+7 495 989 9610, 9am6pm (GMT+3), Monday – Friday
Russian version 

JOURNALS

  

FOR AUTHORS

  

SUBSCRIBE

    
Digest Finance
 

Assessing the institutional and financial factors of the IFRS Foundation management from the perspective of the Eurasian Economic Union

Vol. 26, Iss. 4, DECEMBER 2021

PDF  Article PDF Version

Received: 27 September 2021

Received in revised form: 11 October 2021

Accepted: 30 October 2021

Available online: 27 December 2021

Subject Heading: FINANCE OF ORGANIZATIONS. ANALYSIS OF ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS

JEL Classification: F53, F55, F65, G15, M49

Pages: 470482

https://doi.org/10.24891/df.26.4.470

Mikhail V. RODCHENKOV Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russian Federation
M.Rodchenkov@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6938-2313

Subject. This article explores the impact of the modern institutional and financial structure of the IFRS Foundation on the quality and functionality of the international financial reporting standards, as the main instruments of globalization of the financial and economic sphere, caused by insufficiency in the management of the IFRS Foundation.
Objectives. The article aims to identify the reasons for the growth of risk factors in the IFRS Foundations activities caused by its institutional and financial structure, taking into account the previously identified problems of the IFRS Foundation management, assess the position of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) in the IFRS management system, and develop practical proposals to minimize the identified risks.
Methods. For the study, I used a comparative analysis.
Results. The article finds that the institutional and financial structure of the IFRS Foundation is characterized by disproportion of the current national, sectoral, and financial representation in the Foundations management bodies. This creates risks of inharmonious development of IFRS and confirms the ongoing pendency of the Foundation's unresolved management problems previously identified. The current position of the EEU is characterized by a significant imbalance between functional and financial representations in the Foundation's management system. To reduce such risks, the article proposes to diversify the industry representation, and introduce financial participation coefficients and national representation into the practice of the Foundation's management, based on a transparent and understandable algorithm using public data.
Conclusions. The formulated proposals can be useful for the authorized federal governing bodies of the Russian Federation and the EEU governing bodies when developing growth strategies in the field of accounting and reporting, to improve international standards, and protect the national economic interests of the EEU countries in the course of the IFRS Foundations activities under present-day conditions.

Keywords: IFRS Foundation, EEU, globalization, accounting process, management

References:

  1. Agoglia C.P., Doupnik T.S., Tsakumis G.T. Principles-Based versus Rules-Based Accounting Standards: The Influence of Standard Precision and Audit Committee Strength on Financial Reporting Decisions. The Accounting Review, 2011, vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 747767. URL: Link
  2. Liang L., Riedl E.J. The Effect of Fair Value versus Historical Cost Reporting Model on Analyst Forecast Accuracy. The Accounting Review, 2014, vol. 89, iss. 3, pp. 11511177. URL: Link
  3. Kaya D., Kirsch R., Henselmann K. The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) as Intermediaries of the European Union Decision to Adopt International Accounting Standards: 19732002. The Accounting Historians Journal, 2016, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 59127. URL: Link
  4. Baker C.R., Barbu E.M., Le T.N. A Historiographical Review of Research Concerning Accounting Changes in post-Communist Economies. The Accounting Historians Journal, 2015, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 136. URL: Link
  5. Bhimani A., Bond D., Sivabalan P. Does Greater User Representation Lead to More User Focused Standards? An Empirical Investigation of IASBs Approach to Standard Setting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 2019, vol. 38, iss. 2, pp. 6588. URL: Link
  6. Kadous K., Mercer M. Can Reporting Norms Create a Safe Harbor? Jury Verdicts against Auditors under Precise and Imprecise Accounting Standards. The Accounting Review, 2012, vol. 87, iss. 2, pp. 565587. URL: Link
  7. Helfat C.E. Vertical Firm Structure and Industry Evolution. Industrial Corporate Change, 2015, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 803818. URL: Link
  8. Bajada C. An Examination of the Statistical Discrepancy and Private Investment Expenditure. Journal of Applied Economics, 2001, vol. 4, iss. 1, pp. 2761. URL: Link
  9. Preuss S., Königsgruber R. How Do Corporate Political Connections Influence Financial Reporting? A Synthesis of the Literature. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 2021, vol. 40, no. 1, Article 106802. URL: Link
  10. Loughran T., McDonald B. Measuring Readability in Financial Disclosures. The Journal of Finance, 2014, vol. 69, iss. 4, pp. 16431671. URL: Link
  11. Wagenhofer A. Trading off Costs and Benefits of Frequent Financial Reporting. Journal of Accounting Research, 2014, vol. 52, iss. 2, pp. 389401. URL: Link
  12. Lev B. The Deteriorating Usefulness of Financial Report Information and How to Reverse It. Accounting and Business Research, 2018, vol. 48, iss. 5, pp. 465493. URL: Link
  13. Ashbaugh H., Pincus M. Domestic Accounting Standards, International Accounting Standards, and the Predictability of Earnings. Journal of Accounting Research, 2001, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 417434. URL: Link
  14. Richardson A.J. Merging the Profession: A Social Network Analysis of the Consolidation of the Accounting Profession in Canada. Accounting Perspectives, 2017, vol. 16, iss. 2, pp. 83104. URL: Link
  15. Al Farooque O. Sustainable Financial Reporting Practice in Australian Companies Does Quality Matter? The Journal of Developing Areas, 2016, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 175189. URL: Link
  16. Riles A. Culture Clash: Experts and the Public, Chapter 4. In: Riles A. (Ed.) Financial Citizenship: Experts, Publics, and the Politics of Central Banking. Ithaca, London, Cornell University Press, 2018, pp. 3542. URL: Link
  17. Camfferman K. International Accounting Standard Setting and Geopolitics. Accounting in Europe, 2020, vol. 17, iss. 3, pp. 243263. URL: Link
  18. Kim J., Koga Y. The Value and Credit Relevance of IFRS versus JGAAP Accounting Information. Hitotsubashi Journal of Commerce and Management, 2020, vol. 53, iss. 1, pp. 3148. URL: Link
  19. Jorissen A., Lybaert N., Orens R., Van der Tas L. A Geographic Analysis of Constituents Formal Participation in the Process of International Accounting Standard Setting: Do We Have a Level Playing Field? Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 2013, vol. 32, iss. 4, pp. 237270. URL: Link
  20. Larson R.K. Constituent Participation and the IASBs International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee. Accounting in Europe, 2007, vol. 4, iss. 2, pp. 207254. URL: Link
  21. Richardson A.J., Eberlein B. Legitimating Transnational Standard-Setting: The Case of the International Accounting Standards Board. Journal of Business Ethics, 2011, vol. 98, iss. 2, pp. 217245. URL: Link

View all articles of issue

 

ISSN 2311-9438 (Online)
ISSN 2073-8005 (Print)

Journal current issue

Vol. 26, Iss. 4
December 2021

Archive