International Financial Reporting Standards

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are accounting standards issued by the IFRS Foundation and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). They constitute a standardised way of describing a company's financial performance and position so that company financial statements are understandable and comparable across international boundaries. They are particularly relevant for companies with publicly listed shares or securities.

IFRS have replaced many different national accounting standards around the world but have not replaced the separate accounting standards in the United States, where US GAAP is applied.

History

The International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) was established in June 1973 by accountancy bodies representing ten countries. It devised and published International Accounting Standards (IAS), interpretations and a conceptual framework. These were looked to by many national accounting standard-setters in developing national standards.

In 2001, the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) replaced the IASC with a remit to bring about convergence between national accounting standards through the development of global accounting standards. During its first meeting the new Board adopted existing IAS and Standing Interpretations Committee standards (SICs). The IASB has continued to develop standards, calling the new standards "International Financial Reporting Standards" (IFRS).

In 2002, the European Union (EU) agreed that, from 1 January 2005, International Financial Reporting Standards would apply for the consolidated accounts of EU-listed companies, bringing about the introduction of IFRS to many large entities. Other countries have since followed the lead of the EU.

In 2021, on the occasion of COP26 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Glasgow, the IFRS Foundation announced the formation of the new International Sustainability Standards Board, ISSB.

Due process

New standards and interpretations are developed in a formal, usually multi-year process known as the due process.: 64  The procedural requirements are set out in the IFRS Foundation's Due Process Handbook, which applies equally to the IASB and the ISSB.: 1.1, 1.5  A standard-setting project typically comprises the following steps:

  1. Public consultation on the Board's work plan, at least every five years, and decision to add a project to the work plan: 4.3–4.8, 5.1–5.9 
  2. Research to assess whether standard-setting is needed: 4.9–4.13 
  3. Publication of a discussion paper, research paper or request for information for public comment: 4.14–4.21 
  4. Development of an exposure draft in public Board meetings: 6.1–6.10 
  5. Publication of the exposure draft for public comment, normally for at least 120 days: 6.8, 6.19–6.21 
  6. Consideration of the feedback received, completion of the deliberations and decision on whether re-exposure is necessary: 6.22–6.32 
  7. Finalisation and issuance of the standard: 6.33–6.41 
  8. Post-implementation review, which normally begins within five years of the effective date: 6.52–6.66 

Publishing an exposure draft is a mandatory step, whereas publishing a discussion paper before an exposure draft is a non-mandatory "comply or explain" step: if the Board omits it, it must explain its reasons to the Trustees' Due Process Oversight Committee.: 3.46–3.48  Before adding a major project to the work plan that was not contemplated in the previous consultation, the Board consults the IFRS Advisory Council.: 3.55, 4.7 

The publication of an exposure draft or a final standard requires a supermajority by way of ballot, meaning at least eight Board members in favour if the Board has thirteen or fewer members and nine if it has fourteen; other decisions, such as adding a project to the work plan, require a simple majority of the members present at a meeting attended by at least 60% of the members.: 3.14–3.18 : 65 

Endorsement in the European Union

In the European Union, IFRS apply only once they have been adopted into EU law in an endorsement procedure, through which each standard or interpretation becomes directly applicable law for all companies applying IFRS under the IAS Regulation.: 60  The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), a private body of experts, advises the European Commission on whether to adopt or reject a new standard. The Commission submits its proposal to the Accounting Regulatory Committee (ARC), which is made up of representatives of the member states. If the ARC approves the proposal, it is submitted to the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny; if neither objects within three months, the standard is adopted. If the ARC rejects the proposal or does not decide within three months, the Commission can submit the proposal to the Council, and the standard can still be adopted with the approval of the Council and the Parliament. The whole procedure can take around one year. No endorsement procedure exists for the sustainability standards of the ISSB, since the EU has developed its own sustainability reporting requirements.: 60 

Adoption

IFRS Standards are required or permitted in 132 jurisdictions across the world, including major countries and territories such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, the European Union, GCC countries, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, and Turkey.

To assess progress towards the goal of a single set of global accounting standards, the IFRS Foundation has developed and posted profiles of the use of IFRS Standards in individual jurisdictions. These are based on information from various sources, with the starting point being the responses provided by standard-setting and other relevant bodies to a survey that the IFRS Foundation conducted. As of August 2019, profiles are completed for 166 jurisdictions, with 166 jurisdictions requiring the use of IFRS Standards.

Due to the difficulty of maintaining up-to-date information in individual jurisdictions, three sources of information on current worldwide IFRS adoption are recommended:

Ray J. Ball described the expectation by the European Union and others that IFRS adoption worldwide would be beneficial to investors and other users of financial statements, by reducing the costs of comparing investment opportunities and increasing the quality of information. Companies are also expected to benefit, as investors will be more willing to provide financing. Companies that have high levels of international activities are among the group that would benefit from a switch to IFRS Standards. Companies that are involved in foreign activities and investing benefit from the switch due to the increased comparability of a set accounting standard. However, Ray J. Ball has expressed some scepticism of the overall cost of the international standard; he argues that the enforcement of the standards could be lax, and the regional differences in accounting could become obscured behind a label. He also expressed concerns about the fair value emphasis of IFRS and the influence of accountants from non-common-law regions, where losses have been recognised in a less timely manner.

US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles

US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, commonly called US GAAP, remains separate from IFRS. The Securities Exchange Committee (SEC) requires the use of US GAAP by domestic companies with listed securities and does not permit them to use IFRS; US GAAP is also used by some companies in Japan and the rest of the world.

In 2002 IASB and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), the body supporting US GAAP, announced a programme known as the Norwalk Agreement that aimed at eliminating differences between IFRS and US GAAP. In 2012 the SEC announced that it expected separate US GAAP to continue for the foreseeable future but sought to encourage further work to align the two standards.

IFRS is sometimes described as principles-based, as opposed to a rules-based approach in US GAAP; in US GAAP there is more instruction in the application of standards to specific examples and industries.

Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting

The Conceptual Framework serves as a tool for the IASB to develop standards. It does not override the requirements of individual IFRSs. Some companies may use the Framework as a reference for selecting their accounting policies in the absence of specific IFRS requirements. The first version of the Framework was adopted in 1989; a revised version was published on 29 March 2018 and has applied since 1 January 2020.: 68 

Objective of financial statements

The Conceptual Framework states that the primary purpose of financial information is to be useful to existing and potential investors, lenders and other creditors when making decisions about the financing of the entity and exercising rights to vote on, or otherwise influence, management's actions that affect the use of the entity's economic resources.

Users base their expectations of returns on their assessment of:

  • The amount, timing and uncertainty of future net cash inflows to the entity;
  • Management's stewardship of the entity's resources.

Qualitative characteristics of financial information

The Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting defines the fundamental qualitative characteristics of financial information to be:

  • Relevance; and
  • Faithful representation

The Framework also describes the following enhancing qualitative characteristics:

  • Comparability
  • Verifiability
  • Timeliness
  • Understandability

Elements of financial statements

The Conceptual Framework defines the elements of financial statements to be:

  • Asset: A present economic resource controlled by the entity as a result of past events which are expected to generate future economic benefits.
  • Liability: A present obligation of the entity to transfer an economic resource as a result of past events.
  • Equity: The residual interest in the assets of the entity after deducting all its liabilities.
  • Income: Increases in economic benefit during an accounting period in the form of inflows or enhancements of assets, or decrease of liabilities that result in increases in equity. However, it does not include the contributions made by the equity participants (for example owners, partners or shareholders).
  • Expenses: Decreases in assets, or increases in liabilities, that result in decreases in equity. However, these do not include the distributions made to the equity participants.
  • Other changes in economic resources and claims: Contributions from holders of equity and distributions to them.

Recognition of elements of financial statements

Under the Conceptual Framework issued in 2018, recognition can be described as a two-step process:

Recognition of assets and liabilities under the 2018 Conceptual Framework
Step Question If not met Paragraphs
1 Does the item meet the definition of an asset (a present economic resource controlled by the entity as a result of past events) or of a liability (a present obligation of the entity to transfer an economic resource as a result of past events)? Not recognised 4.3, 4.26
2 Would recognition provide users with relevant information and a faithful representation of the item, and do the benefits justify the costs? Factors include existence uncertainty, a low probability of an inflow or outflow of economic benefits, and measurement uncertainty. Not recognised; information about the item may need to be disclosed in the notes 5.6–5.25
If both steps are met, the item is recognised in the statement of financial position.

The previous versions of the Conceptual Framework instead required that it be probable that future economic benefits would flow to or from the entity and that the item could be measured reliably; the 2018 version does not set a probability threshold. The requirements of individual standards take precedence over the Conceptual Framework.

In some cases specific standards add additional conditions before recognition is possible or prohibit recognition altogether.

An example is the recognition of internally generated brands, mastheads, publishing titles, customer lists and items similar in substance, for which recognition is prohibited by IAS 38. In addition research and development expenses can only be recognised as an intangible asset if they cross the threshold of being classified as 'development cost'.

Whilst the standard on provisions, IAS 37, prohibits the recognition of a provision for contingent liabilities, this prohibition is not applicable to the accounting for contingent liabilities in a business combination. In that case the acquirer shall recognise a contingent liability even if it is not probable that an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits will be required.Added section on measurement bases under the 2018 Conceptual Framework (mixed measurement model), with table

Measurement of elements of financial statements

IFRS follow a mixed measurement model: different standards require or permit different measurement bases for different items. The 2018 Conceptual Framework distinguishes between historical cost and current value measurement bases:

Measurement bases under the 2018 Conceptual Framework
Category Measurement basis Description Examples of use in standards Paragraphs
Historical cost The cost incurred in acquiring or creating an asset, including transaction costs, updated for depreciation, amortisation and impairment; for liabilities, the consideration received less transaction costs Cost model for property, plant and equipment (IAS 16), inventories (IAS 2), amortised cost of financial instruments (IFRS 9) 6.4–6.9
Current value Fair value The price that would be received to sell an asset, or paid to transfer a liability, in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date Measurement guidance in IFRS 13; financial instruments at fair value (IFRS 9); revaluation model (IAS 16) 6.12–6.16
Value in use (assets) and fulfilment value (liabilities) The present value of the cash flows that an entity expects to derive from the use and ultimate disposal of an asset, or expects to be obliged to transfer to fulfil a liability Value in use in impairment testing; fulfilment cash flows of insurance contracts (IFRS 17) 6.17–6.20
Current cost The cost of an equivalent asset, or the consideration that would be received for an equivalent liability, at the measurement date Rarely required by standards 6.21–6.22

Individual standards also use measures derived from these bases, such as the recoverable amount (the higher of fair value less costs of disposal and value in use) used in IAS 36 Impairment of Assets, and net realisable value used for inventories in IAS 2. The earlier versions of the Conceptual Framework listed historical cost, current cost, realisable (settlement) value and present value as measurement bases.

Concepts of capital and capital maintenance

Concepts of capital maintenance are important as only income earned in excess of amounts needed to maintain capital may be regarded as profit. The Conceptual Framework describes the following concepts of capital maintenance:

  • Financial capital maintenance. Under this concept a profit is earned only if the financial amount of the net assets at the end of the period exceeds the financial (or money) amount of net assets at the beginning of the period, after excluding any distributions to, and contributions from owners during the period. Financial capital maintenance can be measured in either nominal monetary units or units of constant purchasing power;
  • Physical capital maintenance. Under this concept a profit is earned only if the physical productive capacity (or operating capacity) of the entity (or the resources or funds needed to achieve that capacity) at the end of the period exceeds the physical productive capacity at the beginning of period, after excluding any distributions to, and contributions from owners during the period.

Most entities adopt a financial concept of capital maintenance. However, the Conceptual Framework does not prescribe any model of capital maintenance.

Requirements

Entities whose securities are publicly traded, or that are in the process of going public, must also prepare a segment report in accordance with IFRS 8. Unlike the German Commercial Code, IFRS do not require a management report; the IASB has instead issued a non-binding practice statement on Management Commentary, which entities can apply voluntarily.: 74 

The components of the financial statements are interrelated: the cash flow statement explains the change in cash and cash equivalents shown in the balance sheet, while the profit or loss of the period, as part of total comprehensive income, together with transactions with owners explains the change in equity shown in the balance sheet and in the statement of changes in equity.: 21–22 : 8–9 

Interrelation of the components of IFRS financial statements

Presentation of financial statements

IFRS financial statements consist of:

Comparative information is required for the prior reporting period.

General features

The following are the general features of IFRS:

  • Fair presentation and compliance with IFRS: Fair presentation requires the faithful representation of the effects of the transactions, other events and conditions in accordance with the definitions and recognition criteria for assets, liabilities, income and expenses set out in the Framework of IFRS.
  • Going concern: Financial statements are present on a going concern basis unless management either intends to liquidate the entity or to cease trading, or has no realistic alternative but to do so.
  • Accrual basis of accounting: An entity shall recognise items as assets, liabilities, equity, income and expenses when they satisfy the definition and recognition criteria for those elements in the Framework of IFRS.
  • Materiality and aggregation: Every material class of similar items has to be presented separately. Items that are of a dissimilar nature or function shall be presented separately unless they are immaterial.
  • Offsetting: Offsetting is generally forbidden in IFRS. However certain standards require offsetting when specific conditions are satisfied (such as in case of the accounting for defined benefit liabilities in IAS 19 and the net presentation of deferred tax liabilities and deferred tax assets in IAS 12).
  • Frequency of reporting: IFRS requires that at least annually a complete set of financial statements is presented. However listed companies generally also publish interim financial statements (for which the accounting is fully IFRS compliant) for which the presentation is in accordance with IAS 34 Interim Financing Reporting.
  • Comparative information: IFRS requires entities to present comparative information in respect of the preceding period for all amounts reported in the current period's financial statements. In addition comparative information shall also be provided for narrative and descriptive information if it is relevant to understanding the current period's financial statements. The standard IAS 1 also requires an additional statement of financial position (also called a third balance sheet) when an entity applies an accounting policy retrospectively or makes a retrospective restatement of items in its financial statements, or when it reclassifies items in its financial statements. This for example occurred with the adoption of the revised standard IAS 19 (as of 1 January 2013) or when the new consolidation standards IFRS 10-11-12 were adopted (as of 1 January 2013 or 2014 for companies in the European Union).
  • Consistency of presentation: IFRS requires that the presentation and classification of items in the financial statements is retained from one period to the next unless:
    1. it is apparent, following a significant change in the nature of the entity's operations or a review of its financial statements, that another presentation or classification would be more appropriate having regard to the criteria for the selection and application of accounting policies in IAS 8; or
    2. an IFRS standard requires a change.

Cash flow statements

Cash flow statements in IFRS are presented as follows:

  • Operating cash flows: the principal revenue-producing activities of the entity and are generally calculated by applying the indirect method, whereby profit or loss is adjusted for the effects of transaction of a non-cash nature, any deferrals or accruals of past or future cash receipts or payments, and items of income or expense associated with investing or financing cash flows.
  • Investing cash flows: the acquisition and disposal of long-term assets and other investments not included in cash equivalents. These represent the extent to which expenditures have been made for resources intended to generate future income and cash flows. Only expenditures that result in a recognised asset in the statement of financial position are eligible for classification as investing activities.
  • Financing cash flows: activities that result in changes in the size and composition of the contributed equity and borrowings of the entity. These are important because they are useful in predicting claims on future cash flows by providers of capital to the entity.


Criticisms

In 2012, staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a report setting out observations on a potential adoption of IFRS in the United States. This included the following criticisms:

IASB staff have responded to these observations and concluded that there were no insurmountable obstacles for the adoption of IFRS by the United States.

In 2013 IASB member Philippe Danjou listed ten common criticisms of IFRS. He sought to counter these, describing them as misconceptions:

Charles Lee, a professor of accounting at Stanford Graduate School of Business, has also criticised the use of fair values in financial reporting.

In 2019, H. David Sherman and S. David Young criticised the current state of financial reporting under IFRS and US GAAP:

Differences between IFRS and GAAP

There are two frameworks that investors and accountants recognize on a global scale: International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). They both serve to ensure transparency and consistency in financial statements. However, they take a vastly different approach to recognizing revenues, reporting leases, and recording inventory. IFRS is followed in over 140 countries, and the system is more principle-based as it gives businesses flexibility in applying standards. GAAP on the other hand, is used almost exclusively in the United States and is governed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). This system is rule-based and much stricter, and it provides industry-specific guidelines. These differences don’t just affect accountants, they also impact how businesses operate and how investors interpret financial performance.

Take two companies for example, one in the U.S. and one in Europe, both selling software subscriptions. Even though they operate the same way, they report their revenues differently, due to the divide between IFRS and GAAP. Both companies follow a five-step model under IFRS 15 and GAAP (ASC 606), but GAAP includes extra layers of industry-specific guidance for sectors such as real estate, software, and financial services. This means that a software company in the U.S. might have detailed, step-by-step rules enforcing revenue from subscriptions. In contrast, international companies using IFRS have more flexibility in applying general principles. For companies operating both frameworks, this can lead to confusion when reporting revenue across different financial statements.

Lease accounting

Lease accounting is another crucial part representing the different approaches that IFRS and GAAP take. For IFRS 16, every lease must be recorded on the balance sheet and classified as a right-to-use asset with a corresponding liability. However, GAAP (ASC842) maintains two types of leases: one on the balance sheet and operating leases, which are generally not recorded on the balance sheet. While this approach allows U.S. companies to hide some lease obligations, critics like H. David Sherman and S. David Young argue that it complicates financial comparisons, especially for global investors trying to assess companies’ liabilities.

Inventory valuation

Another divergence is inventory valuation. IFRS and GAAP differ in their models, Last In First Out (LIFO) and First In First Out (FIFO). This is primarily a difference in accounting-based calculations, which can significantly impact results during fluctuating inventory costs. IFRS adopts the FIFO method, while GAAP utilizes the LIFO method. The LIFO method can provide tax savings during periods of inflation since it results in lower reported profits. However, the inconsistency between the two strategies might cause inconvenience for companies trying to use a standardized rule to value themselves, as using different calculation methods may not always be an apples-to-apples comparison.

Economic opportunities

For businesses, the divergence in the two methods isn't just differences in number or technical detail, as they also have real-world consequences. Multinational corporations adjusting in both IFRS and GAAP jurisdictions must maintain separate financial reports, showing the inconvenience in the process. For investors, transparency and accuracy in the decision-making process might be disrupted by discrepancies in revenue timing, asset valuation, and lease obligations to get a clear picture of financial health. Despite ongoing efforts to harmonize the two systems, significant gaps remain, and full convergence may never happen. For now, understanding these variations is crucial, not just for accountants but for anyone making investment decisions in a global economy.

Economic effects

Many researchers have studied the effects of IFRS adoption, but results are unclear. For example, one study used data from 26 countries to study the economic consequences of mandatory IFRS adoption. It showed that, on average, even though market liquidity increases around the time IFRS is introduced, it is unclear whether IFRS mandate adoption is the sole reason for observed market effects. Firms' reporting incentives, law enforcement, and increased comparability of financial reports can also explain the effects. The adoption of IFRS in the European Union is a special case because it is an element of wider reforms aiming to consolidate the economies of member countries. One study reports positive market effects for companies adopting IFRS, but these positive effects occurred even before the transition took place. Another study looked at the development of the stock market in Poland; it found positive effects associated with Poland joining the EU but no specific effect attributable to its adoption of IFRS. Interestingly, member states maintain a large degree of independence in setting national accounting standards for companies that prefer to stay local.

See also

References

  1. ↑ Posner, Elliot (1 October 2010). "Sequence as explanation: The international politics of accounting standards". Review of International Political Economy. 17 (4): 639–664. doi:10.1080/09692291003723748. ISSN 0969-2290. S2CID 153508571.
  2. ↑ IASB. "Who we are". Retrieved 13 September 2019.
  3. ↑ Deloitte. "International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC)". Retrieved 29 July 2019.
  4. ↑ IASB. "Who we are, history". Retrieved 29 July 2019.
  5. ↑ IFRS Foundation. "IFRS Foundation announces International Sustainability Standards Board, consolidation with CDSB and VRF, and publication of prototype disclosure requirements". Retrieved 15 November 2021.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Coenenberg, Adolf G.; Haller, Axel; Schultze, Wolfgang (2024). Jahresabschluss und Jahresabschlussanalyse [Annual Financial Statements and Financial Statement Analysis] (in German) (27th ed.). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel. ISBN 978-3-7910-6192-4.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 "Due Process Handbook" (PDF). IFRS Foundation. April 2026. Retrieved 9 November 2026.
  8. ↑ "Use of IFRS by jurisdiction". IAS Plus. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
  9. 1 2 Profiles of the IFRS Foundation
  10. ↑ "World Bank Reports on the Observance of Standards and Codes". Archived from the original on 6 August 2020. Retrieved 30 July 2019.
  11. ↑ "IFAC Member Organizations and Country Profiles". Archived from the original on 10 August 2019. Retrieved 30 July 2019.
  12. 1 2 Ball R. (2006). Accounting and Business Research
  13. ↑ Bradshaw, M., et al (2010). Response to the SEC's Proposed Rule- Roadmap for the Potential Use of Financial Statements Prepared in Accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by U.S. Issuers. Accounting Horizons(24)1
  14. ↑ FASB. "Convergence with the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)". Archived from the original on 31 July 2019. Retrieved 31 July 2019.
  15. ↑ PwC. "IFRS in the US". PwC. Retrieved 31 July 2019.
  16. ↑ SEC. "A U.S. Imperative: High-Quality, Globally Accepted Accounting Standards". Retrieved 31 July 2019.
  17. ↑ AICPA. "Is IFRS That Different From U.S. GAAP?". Archived from the original on 31 July 2019. Retrieved 31 July 2019.
  18. ↑ KPMG (29 March 2018). "Conceptual Framework – The new foundation for IFRS". Archived from the original on 27 August 2019. Retrieved 27 August 2019.
  19. ↑ Mazars (25 June 2018). "Key Features of the New IFRS Conceptual Framework". Archived from the original on 29 August 2019. Retrieved 29 August 2019.
  20. ↑ Deloitte. "Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting 2018". Retrieved 29 August 2019.
  21. ↑ International Accounting Standards Board (2010). Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting, paragraph 4
  22. ↑ "Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting". IFRS Foundation. Retrieved 10 November 2026.
  23. ↑ "Extreme makeover". ACCA. Retrieved 10 November 2026.
  24. ↑ Paragraph 63 of the IFRS standard IAS 38
  25. ↑ Paragraphs 54 and 57 of the IFRS standard IAS 38
  26. ↑ Paragraph 27 of the IFRS standard IAS 37
  27. ↑ Paragraph 23 of the IFRS standard IFRS 3
  28. ↑
  29. ↑ IASB staff paper (April 2013). "Draft discussion paper: Capital maintenance" (PDF). Retrieved 5 September 2019.
  30. ↑ Coenenberg, Adolf G.; Haller, Axel; Mattner, Gerhard; Schultze, Wolfgang (2024). Einführung in das Rechnungswesen: Grundlagen der Buchführung und Bilanzierung [Introduction to Accounting: Fundamentals of Bookkeeping and Financial Reporting] (in German) (9th ed.). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel. ISBN 978-3-7910-6302-7.
  31. ↑ International Accounting Standards Board (2007). IAS1, Presentation of Financial Statements, paragraph 10
  32. ↑ Paragraph 15 of the standard IAS 1
  33. ↑ Paragraph 25 of the standard IAS 1
  34. ↑ Paragraph 28 of the standard IAS 1
  35. ↑ Paragraph 29 of the standard IAS 1
  36. ↑ Paragraph 32 of the standard IAS 1
  37. ↑ Paragraph 57, 63 of the standard IAS 19
  38. ↑ Paragraph 71 of the standard IAS 12
  39. ↑ Paragraph 36 of the standard IAS 1
  40. ↑ Paragraph 38 of the standard IAS 1
  41. ↑ Paragraph 10f of the standard IAS 1
  42. ↑ International Accounting Standards Board (2016). IAS 7, Statement of Cash Flows
  43. ↑ Deloitte. "IAS 7 – Statement of Cash". Retrieved 5 September 2019.
  44. ↑ SEC staff (13 July 2012). "Work Plan for the Consideration of Incorporating International Financial Reporting Standards into the Financial Reporting System for U.S. Issuers" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 October 2022. Retrieved 21 August 2019.
  45. ↑ Emily Chasan, Wall Street Journal (13 July 2012). "SEC Staff Offers 127 Pages of Reasons Not to Adopt IFRS". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 21 August 2019.
  46. ↑ IASB (22 October 2012). "Analysis of SEC Final Staff Report" (PDF). Retrieved 21 August 2019.
  47. ↑ Deloitte (6 February 2013). "Philippe Danjou answers 10 misconceptions about IFRS". Retrieved 21 August 2019.
  48. ↑ Charles Lee (6 February 2013). "Why fair value isn't fair". Retrieved 21 August 2019.
  49. ↑ Sherman, H. David; Young, S. David (1 July 2016). "Where financial reporting still fall short". Harvard Business Review. Retrieved 21 August 2019.
  50. ↑ "GAAP vs. IFRS: What's the Difference?". Investopedia. Retrieved 27 February 2025.
  51. ↑ "IFRS - Why global accounting standards?". www.ifrs.org. Retrieved 25 February 2025.
  52. ↑ "Complying with ASC 606 and IFRS 15". Certinia. Retrieved 21 February 2025.
  53. ↑ fasb.org https://fasb.org/page/PageContent?pageId=/projects/recentlycompleted/revenue-recognition-summary.html. Retrieved 21 February 2025. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  54. ↑ PricewaterhouseCoopers. "IFRS 16 Leases expands the balance sheet". PwC. Retrieved 27 February 2025.
  55. ↑ www.fasb.org https://www.fasb.org/page/PageContent?pageId=/projects/recentlycompleted/leases-topic-842lessorsleases-with-variable-lease-payments--postissuance-summary.html&isstaticpage=true. Retrieved 21 February 2025. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  56. ↑ "Where Financial Reporting Still Falls Short". Harvard Business Review. 1 July 2016. ISSN 0017-8012. Retrieved 27 February 2025.
  57. ↑ "How Does Inventory Accounting Differ Between GAAP and IFRS?". Investopedia. Retrieved 27 February 2025.
  58. ↑ U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2017). A financial system that creates economic opportunities: Capital markets. U.S. Department of the Treasury. https://home.treasury.gov/sites/default/files/2018-03/A-Financial-System-Capital-Markets-FINAL-FINAL.pdf
  59. ↑ Daske, Holger; Hail, Luzi; Leuz, Christian; Verdi, Rodrigo (2013). "Adopting a Label: Heterogeneity in the Economic Consequences Around IAS/IFRS Adoptions". Journal of Accounting Research. 51 (3): 495–547. doi:10.1111/1475-679X.12005. hdl:1721.1/88143. ISSN 0021-8456.
  60. ↑ Klimczak, Karol (2011). "Market reaction to mandatory IFRS adoption: evidence from Poland". Accounting & Management Information Systems / Contabilitate Si Informatica de Gestiune. 10 (2): 228–248.
  61. ↑ Dobija, Dorota; Klimczak, Karol Marek (2010). "Development of accounting in Poland: Market efficiency and the value relevance of reported earnings" (PDF). The International Journal of Accounting. 45 (3): 356–374. doi:10.1016/j.intacc.2010.06.010. ISSN 0020-7063. S2CID 155043665.
  62. ↑ André, Paul (2017). "The Role and Current Status of IFRS in the Completion of National Accounting Rules – Evidence from European Countries". Accounting in Europe. 14 (1–2): 1–12. doi:10.1080/17449480.2017.1319965. ISSN 1744-9480. S2CID 157333221.

Further reading

Data related to International Financial Reporting Standards at Wikidata