Mr Hoogervorst spoke about the paradox of standard-setting. Throughout the history of accounting standards, it has often been the most needed improvements to transparency that were the most controversial, and the hardest to drive through. For example, expensing stock options was obviously the right thing to do. But vested interests were so strong that the economic myth that these options basically were for free could be kept up for a very long time.
At the same time, not all controversy is the result of lobbying by vested interests. After all, most standard-setters have at some time proposed changes that were not sufficiently developed or that had unintended consequences not obvious at the time of proposal. The IASB's due process provides an important quality control mechanism and this is something to cherish. Legitimate technical or practical concerns about IFRS need to be addressed and that is what the IASB does.
The difficulty comes in trying to distinguish between these two. It is not always obvious what is lobbying by vested interests and what is public interest feedback whose purpose is to help the IASB deliver a high quality standard. More often than not the vested interest is packaged in public interest arguments. Sometimes even users do not want change. Analysts are sometimes so much in love with their own models that they do not want IFRS to shed light on complex issues.
Helping the IASB to make this distinction between legitimate concerns and the conservatism of the status quo is a central role of all standard-setters, including national standard setters. The IASB needs national standard setters to identify technical and practical flaws in the IASB's proposals. But the IASB also needs their help in pushing back on vested interests. This is difficult, often unpopular work, but it is essential and the IASB cannot do it alone. If the IASB is to deliver standards with the necessary rigour and discipline the IASB needs all the help it can get.
This is particularly important in the coming year as the IASB seeks to finalise the four major projects of insurance, financial instruments, leasing and revenue recognition. In each of these cases, the IASB will do everything possible to minimise the possibility of unexpected consequences. High quality feedback and field testing is invaluable as the IASB completes this work. However, the IASB must also guard against being lobbied off course. Standard-setting is an exercise in change management, and change is rarely popular, even if it is change for the better.
Full speech
© IASB - International Accounting Standards Board
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article