Should Accounting Standards be Principles or Rules?

In a recently-published article, Sir David Tweedie notes that: “Forty-odd years ago, as a CA apprentice, I didn't have to study accounting standards because there weren’t any! There was one major standard – the true and fair view – augmented by accepted practice.” According to Tweedie, two disputed takeover bids soon changed that. The President of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW), Sir Ronald Leach, senior partner of Peat Marwick & Co., and Professor Edward Stamp of Edinburgh University became embroiled in a public argument in the pages of The Times over the state of British financial reporting.

 

“Professor Stamp argued that for any major company, there would be a million ways which you could show a true and fair view, and that this was totally unacceptable. Sir Ronald reacted with alacrity, and together with the other Institutes (including a rather reluctant ICAS), agreed to form the Accounting Standards Steering Committee in 1969. Pressured by the Government, the Committee looked for a quick win and came upon a research paper of the ICAEW dealing with Associated Companies. This was rapidly turned into the Statement of Standard Accounting Practice 1. While to accountants such a topic would be a bizarre choice for the first standard, rather than what became SSAP2 – Accounting Policies – the profession needed to show it.”

 

“The argument continues over whether standards in financial reporting can best be governed by clear and detailed rules, or by principles and judgement could act quickly in a time of crisis. Since then, we have seen the SSAPs gradually replaced with Financial Reporting Standards and latterly by International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). These standards have become more and more complex.”

 

“Accounting is not rocket science. Writing a standard to deal with 80 per cent of the problems takes only a few pages, yet if our profession requires every avenue to be explored, then it can run into hundreds. ICAS is just completing a judgement framework to assist professionals who are unsure what exactly judgement involves. If you have been trained in what I term ‘search-engine’ accounting – looking up the answer in a massive book of rules –judgement can be scary.”

 

“The profession is at a crossroads, and the more we head down the rules route the harder it will be to pull back to simpler, more clearly expressed principle-based standards.” Read the article “Should Accounting Standards be Principles or Rules?” by Sir David Tweedie, President of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS), as well as previous postings regarding the Principles versus Rules debate.

Paul Pacter: Profile and Interview

 

Accountancy Age online published an April 2010 article called “Profile: Paul Pacter, international standard setter.” The article states that, although some people may not recognise his name, Paul Pacter is one of the most influential men in the history of international accounting standards."  Since 2000, he has played a variety of roles including director of standards for small and medium-sized entities at the International Accounting Standards Board and director at the global IFRS office for Deloitte in Hong Kong. During the 1990s, he served as staff member at the International Accounting Standards Committee working on projects including financial instruments, interim financial reporting, segment reporting, discontinuing operations, extractive industries, agriculture, and electronic financial reporting. From 1984-1989, he was vice chairman of the advisory council to the US Governmental Accounting Standards Board.

 

On July 12, 2011, an Interview with Paul Pacter was conducted in New York City by James Stocker for the Securities and Exchange Commission Historical Society’s virtual museum and archive on the history of financial regulation. A 53-page transcript of that interview notes that, during the 2000s, he also set up a very popular website (www.iasplus.com) for accountants involved in international accounting standards. Pacter comments that: “This was done for Deloitte. We just had an idea that there ought to be someplace out on the Internet where all sorts of information about international accounting standards was available. The old IASC didn’t have much of a website, although I did that too, I taught myself the HTML and the graphics and how to do FTP. Deloitte said, “Why don’t you set something up for IASs?” We opened shop as a free site. We opened the door in December 2000. Visitor numbers grew dramatically. When I left Deloitte in June 2010, we were getting 60,000 to 70,000 visitors a week – unique visitors. We had about 1,000 webpages. We had 4,000 downloadable PDF files. It was, and still is, the biggest website in a very narrow area of interest, international accounting standards.”

 

Looking back at a long career, Pacter comments: “...I must just say out of respect for the U.S. SEC, they’ve been a great contributor to accounting standards. They have stayed out of the development of the standards. They’ve encouraged and prodded and commented. They’ve insisted on high quality implementation. For that, I say I have the greatest respect for the commission and for their counterparts around the world. We don’t want politics setting accounting standards. We don’t want politicians setting accounting standards any more than I want them telling my surgeon how to do my surgery. Set the broad principles and let the private sector do the job. The commission has done that, and I thank them for that.”

Evolution of Accounting Standards in Canada

As the end of the first decade of the new millennium draws to a close, it is time to review the current status of standard-setting activities in Canada, ponder the future and reflect on the past. A special edition of FYI Accounting Standards, a periodic newsletter issued by staff of the Canadian Accounting Standards Board (AcSB), describes the implementation of the new strategic plan for publicly-accountable enterprises, private enterprises and not-for-profit organizations.


The FYI newsletter explains the changes in the accounting standards applicable to each type of reporting entity by listing those amendments to the CICA Handbook-Accounting that took effect in 2009 or that have been issued but are not yet effective. It also notes that the AcSB expects to include International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in the Handbook early in 2010. In that regard, it lists amendments to IFRS that are effective for 2009, issued but not yet effective, and expected to be issued in 2010.


Migrating to IFRS will mean significant changes to both the accounting standards and the due process for developing future standards. Lest we forget, the standard-setting processes in Canada have evolved considerably over the years (as explained in CAmagazine articles spanning the period from 1976 to 1992). The evolution continues…