| January/February 2009 | Leaders' Edge | ||||
|
|
|||||
|
IFRS Adoption: The First Wave in an
Inevitable Tide of Change for All Companies By William F. O’Brien, MBA, CPA, Executive Education, Inc. In November 2008, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced a Roadmap for implementing International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by public companies in the United States. The SEC’s November 14, 2008 release set 2014 as the “most likely” date for mandatory IFRS usage with adoptions as early as 2010 available to qualifying firms. Even though 2014 is more than five years away, early adoption and multi-year financial statement presentation requirements effectively accelerate IFRS conversion into the 2010-2011 timeframe – a mere two years from today. A Historical Perspective The winds of change began to circulate in 2001. In April of that year, the IASC reorganized into the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). James Leisenring, a former FASB chairman, joined the inaugural 14-member board. At the same time, the IASB began a closer working relationship with U.S. standard setters and the SEC.
The first significant step came in January 2005 when IFRS became mandatory in the European Union. At the same time, the efforts of IASB-FASB standard convergence accelerated. Since then, the two standard setting bodies have published numerous updated pronouncements. IFRS 3 and SFAS 141R, dealing with business combinations, are current examples of this joint development process. Although these convergence efforts have been productive, they still do not address the costly impact of issuing multi-standard financial statements – particularly in the United States. In November 2007, the SEC took a huge leap forward in addressing the restatement issue when it announced that foreign registrants could report their operating results under IFRS and not be subject to U.S. GAAP reconciliation. The commission followed this announcement with a series of town-hall style meetings that led to the Commission’s statement in December 2007 regarding the potential expanded use of IFRS in the United States. SEC Chairman Christopher Cox initially cited a release date for the adoption timetable of June 2008. That date slipped into August and the timetable morphed into a press release with a promise of more to come. The Current Situation There has also been a flurry of IFRS adoption activity in other corners of the accounting profession. Each of the four major international firms, for example, has invested significant resources, research and opinion on the global accounting standards issue. PricewaterhouseCoopers believes significant action will occur in early 2009 after the Roadmap’s comment period ends. Ernst & Young senses a similar timeframe and views the adoption of international standards as the single most important initiative in the financial reporting world. KPMG appears to have the most robust IFRS information effort in its IFRS Institute. The Institute is always an interesting source of IFRS comment and perception. For example, it recently noted a considerable debate remains over the rush to global standards. One position, led by the PCAOB, recommends slowing the adoption process down in order to more fully absorb the impact of the global financial crisis. Those at the other end of the spectrum believe that the current international financial crisis actually demands a single set of high-quality standards that reflect reality. Another international firm, Deloitte, offers IFRS training and consulting services to firms wishing to stay ahead of the adoption curve. Both KPMG and Deloitte concur that the adoption effort is still very much alive. While there is a slight delay in finalizing the full adoption timetable, the FASB and IASB have accelerated their completion date for the seemingly unending convergence project. Following their September 2008 joint meeting, the two boards set 2011 as the deadline for resolving the remaining four open issues on their agenda. The targeted areas for discussion include financial statement presentation, liability and equity classification, lease accounting and revenue recognition. Although some conflict remains over a firm calendar for adoption, no one disputes one issue. All knowledgeable parties believe that much more than simple financial reporting changes are at stake. Since the changes required to convert to international standards are both numerous and complex, now is the time to initiate your IFRS learning curve and to begin the design of your IFRS adoption strategy. More
than Just an Accounting Exercise Revenue recognition under U.S. GAAP is very specific. There are unique rules, for example, with respect to individual industry practices, computer software and real estate transactions. Conversely, a single standard (IAS 18) governs general revenue recognition under IFRS. This absence of specificity is symptomatic of the related conceptual issue of principles-based versus rules-based accounting. The lack of LIFO inventory valuation under IFRS (IAS 2) presents additional challenges. Will the Internal Revenue Service relax LIFO conformity rules as part of the switch to international standards? If so, how will this change income tax strategy for U.S. firms? Differences also abound in the area of research and development costs. FAS 2 requires that companies expense all R & D costs as incurred. IAS 38, on the other hand, categorizes R&D expenditures as either research or development activities. IAS 38 expenses research costs, while it capitalizes development costs as an intangible asset. Lastly, and perhaps the most problematic issue from the perspective of transparency, is the valuation of operational assets. Under IFRS (IAS 36 and IAS 38), if the organization meets certain conditions they may reverse intangible asset impairments, other than goodwill. This “elevator effect” of valuations constantly moving up and down will challenge both independent auditors and financial statement users alike.
Changes in earnings will affect the computation of financial institution lending covenants. Right now, we do not know how lenders will respond to these modifications. Similarly, there will be changes in the determination of incentives and bonuses based upon profitability. Institutional investors and labor unions may not respond favorably to these potential revisions in compensation. The anticipated implementation of IFRS will also require comprehensive training of investors, board members, management personnel and financial statement preparers. Assisting these stakeholders in assuming a principles-based thought process will be incredibly difficult. The adoption of approximately 2,500 pages of new pronouncements will be, by comparison, easy.
Faced with accounting changes, operational changes and behavioral changes, what must firms do today to be prepared for the inevitability of tomorrow? A Checklist for Action Given this sense of urgency, consider the following ten points as your IFRS Roadmap for Action.
Final Thoughts All firms, public and private, will face the issues that IFRS adoption brings. All global customers will demand an understanding of IFRS-based statements. Many lending activities will require new IFRS-driven assessment. This is not just a public company accounting issue. This is a major business transformation issue affecting all companies in the United States. A wave of change in accounting standards is coming. Plan to establish your IFRS breakwater today. Don’t be caught unprepared when the international accounting standards tidal wave hits your beach.
|
|||||