The Securities and Exchange Commission signaled the demise of U.S. accounting standards, kicking off a process Wednesday that could ultimately require all publicly listed American companies to follow an international model instead.
Introduced in two steps, the shift could eventually cut costs for companies and smooth cross-border investing. At the same time, investors worry it will create confusion, especially during the transition. Others critics worry that the international system offers too much wiggle room for companies, compared with the more precise rules enshrined in U.S. standards.
The SEC's proposal would allow some large multinational companies to report earnings according to international accounting beginning in 2010. The SEC estimates at least 110 U.S. companies would qualify based on their market capitalization, among other factors. The agency also laid out a road map by which all U.S. companies would switch to International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS, beginning in 2014, at the expense of U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, the guiding light of accountants for decades.
The proposals will be open for public comment for 60 days and could be finalized later this year.
U.S. corporations gave the news a qualified welcome. Margaret Smyth, controller at aerospace and building-services conglomerate United Technologies Corp., said the possibility of having one set of books around the world, though still years away, would result in 'tremendous savings.' In the short term, Ms. Smyth said the shift would be expensive and added that 'there are some issues that still need to be worked out,' particularly in the realm of tax accounting.
The SEC says the change will help the U.S. to compete globally because many other nations use the international standards or plan to do so. Larger companies, especially those with overseas subsidiaries, have urged the SEC to move in this direction. They hope a single accounting standard will enable U.S. investors to more easily compare a retailer in the U.S. with one in France, for example.
SEC Chairman Christopher Cox noted that 100 countries around the globe use IFRS and two-thirds of U.S. investors currently own securities of foreign companies.
'The increasing world-wide acceptance and U.S. investors' increasing ownership of foreign companies make it plain that if we do nothing and simply let these trends develop, comparability and transparency will decrease for U.S. investors and issuers,' he said.
The proposal marks the capstone of Mr. Cox's push as chairman to lower global barriers for U.S. investors. It also stems from a concern, voiced more loudly before the credit crunch took hold, that Wall Street was losing business to overseas competitors. In particular, some say the New York Stock Exchange and other U.S. exchanges have been a less attractive place for global companies to list their shares because of the distinct U.S. accounting standards.
Mr. Cox will likely step down following the November presidential election and the next administration could have different priorities. But several observers say it's likely the shift to IFRS will still occur.
Skeptics, even those who agree with the concept of a common accounting language, called the SEC's approach wrongheaded. Barbara Roper, director of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America, said allowing certain U.S. companies to switch ahead of others would 'shift the burden of the translation between the two accounting languages onto investors.'
When companies can choose which standard to use, 'there's every reason to believe . . . they'll choose the language that paints their financials in the rosiest light,' she added.
The U.S. accounting system, which is ingrained in textbooks, business schools and company treasuries, is based on detailed rules, while the international system expects companies to follow broad principles. In practice, the systems differ on smaller matters, such as the timing of when a company should note any change in the value of an investment.
Under U.S. GAAP, for example, research and development costs are generally treated as expenses when they occur. Under the international standards, once a project gets to the development stage the costs are spread out over time. GAAP also provides specific instructions for industries such as oil and insurance. IFRS doesn't.
Jack Ciesielski, an accountant and publisher of the Analyst's Accounting Observer, says accounting under IFRS tends to lead to higher earnings. He examined filings from 137 foreign companies whose shares traded in the U.S. in 2006. That was the final year that U.S. regulators required these companies to translate their books into GAAP from IFRS. Mr. Ciesielski says 63% of the companies reported higher earnings under the international standard, and the median increase was 11.1%.
A move to international standards 'will likely inflate the earnings of U.S. companies and mislead investors,' said Gregory Pai of Paradigm Asset Management in White Plains, N.Y. On the plus side, he noted, the convergence should eventually allow multinationals to save on their accounting bills.
The SEC's road map requires the two bodies that oversee U.S. and international accounting rules narrow the differences.
Kara Scannell / Joanna Slater
|
|
