The Leading Financial Changed of Revenue Recognition by Business Enterprises under FASB vs. IASB

Prof. Edel Lemus

Authors

Prof. Edel Lemus

Keywords:

financial reporting theory, US securities and exchange commission (SEC), financial accounting standard board (FASB), international accounting standa

Abstract

The purpose of this research study is to provide a relevant position about the emergence and adoption process of the revenue recognition project under Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) and International Accounting Standard Board (IASB) and its crucial financial reporting performance by business enterprises. In 2014 the Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) developed a conceptual framework in relation to the joint revenue recognition project. As a result, the Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) in an early announcement this year stated that the revenue recognition project will take place as early as 2015 as noted by Lemus (2014). However, the revenue recognition project will change its reporting perspective from historical cost value to fair value measurement. For example, the International Accounting Standard Board (IASB) noted that more than 95% of Small and Medium-sized Entities (SMEs) are allowed to use EFRS. Therefore, it is expected (as cited in Kieso, Weygandt, & Warfield, 2013) that the optional adoption process of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in the United States will take place as early as 2017.

Downloads

How to Cite

The Leading Financial Changed of Revenue Recognition by Business Enterprises under FASB vs. IASB. (2014). Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 14(D4), 1-7. https://journalofbusiness.org/index.php/GJMBR/article/view/1537

Download Citation

References

F Bellandi (2007) Willey Dual Reporting for Equity and Other Comprehensive Income. 77(12), 32-41.

H Bohusova, D Nerudova (2011) Is an asset and liability approach to revenue recognition suitable for IFRS and US GAAP convergence purpose?. 18(2), 107-114.

H Boerner (2011) Sustainability and ESG reporting frameworks: Issuers have GAAP and IFRS for reporting financials-what about reporting for intangibles nad non-financials. 15(5), 34-37.

Denton Collins, William Pasewark, Mark Riley (2012) Financial Reporting Outcomes under Rules-Based and Principles-Based Accounting Standards. 26(4), 681-705.

D Dickins, B Cooper (2010) IFRS: A summary and update. 25(6), 34-40.

(2014) Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB).

(2011) Professional Services Close -Up.

M James (2009) Consolidated Financial Statements and Separate Financial Statements (IAS 27). 16, 191-214.

S Kenny, R Larson (2009) Interpreting IFRS. 208(4), 60-64.

D Kieso, J Weygandt, D Warfield, T (2013) Intermediate accounting.

E Lemus (2014) Business Combinations (IFRS 3). 14(3), 263-279.

J Lin, P Fink (2013) International financial reporting standards: Are they right for the united states?. 7(2), 59-67.

M Mcanally, S Mcguire, C Weaver (2010) Assessing the financial reporting consequences of conversion to IFRS: The case of equity-based compensation. 24(4), 589-621.

T Mckee, L Mckee (2013) Using learning curves for revenue recognition. 83(4), 60-64.

J Sanders, D Lindberg, D Seifert (2013) 3 Characteristics of Full IFRS and IFRS for SMEs adoption. 83, 32-35.

Charlene Spiceland, David Spiceland, Phillip Njoroge (2011) Tourist Trap: The new lease accounting standard and debt covenants. 45, 45-59.

P Walters, C (2011) Accounting for equity and other comprehensive income: Dual reporting under U.S. GAAP and IFRS. 10(1), 128-129.

J Weiss (2012) FASB webcast: 2012 chairman's outlook on the FASB with Leslie F. Seidman. 12(7), 1-8.