Feeds:
Posts
Comments

An eight part series reviewing the arguments of seven prominent opponents to the U.S. adoption of IFRS.

Shyam Sunder–IFRS Critic (Yale professor)
Charles Niemeier–IFRS Critic (PCAOB member)
Ray Ball–IFRS Critic (Chicago professor)
Ed Ketz–IFRS Critic (Penn State professor)
Tom Selling–IFRS Critic (consultant, retired Thunderbird prof)
Bob Jensen–IFRS Critic (Trinity professor, emeritus)
David Albrecht–IFRS Critic (Bowling Green professor) [final version]

Soon: The Comprehensive Anti-IFRS Argument

Soon: The For-IFRS Argument

Soon: Comparing and Evaluating Both Sides of the IFRS Issue

accountantdaylargeIt is still November 10 up here in North Dakota.  That means it is still Accountant’s Day!

Did you get a chance to celebrate?  Professor Ed Scribner at New Mexico State University reminded his accounting theory students, and one brought a cake to class.  I’m on a diet, but I would break it for a slice of Accountant Day cake.

How did I celebrate?  I walked around campus (Concordia College in Moorhead, MN) reciting the debiti-credit cadence.  You don’t know what that is?  Instead of walking and saying, “a-left (pause) a-left (pause) a-left right left (pause)”, you say, “debit (pause) debit (pause) debit credit debit (pause).  I also tested students taking my courses on the finer points of accounting.   I’ll bet they are celebrating tonight.

As explained in a previous blog post, on November 10, 1494, volume 2 of Summa de Arithmetica, Geometria, Proportioni et Proportionalita (Everything About Arithmetic, Geometry and Proportion) was published.  It is in volume 2 of the Summa that Luca Pacioli included a description of the bookkeeping/accounting system of Venice.

Who says I don’t know how to have fun?  On Accountant’s Day I’m the life of the party.

accountantsday2009Now, back to the party.

Debit and credit – - David Albrecht

thinkingThere are several controversies in financial reporting.   These are all either or, with no compromise available.   Here are a few just off the top of my head:

  • Which group is the primary beneficiary of financial reporting?  Investors or companies
  • How complex is financial reporting for either investors or companies?   Too complex or not too complex
  • Should there be one set of global accounting standards?  Yes or no
  • What about the U.S. and GAAP?  Retain its GAAP or switch to IFRS

I’ll write more about each in following days.  But for now …

Should the primary beneficial of financial reporting be investors or companies?   In the grand scheme of things, there is no correct answer.  The United States believes that the investor should be primary.  Consequently, companies do not comply with the accounting rules.  Plain and simple.  The European Union believes that financial statements should help companies raise capital.  Consequently there are no accounting scandals.

In the U.S., accounting rules are complex.  There is a cycle, where accounting rules are devised, then companies–using armies of lawyers–circumvent the rules, then stricter accounting rules are devised, then companies circumvent these rules, then even stricter rules are devised.  Good pitching beats good hitting, except when good hitting.  There are complex rules that I don’t understand, but I like it that way.

Should there be one set of global accounting standards?  This one is easy.  NO.  NO.  NO.  NO.  There is compelling theory to explain why one set of global accounting standards is not good.  There is no theory, not even a single plausible reason, why there should be.  But why ask professors and theorists who delve deeper into issues?  However, if you stand to make billions or trillions then you’d want one set of global accounting standards, too.  Can you spell self-interest?

Should the U.S. retain its GAAP?  Probably.  There is no down side to retaining it.  All major capital markets in the world accept financial statement prepared according to U.S. GAAP.  Moreover, analysts and investors around the world are fluent in U.S. GAAP.  There is considerable downside to the U.S. adopting IFRS.

In succeeding days, I’ll discuss each of these controversies.

Debit and credit – - David Albrecht

This post is not related to financial reporting issues, but it does relate to accounting education.

cheating2First, a little history.  Accounting professors tend to mostly have tests that require the regurgitation of factual content.  Questions are similar to:  Do you know this?  Do you know that?  Can you compute this accounting number? And so forth.  To do well on tests, students have to memorize.  Naturally, students are concerned about their memories holding up.  They fear forgetting, so they hedge their chances by cheating.  It has been shown many times that cheating is rampant in both business courses and accounting courses.  Professors think cheating is terrible, students don’t.  Students reason that they already knew the material, so cheating on the test isn’t as bad as, say, axe murder.  Students are so good at cheating on tests that professors rarely catch them.  If you ever see a professor walking around a test room, chances are the professor is wearing a scowl.  He/she is unhappy about not catching all the students that undoubtedly are cheating on the test.

vomitThis type of cheating bleeds over to the writing of papers.  Paper assignments in accounting courses tend to require students to look up information and regurgitate it onto a written paper.  Glom it and vomit.  These days the research is conducted on-line, locating articles appearing in digital media.  It is easy to cut text directly out of an on-line article, and paste it directly into a student’s paper.  Without attribution, if course.  According to current academic rules, this is cheating.  Those wonderfully written passages found on the web are supposed to be paraphrased into the paper, not pasted onto the paper.  Professors on their high horse are ready to punish students for plagiarism with an F in the course and academic suspension.  Students think this is going way too far.

nukeUnfortunately for students, in 2009 it is much easier for professors to catch students plagiarizing on papers than it is to catch them on tests.  If a professor suspects a student of plagiarizing, then the professor can easily do a google search on the suspect wording and quickly catch a student in the act!  When this happens, the student is screwed.  And how!  University rules and policies permit, even encourage, professors to assign the grade of F.  A student also can get suspended or expelled.  A nuke!

Just about any professor (it doesn’t have to be an accounting professor) hates cheating or plagiarizing.  When two or more professors gather together, they frequently rail against it.  Cheating and plagiarizing garner more complaints than either death or taxes.

Yet, professors remain human with a modicum of compassion.  When it comes right down to it they are reluctant to nuke a cheating student.  So, what to do?  They think that something should be done, but they don’t want to ruin a student’s academic career.

M. Garrett Bauman, a retired English professor, has written the latest Chronicle of Higher Education story on plagiarism.  After a few paragraphs retelling popular faculty attitudes towards plagiarized work, he suggests that we should play or toy with students that plagiarize, just like he did once.  Hiscat-mouse story is amusing, I guess, in the same way we are amused when a cat plays with a captured mouse. Of course, it is not amusing to the mouse.  The mouse must feel its rights have been violated. If it can get past the terror.

After students plagiarize anyway, release your inner crime-scene investigator and make catching them a sport instead of a chore.  For example, you can amuse yourself by directing your own morality play to lead a felon to his fate.  Here’s how I did it once:

David’s shoulder-length hair, trimmed beard and mustache, soft eyes, and mild manner were reminiscent of Jesus.  His writing was clichéd and immature.  Then he handed in a scintillating paper containing words like “winsome,” “beguiling,” and “Krishna.”  I called him to my office.  “This is quite a paper, David.”

“Thank you.”  He blinked his Jesus eyes and stroked his long, soft hair.

“I do have a few tiny questions.  Here on Page 2, you used the word ‘charlatan.’  What does that mean?”

“Don’t you know?”

“Enlighten me.”

“Uh, well, it’s like an idol that people worship.  I think he was a king.”

“Kind of like Charlemagne?”

“Right.”

“I see. How about ’salutary’ here on Page 3?”

He shrugged.  “That’s being alone.”

“I think that’s ’solitary.’  This is ’salutary.’ See?”

“I guess I typed it wrong.  I meant ’solitary.’”

“‘Solitary’ makes no sense.  ‘Salutary’ fits perfectly.”

“It does?”

“Yes.  Actually, it’s quite professional.”  I tapped the paper, leaned closer, and whispered confidentially:  “How is it that you use such words and don’t know their meaning?”  Delightful little beads formed on David’s forehead.

He blinked several times.  “Uh, I guess the right word just comes to me.”

“Like, you’re inspired?”

“Exactly!”  He hugged the word “inspired.”

“Amazing.  You must have been catatonic when you wrote it.”

“Well­”  He smiled, hoping I had complimented him.

“I’m sure the dean would love to chat with you about this ­um ­ability.”

“Aw, no, he wouldn’t.”  David glanced at the door.

“Oh, he would.  You wrote this with no help whatsoever.”  I shook my head.  “Amazing.”

David snapped his fingers.  “You know what?  I just remembered that I used the computer thesaurus a few times.  You know, to build up my vocabulary.”

“Ah!  But isn’t it odd you forgot the definitions?”

“I wrote the paper a while ago.”  He shrugged off his weak memory.

“Strange, I read something on this topic recently.”  I pulled the download from my drawer.  “The author uses many vocabulary words you do.  Whole passages, in fact.  Look here.  See?  And here.”  His head bent pretending to read, but his eyes were squeezed shut, awaiting the ax.  I couldn’t resist one last little twist.  “David, do you think some unscrupulous author saw your paper somewhere and copied it?”

His head shot up. “Really?”

I smiled beatifically.

I doubt that I could ever deal with a student the way Bauman tells of it.  It’s too cruel for my taste.  But, perhaps he has a point.  There could be proportionate liability for those caught plagiarizing.   I mean, audit firms have for decades grappled with the issue of what audit opinion to render after finding shortcomings in a client company’s work.  Too often the company is let off with a warning,  “Don’t do it again.”  But of course, they frequently do.  Perhaps our plagiarizing students are best dealt with by scaring them (if it can be done), then letting them go.  A catch and release policy, if you will.  Perhaps it is a punishment more fitting to the crime.  Maybe not.

I shared this CHE article over on AECM, the e-mail list for accounting professors.  Bob Jensen responded, reminiscing about “… how hard it was in the good old days to detect plagiarism.  One of my high school history teachers said that after 30 years of teaching she warned in advance that she knew encyclopedia passages by heart, including passages on Napoleon, Thomas Jefferson, and other popular topics for history papers.  She also had two of the most popular encyclopedia sets in her home where she graded papers.”

Bob’s memories are the best stories.

Debit and credit – - David Albrecht

Bumper stickers–gotta love em.  Combining wit, humor and sarcasm, they present truth in style.  Remember these all time favorites?

Love Thy Neighbor

Like A Roll of Toilet Paper

Here are some ideas for accounting bumper stickers:

  • Cure insomnia . . . sleep with an accountant
  • It’s accrual world
  • CPA:  I might be certified, but I’m not crazy.
  • I’m not a liability, just look at my assets
  • I love accounting
  • It took an accountant to catch Al Capone.
    Be an accountant with conviction
  • I’m one cute tax deduction
  • Chicks dig accountants
  • Not without my ledger
  • A good accountant is a debit to the profession
  • No, in the red is not a good thing
  • Warning! I have a calculator and know how to use it
  • Are you crying?
    There’s no crying!
    There’s no crying in accounting!
  • Balance this!
  • Audit this!
  • I’m an accountant! Don’t attempt this at home.
  • Not just another pretty deduction
  • Mild mannered CPA by day, sexy dude by night
  • Save a horse, ride an accountant
  • Honest accountant–Numbers don’t lie, people do
  • I’m a 10-key assassin
  • Wear a necktie and release your inner accountant
  • Do not make me use my accountant voice
  • Instant accountant . . . just add coffee
  • Filing single, looking to file jointly
  • Accountants rock
  • Have you hugged an accountant today?
  • Warning:   accountant with an attitude
  • Don’t make me count before my first cup of coffee
  • You mess with accounting, you mess with me
  • I’m an accountant.  I’m really that boring
  • I am the accountant your mom warned you about
  • GAAP clothes
  • Debits go on the window side
  • My spouse is so accrual, he/she doesn’t depreciate me any more.

Care to suggest some others?

Debit and credit – - David Albrecht

Finally, some hard hitting rumor reported as news on Thursday, July 30.  According to Jesse Westbrook and Ian Katz of Bloomberg, Mary Schapiro has narrowed down Chief Accountant finalists to two:  James Kroeker (accounting firm candidate with ties to Clifford Cox and Robert Herz) and independent Jack Ciesielski.

I’ve talked with Westbrook before, and he has been following the chief accountant for many months. Westbrook also reported Niemeier’s candidacy.  I suspect that these rumors are fairly square on.

This is an interesting development from early June when I reported on leaks that there were five finalists.  On June 4, I supplied more information about each candidate in Thoughts About Candidates For Chief Accountant.

James Kroeker, acting Chief Accountant, and Wayne Carnall, chief accountant of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, are both in-house candidates and IFRS proponents, the issue of the day, year and decade.  That Kroeker remains as finalist is an endorsement of his performance as acting chief.   He seems to have done well in discussions with Congress as he defended fair value.  He was chief architect of an SEC report that concludes fair value accounting did not cause the recent financial mess.

Jack Ciesielski, candidate for SEC's chief accountant

Jack Ciesielski, candidate for SEC's chief accountant

Jack Ciesielski beat out Charles Niemeier as the anti-IFRS candidates (that is, U.S. should not adopt IFRS).  Both have impressed with the quality of their research on IFRS and other issues.   I suppose Jack’s ascendancy is not surprising given that Charley has been a lightening rod, but I still love Charley.  We owe him much gratitude for his 2008 speech that enticed hundreds of thousands of U.S. accountants to come out of the woodwork and declare their opposition views to IFRS.

Jack Ciesielski has written at length about the perils of U.S. adoption of IFRS, at least as currently formulated and with its current structure.  His Analyst’s Accounting Observer is a great resource.

Both remaining candidates are fair value proponents.

Who will win out?  I don’t really know Mary Schapiro, and it’s her call.  She faces a great deal of pressure from Barak Obama and Paul Volcker to appoint someone who will implement G-8 recommendations.  Kroeker is this person.  On the other hand, she seems to have an independent streak and a mind of her own.   Both qualities could lead her to support the anti-IFRS candidate.

The country does not need a big four Chief Accountant.  Kroecker would triumph the preparers of accounting information over the users.  He has ties to the foul Christopher Cox.    Foxy John Kroecker will eat us all hens for supper.

If Mary Schapiro is true to her stated prinicples, she will act to protect investors and appoint Jack Ciesielski.

Why has this taken so long?  Schapiro has been under intense pressure not to appoint an anti-IFRS person.  But, she has resisted, because the U.S. adoption of IFRS is clearly the wrong thing to do.  Had Kroeker not done such a fine job in the fair value defense, I suspect that Ciesielski would already have been appointed.

Over and out – - David Albrecht

I'm on the road again, this time to Concordia College

I'm on the road again, this time to Concordia College

Moving is such difficult work.  For a long time I thought I never would do it again.  But now I must.  C’est la vie!

I’ve lived in several university towns:  Iowa City, Iowa; Berrien Springs, Michigan; Blacksburg, Virginia, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Bowling Green, Ohio.  Now, I’m on to Moorhead, Minnesota and Concordia College.

My University of Iowa experience was pretty much like that of many baby boomers.  I was a first generation college student, it was in my home town and very cheap ($125 for my first semester).  I learned how to do many things:  cut classes, play cards, drink beer, get bad grades, play pool, play foosball, jog for long distances, and root for the Iowa Hawkeyes.  After dabbling in music performance (string bass), chemistry, fiction writing, spanish, history and political science, I didn’t leave my undergraduate days with much of anything.  I didn’t even learn how to chase/catch girls.  I was pathetic.

Maybe that’s not true.  I  learned how not to be a student.  As an undergraduate, I would only occasionally tune in.  If I focused on a class for a while, I’d attend most days and take copious notes.    I’d then try to memorize everything for the next test.  I never received a A.  I now look back on realize that given how I went about being a student, I was fated never to learn anything or get good grades.  Cutting so many classes resulted in several grades of D (4) and F (11).  I now realize that it was impossible to memorize everything.  But at the time I didn’t know any differently.

I recall one particularly futile incident.  I memorized 30 pages of handwritten lecture notes and was confident that I’d really nail the next test in Psych 101.  The test itself was largely multiple choice questions over research studies cited in the textbook.  It came from a test bank.  It was completely irrelevant to the classroom experience, and I was screwed.  I got a bad grade and it was unrelated to what I had learned about introductory psychology.   Years later as a new accounting professor, I tried doing that for a test.  Adverse student reaction was enough for me to drop that particular testing approach forever.  I have since learned that lecture plus multiple choice test actually combine to inhibit learning.

Never-the-less, I did pick up a few things that have influenced my life as an accounting professor.  I recall Professor James Murray.  He was an authority on international politics, and I took every course he taught.  I wasn’t a very good student, but I did attend almost every class.  He was an excellent lecturer.  He had everything analyzed and organized.  He’d read through his notes, bullet point by bullet point.   I had so many pages of notes containing ordered lists of why this was done, or that happened, or why such and such will happen in the future.  I don’t know that I wanted to grow up and be a professor just like him, but for me he was the embodiment of a great lecturing professor.  In my early years as a teacher, I drew on my memories of him.  Interestingly to me, I am drawing on my experience in international politics as I attempt to analyze IFRS adoption.  I don’t recall a single bullet point from those days, but I did learn to reach below the surface to discover why things actually happen.  I guess that shows sticky ideas can be delivered by lecture.

Donald Johnson, all-time favorite political science professor

Donald Johnson, all-time favorite political science professor

I also recall Professor Donald Johnson.  I took a course or two from him, don’t remember liking them because he wasn’t like Murray in class.  He’s important to me because we had one interaction.  Only one, but it was significant.  It was on my way out the door.  He was my curriculum advisor, and asked what I was going to do with my life.  It was the greatest generation speaking to the baby boomer generation.   I thought about how I was going to drink beer and chase girls, but that wasn’t appropriate to say.  I reached deep and came up with “profesional bridge player.”  Years later I’m still embarrassed by that.  He then opined that playing cards wouldn’t make the world a better place for anyone else but me. And that would be a shame because I would have squandered my opportunity to make a mark on the world.  Years later I more fully understand what he was teaching me.  People won’t remember you if your make your own life better.  People will remember you if you help make their own lives better.  The first is valueless to anyone else but you.  The second is of great value to the universe.   Professor Donald Johnson, in one brief interaction, added enough to my life that I remember him decades later.

I’m proud to say that I’ve turned preacher in my accounting classes.  I offer that accounting is a calling, and through being an accountant it is possible make the world a better place.  Moreover, as life is lived it is important to remember always that helping others is what makes life worth living.  Living life only to make a lot of money seems ise such a waste of really good human talent.   People may envy you but won’t respect you.  So many people need financial understanding but they don’t have a clue.  It is for such people that we accountants serve.

I then took a break from school and worked for three years at the Iowa City post office along side my father.  I wish every son could be so fortunate as I, to be with his father at work.

Next:   what I learned from getting a masters degree in accounting from the University of Iowa.

Debit and credit – - David Albrecht

In a report issued Wednesday, June 17, the Obama administration touched on its vision for regulation of financial reporting in the U.S.  Not yet possessing statutory authority, Financial Regulatory Reform is more a statement of strategy and intention with respect to regulation of banks and all matters related to financial markets in the U.S.

muddyfootprints2It has Paul Volcker’s muddy footprints all over it.  Shame.

I see two provisions affecting accounting.  The first, from page 11:

The accounting standard setters (the FASB, the IASB, and the SEC) should review accounting standards to determine how financial firms should be required to employ more forward-looking loan loss provisioning practices that incorporate a broader range of available credit information. Fair value accounting rules also should be reviewed with the goal of identifying changes that could provide users of financial reports with both fair value informationand greater transparency regarding the cash flows management expects to receive by holding investments.

Quite simply put, fair value reporting by banks of financial assets is reaffirmed.  However, bank desires to avoid recognizing losses in declines in value should also be accommodated. Nice work if you can get it (and you can get it if you try).

The kicker is on pages 19-20 (with more detail provided on pages 86-87):

J. Improve Accounting Standards

1.  We recommend that the accounting standard setters clarify and make consistent the application of fair value accounting standards, including the impairment of financial instruments, by the end of 2009.

2.  We recommend that the accounting standard setters improve accounting standards for loan loss provisioning by the end of 2009 that would make it more forward looking, as long as the transparency of financial statements is not compromised.

3.  We recommend that the accounting standard setters make substantial progress by the end of 2009 toward development of a single set of high quality global accounting standards.

The G-20 Leaders agreed that the accounting standard setters should make substantial progress toward a single set of high quality global accounting standards by the end of 2009. The IASB and FASB have engaged in extensive efforts to converge IFRS and U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to minimize or eliminate differences in the two sets of accounting standards. Last year, the IASB and FASB reiterated their objective of achieving broad convergence of IFRS and U.S. GAAP by the end of 2010, which is a necessary precondition under the SEC’s proposed roadmap to adopt IFRS. Currently, the SEC is considering comments submitted on its proposed roadmap that sets forth several milestones that could lead to the eventual use of IFRS by all U.S. issuers.

Does Paul Volcker want the U.S. to move to IFRS?   Why yes, bears shit in the woods.  Obama and Volcker wishing it, however, does not mean that it will happen.  I hope someone in the Obama administration finds a brain.  And soon.

Debit and credit – - David Albrecht

I don’t know how much credibility to attach to the following reports from the UK’s GAAPweb.

The first, dated Monday, June 8, claims that sources close to EU politicians are suggesting that the EU have its own standard setting body.  The second, has a brief recap of a meeting between Tweedie and Council of the EU, in which McGreevy claims that some EU politicians question if the IASB is out of touch.

In my opinion, in these reports, reporters are just message carriers.  They reflect real political concern in Europe about the IASB.  Since I’m not over there talking with politicians myself, I can’t judge how much juice these rumors have.  There is enough smoke, however, to make me conclude that the EU dropping IFRS is a reasonable possibility.  It is way too early to tell if it is probable.

The major factor working against the IASB is its independence.  The EU wants the IASB to be independent of everyone but Europe.  The EU wants the  IASB to be subservient to Europe’s wishes. European politicians just have to be getting tired of lobbying in the financial press for certain provisions in IFRS.  It would be much easier if Europe had a standard setting body that answered directly to Charlie McGreevy, Finance Minister.  The result would be more acceptable standards and less debate in the public spotlight.

There have been other interesting things that have come out.  Tom Selling has a very interesting blog post today, in To Catch a Chief Accountant, in which he confirms my suspicion that the tide has turned against IFRS in the US.  If so, Charley Niemeier and Jack Ciesielski are more likely candidates than previously thought.  I wonder, though, if Jane Adams is still the favorite. She doesn’t have the Big-4 ties, although she does have AICPA work.  Her view on IFRS is completely unknown, as she has not spoken publicly about it.

The controversy over IFRS has both sides pushing with everything they have.  The final decision will be political.  I think it likely that the flexibility of IFRS principles/guidelines will largely be lost as a result of all the politics.  Accounting standards will inevitably become more like hard and fast rules, the result of hard fought political compromises. Both sides (national GAAP vs. IFRS) will argue for clearly defined rules, to limit gains from the other side.

Debit and crecit – - David Albrecht

Older Posts »