I hoped that my previous post would make a compelling argument for why a more focused objective for the FASB could lead to standards that would better serve the public interest. Some readers liked it; however, two former policy makers were not persuaded. Both felt that my criticisms of the FASB’s (and by extension, IASB’s) statements about “general purpose financial reporting” was not warranted. One of them opined that failure to hew to the conceptual definitions of “assets” and “liabilities” was more of a problem. The other stated that he could barely make sense of what I had written!
Accordingly, one of the objectives of this post is to restate more clearly the views expressed in my previous post. I have one other related objective, which I’ll say more about later.
The Three (Shaky) Pillars of the FASB’s Conceptual Framework
The foundational features of the conceptual framework are: (1) the objectives of “general purpose financial [Read More...]