Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report  - CPAsummit2011
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force Report - CPAsummit2011

2,282

Published on

The time is now! MACPA task force supports creation of private company standards board, says GAAP exceptions and modifications are essential to meet the needs of private company users of financial …

The time is now! MACPA task force supports creation of private company standards board, says GAAP exceptions and modifications are essential to meet the needs of private company users of financial statements and reduce overly complex and unnecessary accounting standards.

A panel of task force members presented their report, recommendtaions and analysis at the MACPA CPA Summit on June 3, 2011 at the BWI Hilton Hotel in Maryland.

The report was accepted and endorsed unaimously by the MACPA Board the day before.

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes

Comments are closed

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,282
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
17
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • The current U.S. financial regulatory system has relied on a fragmented and complex arrangement of federal and state regulators—put into place over the past 150 years—that has not kept pace with major developments in financial markets and products in recent decades. As the nation finds itself in the midst of one of the worst financial crises ever, the regulatory system increasingly appears to be ill-suited to meet the nation’s needs in the 21st century. Today, responsibilities for overseeing the financial services industry are shared among almost a dozen federal banking, securities, futures, and other regulatory agencies, numerous self-regulatory organizations, and hundreds of state financial regulatory agencies. Much of this structure has developed as the result of statutory and regulatory changes that were often implemented in response to financial crises or significant developments in the financial services sector. For example, the Federal Reserve System was created in 1913 in response to financial panics and instability around the turn of the century, and much of the remaining structure for bank and securities regulation was created as the result of the Great Depression turmoil of the 1920s and 1930s.
  • Let me set the stage for you. This is an issue that impacts vast reaches of the U.S. economy. Only about 15,000 companies are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, but there are 28.5 million private businesses, according to the U.S. Census Bureau (this number excludes non-profits which would not be covered by current proposed changes in private company reporting). Yet U.S. GAAP is driven by issues that occur in the capital markets to address the needs of public companies and their stockholders. So, standards developed for 15,000 companies have to be applied to many of the nation’s 28.5 million private businesses that prepare U.S. GAAP financial statements. In recent years, accounting and reporting guidelines too often have lacked relevance and have become unnecessarily complex. The result is that too much of what’s included in current financial statements is not useful to private company owners, lenders or investors. Anything that hinders small businesses has a profound impact on the U.S. economy. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, small businesses employ more than half of all private sector workers in the United States and are responsible for 44% of the private payroll. They have generated 64% of the new jobs created during the past 15 years. Many of these companies are small and medium-sized organizations that report to a narrow range of financial statement users, such as lenders, venture capitalists and insurers.
  • In 2004, the AICPA undertook a research effort to definitively assess what constituents thought about the problem after hearing concerns from CPAs and others for decades. The AICPA’s Special Task Force on Private Company Financial Reporting (also known as the “Castellano Task Force”), after getting responses from more than 3,700 lenders, investors, business owners, financial managers and public accounting practitioners, found that too many GAAP-specific requirements are not useful or relevant to private company constituents. A majority of each group who had an opinion believed it would be useful if underlying accounting in GAAP reporting were, in certain instances, different for non-public companies. The task force published its report in early 2005, underscoring the need and urgency to address private company reporting. Two examples cited as offering many private company financial statement users little benefit while costly to implement are: the interpretation formerly known as FIN 48, on uncertainty in income taxes, and FIN 46R, related to consolidation of variable interest entities. Many private company constituents say both are causing unnecessary challenges for private companies and demonstrate why private companies are spending quite a bit of their time and money complying with accounting standards that relate to information that may never actually be used by anyone reading their financial reports.
  • What was the U.S. response? In 2010, the AICPA, the Financial Accounting Foundation and the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy formed the Blue Ribbon Panel on Private Company Financial Reporting. (FAF oversees the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the Governmental Accounting Standards Board.)The panel’s mission was different from those of prior committees or groups created to study the issue because it looked at the standard-setting process from a policy level, rather than at specific changes to individual standards. This was a significant departure from the past. It was about exploring whether and how there should be a standard-setting process that recognizes there are differences between public and private companies.The panel chair was Rick Anderson, CPA, CEO of Moss Adams LLP and a former member of the FAF Board of Trustees. The other 17 members represented a top level cross-section of financial reporting constituencies, including lenders, investors, owners, preparers and auditors. AICPA President and CEO Barry C. Melancon, CPA, served on the panel. Five meetings were held in 2010 and the panel completed its report with recommendations for change in January 2011. The report was given to FAF at that time.
  • The report had other recommendations as well: To determine when there should be differences for private companies in the standards, the panel recommended that a framework with decision criteria be developed against which standards would be compared. It also outlined a process for exposure of proposed standards. Another recommendation is that the new standard-setting structure and process be reviewed after 3 to 5 years to determine if it is working as effectively and efficiently as it should. The FAF would at that point determine if the changes are performing as intended, and whether additional structural modifications are necessary.The number of board members of the new board was proposed for between 5 and 7.The panel’s staff estimated the cost of the new board at approximately $4-5 million annually and suggested ways of funding it.
  • In 2004, the AICPA undertook a research effort to definitively assess what constituents thought about the problem after hearing concerns from CPAs and others for decades. The AICPA’s Special Task Force on Private Company Financial Reporting (also known as the “Castellano Task Force”), after getting responses from more than 3,700 lenders, investors, business owners, financial managers and public accounting practitioners, found that too many GAAP-specific requirements are not useful or relevant to private company constituents. A majority of each group who had an opinion believed it would be useful if underlying accounting in GAAP reporting were, in certain instances, different for non-public companies. The task force published its report in early 2005, underscoring the need and urgency to address private company reporting. Two examples cited as offering many private company financial statement users little benefit while costly to implement are: the interpretation formerly known as FIN 48, on uncertainty in income taxes, and FIN 46R, related to consolidation of variable interest entities. Many private company constituents say both are causing unnecessary challenges for private companies and demonstrate why private companies are spending quite a bit of their time and money complying with accounting standards that relate to information that may never actually be used by anyone reading their financial reports.
  • Transcript

    • 1. PRIVATE COMPANYSTANDARDS –IS IT TIME?Presentation for:Maryland Association of CPAsCPA SummitJune 3, 2011BWI Hilton
    • 2. Our Panelists All members of the MACPA Private Company Standards Task ForceSkip Falatko, CPA – MACPAArt Flach, CPA – Grant ThorntonJoselin Martin, CPA – Hayles & Howe, IncCarl Kampel, CPA – Ellin & Tucker, Chtd
    • 3. US TreasuryMD Comptroller MD ComptrollerMD Comptroller CAQ Courtesy of the Maryland Association of CPAs – 2008 edition Drawing by Carol Kirwan, CPA
    • 4. Another way to look at standards & oversight Public Company Private Company Int’l CompanyFinancial SEC FASB IASBReporting FASB PCFRC IFRS & SMEAudit /Attest AICPAPerformanceStandards PCAOB ASB, ARSC, IAASB PRBCode of AICPA AICPAConduct PEEC PEEC IFACCPA State Oversight & Enforcement of CPA LicenseLicensure
    • 5. The PlayersSEC FAF BRP FASB GASB PCFRC & State Boards & State CPA Societies
    • 6. Additional Background Info15,000 issuers and 28.5 million private companiesbut GAAP driven by public company issuesSmall businesses employ more than half of allprivate sector workersPrivate companies and their financial statementusers have information needs that are differentthan public companies
    • 7. Similar Issue Outside the US Too
    • 8. Concerns About Private Company Financial Reporting Include:Too many GAAP-specific requirements not useful or relevant for private companiesGreater FASB emphasis on public companiesIncreased cost, complexity, time- consuming using full GAAPUse of OCBOA raises the issue of what’s “generally accepted”
    • 9. U.S. Answer: Blue Ribbon Panel on Private Company Financial ReportingAddress how accounting standards can best meetprivate company financial statement users’ needsDetermine future of GAAP standard-setting processfor private companiesSponsored by AICPA, FAF and NASBA18 panel members: cross-section of financialreporting constituencies, includinglenders, investors, owners, preparers and auditors
    • 10. Blue Ribbon Panel’s ConclusionsA problem exists that needs resolutionRecommendation #1 - Enhance GAAP for private companies by making significant modifications, where warrantedRecommendation #2 - FAF should create a separate private entities accounting standards board
    • 11. Other Key BRP RecommendationsFramework for differential decision criteria3-5 year sunset review to determineeffectiveness of new board5-7 board members$4-5 million annual budget
    • 12. FAF “Working Group”FAF created a “Working Group” on March 4, 2011Comprised of FAF Trustees and FAF StaffAdded non-profits to the mix
    • 13. 90.87% of MACPA members believe we need Private Company StandardsInsights form the Spring & Fall, 2010 PIU / town hall meetings covering 2,000+ members
    • 14. Judy O’Dell chair of FASB PCFRC shared her perspectiveThe MACPA requested that private company’s be exempt from Fin 48 and Fin 46Rin September, 2008. The PCFRC’s recommendations were ignored by FASB.
    • 15. MACPA’s responseMACPA sent comment letter to FAF on December, 2010 for initial surveyMACPA Chair Kimberly Ellison-Taylor appoints special Accounting Standards Task ForceAccounting Standards Task Force held meetings from Jan – Apr, 2011
    • 16. MACPA Accounting Standards Task Force – The power of “We”Chair:Art Flach Grant Thornton Public accounting firmMACPA Facilitators:Tom Hood MACPA CEO & Executive Director Non-ProfitJackie Brown MACPA COO Non-ProfitSkip Falatko MACPA CFO Non-ProfitTask Force Members:Ernie Paszkiewicz Gross Mendelsohn & Assoc. Public accounting firmRob Tuggle BB&T BankingBill Ziegler BB&T BankingCarl Kampel Ellin & Tucker Public accounting firmJoselin Martin Hayles & Howe Private companyLiz Gantnier Stegman & Co. Public accounting firmBob Tarola Right Advisory Public company consultantMike Manspeaker Smith Elliott Kearns & Company, LLC Public accounting firmKen Kelly McCormick Public companyDon McConnell KCI Private companyJim Canalichio Dixon Valve Company Private companyJim Jenkins Stout Causey & Horning Public accounting firmAl DeLeon DeLeon & Stang Public accounting firmDebra Busk DeLeon & Stang Public accounting firmCharles Postal Santos, Postal & Co. Public accounting firmJim McKinney University of Maryland EducatorOJ Phillips Small Business Administration Government
    • 17. Our guiding principles
    • 18. Draft conclusions – approved by MACPA BoardPrivate Company Standards need to be addressed (costs, complexity, OCBOA)Current structure is not working – PCFRC recommendations were not addressed, prior studies indicate issueOther jurisdictions around the world recognizes needs of private company users are different
    • 19. TASK FORCE ISSUES Concept of differences in recognition and measurement Separate Board  Funding source to ensure independence  Collaboration with FASB  How much divergence  Disparity of interests, small vs. large
    • 20. TASK FORCE ISSUES Effect of increasing complexity  Revenue Recognition  Leases  IFRS Is it too much?  How does everyone become knowledgeable – Bankers, sureties and other users
    • 21. TASK FORCE ISSUESWhat is the future role of the FASB? Input and support to IASB. Advancing considerations of U.S. perspectives Incorporating IFRS into U.S. GAAP through an endorsement process Educating U.S. constituents about IFRS
    • 22. New DevelopmentsAICPA launches Private Company Standards resource centerhttp://www.aicpa.org/privateGAAPFASB offers webcast: FASB Update for NonPublic Entities (Private Companies)Our view is that we applaud the efforts of FASB to focus on needs of privatecompanies and that there was a formal structure with the PCFRC that wasignored. It is time to give this new approach a chance with a re-visit in five (5)years.
    • 23. Conclusion On June 2, 2011 the MACPA Board of Directors unanimously adopted the report & recommendations of our Accounting Standards Task Force, urging FAF to move forward with the separate Private Company Standards Board and the recommendations in their Blue Ribbon Panel report.MACPA Announcementhttp://www.macpa.org/Content/26146.aspxMACPA whitepaper can be viewed & downloaded here:http://www.slideshare.net/thoodcpa/macpa-private-company-standards-whitepaper
    • 24. Next StepsDistribution and communicationEducation & awareness of our members and the small business communityMake our voices heard at the FAF
    • 25. Skip Falatko, CPA Director of Finance Maryland Association of CPAs Business Learning Institute (443) 632-2322 E-mail skip@macpa.org Web http://www.macpa.orgBlogs http://www.cpasuccess.com http://www,bizlearningblog.com
    • 26. Tom Hood, CPA.CITP CEO Maryland Association of CPAsFollow me on: Twitter: http://www.Twitter.com/tomhood LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tomhood Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/thoodcpaPlaxo: http://tomhood.myplaxo.comSlideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/thoodcpaYoutube: http://www.youtube.com/thoodcpaSecond Life avatar name: Rocky MaddaloniCheck our Customized Training Catalog out: http://www.bizlearning.net

    ×