Formal Participation in the IASB's Due Process of Standard Setting: A Multi-issue/Multi-period Analysis
AbstractThis paper sets out to enquire about the nature of constituents' participation in the IASB's due process in terms of representation (constituents' diversity and characteristics) and drivers to participate. We choose to adopt a multi-issue/multi-period approach to investigate constituents' formal participation. An analysis of comment letters sent directly to the IASB over the period 2002--2006, reveals that preparers sent most letters followed by the accounting profession and standard setters. With regard to timing, we find that preparers concentrate their participation efforts at a later stage in the process compared to the other constituents, who react earlier. Formal indirect participation in the IASB's due process by submitting comment letters to EFRAG is infrequently used by European constituents. In those cases where constituents exert influence to both IASB and EFRAG, they often use exactly the same comment letter. Concentrating on the drivers to participate, the data reveal that preparers, accountants and standard setters react significantly more when proposals have a major impact on the accounting numbers of a company. Users, stock exchanges and their supervisory authorities write significantly more comment letters when disclosure issues are at stake. Finally, participating preparers in the IASB's due process are larger and more profitable than non-participating preparers.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal European Accounting Review.
Volume (Year): 21 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/REAR20
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.