benefits and costs associated with the application of two diametrically opposite measurement methodologies for banks. These can also have important implications for the “perceived” value/measurement profile of a bank – as argued in the concluding section – for bankers and their regulators, on the one hand, and accounting standard setters and investors, on the other.

The propositions constitute a significant departure from current accounting practices in that all financial assets and liabilities should uniformly be recognised and reported under a universally accepted “economistic” measurement framework.

The paper captures perceptions and attitudes as to the future “behavioural” direction of banks and provides a balanced argument between the rigours of historical cost accounting and fair value accounting.

This paper aims to provide empirical evidence on formal stakeholder participation (or “lobbying”) in the early phase of the International Sustainability Standards Board’s (ISSB’s) standard-setting.

Drawing on a rational-choice framework, this paper conducts a content analysis of comment letters (CLs) submitted to the ISSB in response to its first two exposure drafts (published in 2022) to investigate stakeholder participation across different groups and jurisdictional origins. The analyses examine participation in terms of frequency (measured using the number of participating stakeholders) and intensity (measured using the length of CLs).

Preparers and users of sustainability reports emerge as the largest participating stakeholder groups, while the accounting/sustainability profession participates with high average intensity. Surprisingly, preparers do not outweigh users in terms of participation frequency and intensity; and large preparers outweigh smaller ones in terms of participation intensity but not participation frequency. Internationally, stakeholders from countries with a private financial accounting standard-setting system participate more frequently and intensively than others. In addition, country-level economic wealth and sustainability performance are positively associated with more participating stakeholders.

This study is of interest for organizations and stakeholders involved in or affected by standard-setting in the field of sustainability reporting. The finding of limited participation by investors and from developing countries suggests the ISSB take actions to enhance the voice of those stakeholders.

The imbalances in stakeholder participation that were found pose potential threats to an important aspect of the input legitimacy of the ISSB’s standard-setting process.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to explore stakeholder participation by means of CLs with the ISSB in terms of frequency and intensity.

This paper seeks to assess the feasibility and desirability of a major emerging economy adopting and implementing fair value accounting (FVA), as codified in the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), by studying China's recent experience.

The paper examines the extent of FVA adoption in China's new accounting standards (“2007GAAP”), reasons for differences from the International Accounting Standard Board's IFRS, and how 2007GAAP has been implemented in practice. Data are obtained from content analyses of IFRS and 2007GAAP FVA requirements, critical assessments of standard setters' official statements, and analyses of empirical evidence from official reports, media, and academic research.

The authors find a high degree of adoption of IFRS FVA standards in China's 2007GAAP for financial instruments, but many differences for non‐financial long‐term asset investments. Standard setters justify this divergence by fundamental characteristics of the Chinese environment. The resulting differences from IFRS in the 2007GAAP FVA standards, and in their implementation, challenge official claims of “substantial convergence” between 2007GAAP and IFRS. Hence, the benefits desired by Chinese regulators from adopting FVA and international accounting convergence to IFRS may not be realized.

The findings are derived from aggregated data in government reports. These findings can be extended in future research by examining specific implementation outcomes in company financial statements.

The paper contributes a timely critical examination of a major emerging economy's convergence with the controversial FVA requirements, which supports the IFRS's standing as a high quality set of accounting standards. The findings provide new insights into factors that can impede international accounting convergence in emerging economies.