An Analysis of Differences in Terms of Professional Interests Based on the Project to Replace IAS 39

Abstract

The professional interests of the various stakeholders groups are often seen as obstacles to full accounting harmonization. Studying different professional interests in the accounting domain is significant for organizations involved in the international accounting harmonization process, insofar as it enables them to identify the main obstacles to face in order to achieve full harmonization. Thus, this article is aimed at analyzing the differences in terms of professional interests by addressing the participation of various stakeholders groups in the process of issuing/modifying standards of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). Based on content analysis, we examined the comment letters sent to the IASB in the context of the first part of the first phase of the project to replace the International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39, entitled "Financial Instruments -Recognition and Measurement", by the International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 9, on its turn entitled "Financial Instruments". Respondents were identified according to the stakeholders group, and, later, the collected data underwent a nonparametric chi-square test. The results of this study indicate there are significant differences between the answers obtained from the various stakeholders groups involved in the process of issuing or reviewing a standard of the IASB, above all made clear between the group of financial preparers and the regulatory and/or standard-setting agencies and the professional associations related to accounting.

Tendencias en los estudios brasileños sobre el cambio de normativa contable

“…En esta etapa mereció la atención, además, temas relacionados con los obstáculos enfrentados por diferentes grupos de stakeholders para lograr una plena armonización contable a partir de la participación de estos, en el proceso de emisión/alteración de estas normativas (Carvalho et al, 2015;Haveroth et al, 2017), y otros estudios sobre la relación de factores subjetivos y de contingencias en la aplicación del valor justo (Klein & Almeida, 2017;Silva Filho, Lucena & Leite Filho, 2017).…”

IFRS 9 e o novo tratamento contábil do próprio risco de crédito de passivos financeiros designados ao valor justo: incentivos para a adoção antecipada e efeitos sobre a relevância da informação

“…In proposing a change in the classification and measurement requirements for financial instruments, it is necessary to analyse the impact that it can bring. The importance of the study is based on the sparse literature analysing the effects of IFRS 9 requirements on financial reporting, both in the international literature (e.g., Cipullo & Vinciguerra, 2014;Elgeti, Pummerer, & Steller, 2010;Hronsky, 2010;Huian, 2012Huian, , 2013Jääskeläinen, 2016;Singleton-Green, 2014), as well as in the national literature (e.g., Almeida, 2010;Carvalho, Albuquerque, Quirós, & Justino, 2015;Sayed, Souza, Costa, & Tancini, 2013), which can be justified by the fact that the standard is effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2018.…”

“…Huian (2013), in its turn, examines the level of involvement of all major stakeholder groups in the development of the first phase of IFRS 9, through the submission of comment letters to the IASB, and the degree in which the concerns and complaints expressed by those letters were integrated into the final standard. Carvalho et al (2015) also examine the comment letters received by the IASB in the context of IFRS 9's first phase, however, with the aim at analysing the differences in terms of professional interests among the various groups of stakeholders.…”