FASB Statements 165,166,167 & 168
FASB Statement 165
This statement is meant to dictate how to handle activities and events that occur after the official balance sheet had been completed but before the actual financial statement is available to be issued. Issued in 2009, the statement aims to cover some events and transactions that were before in a gray area according to the GAAP. These events and activities occur after the period for recording management and financial activities has closed. Thus, the evaluation of those activities typically would not be considered in that period. However, the financial statements from that period have not yet been released. This ultimately creates a situation where there is the potential to recognize such events with special circumstances.
There are circumstances where events and transactions that happen after the date of the balance statement should still be included within its financial statements. The general name of this statement happens to be "Subsequent Events." For events that occur before the financial statements are released, they can be included into the balance statement with the added notation. This notation is a disclosure for the exact date the event or transaction occurred and the exact meaning of the date, suggesting when such financial data would be available.
Additionally, this ultimately warns with the disclosure that there are transactions and events that may not be properly evaluated because of their late duration. For certain entries that record middle ground transactions, it is important to note whether or not they were properly evaluated within the current balance sheet. If events are not appropriately evaluated, there needs to be a disclosure which states the exact date of the publication of the financial statement that will have that specific transaction...
GAAP vs. IFRS As globalization begins to hit full stride, new rules and customs must be addressed with older and more established practices. The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) represents a global perspective on the accounting rules for global organization. The United States has followed their Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) to dictate the regulations dealing with domestic companies. The purpose of this essay is to examine both of these
GAAP Newsletter Dear Managers: In the 21st century, particularly after a combination of the Global Recession and issues surrounding companies like Enron and Arthur Anderson, there has been a new paradigm about accounting in the media, for stakeholders, governments, and professionals alike. There are a number of ways to accomplish this new paradigm, which revolves around trust in reporting numbers, the use of numbers in particular financial documents, and the manner in
GAAP There are two main types of accounting, cash accounting and accrual accounting. The former is used mainly in private businesses, and small ones at that. The latter is the basis for generally accepted accounting principles and is therefore much more common in business, especially larger businesses. This paper will explain some of the differences between these two forms. The differences between cash accounting and accrual accounting stem from philosophical differences. Cash
Introduction There are a number of different areas of difference between US GAAP and IFRS. Nguyen (2017) points out that one of those areas of difference is with respect to the treatment of intangible assets. Intangible assets show on the balance sheet, but what types of intangible assets and how they are valued differ between these two different accounting systems. This report will highlight these differences, and their implications. US GAAP Treatment There
Introduction In 2016, the chief accountant of the SEC, James Schnurr, announced that he would not recommend that the SEC should mandate, or even offer the choice, for US companies to use International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). This announcement was believed to be the "death knell" for the convergence between GAAP and IFRS, a project that had already stretched more than a decade with only moderate success (Katz, 2015). The Merits of
The authors also point out that in the hierarchy of the GASB statements, interpretations, technical bulletins and the role of consensus approvals of GASB also need to be seen as the development of future Implementation Guide recommendations for future years as well. In summary, the authors provide an excellent overview of how the hierarchy of GASB statements relate to the Implementation Guides produced. Impact of the article: This specific article
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now