Posted by & filed under Accounting Principles, Advanced Accounting, All Articles, Auditing, Financial Accounting, Financial Reporting and Analysis, Financial Statement Analysis, IFRS, Intermediate Accounting, International Accounting, Managerial Accounting.

When the IASB and FASB began the convergence process in 2002, they considered R & D as a high-priority project, where differences between US GAAP and IFRS were seen as particularly straightforward. However, as this article notes, still no consensus has been reached because IASB’s R&D treatment  appears to defeat comparability in the eyes of the FASB.

Questions:

1. The author refers to SFAS 2 as support for R & D reporting under U.S. GAAP.  What is SFAS 2?

2.  What are the capitalization criteria from IAS 9 that became part of IAS 38 to distinguish research costs from development costs?

3.   Briefly summarize the article’s presentation of why FASB ruled  in the 1970’s that all R&D expenditures must go straight to the income statement.

Source:

Selling, Tom (2010). Failed Convergence of R & D Accounting: Only Politicians and Opportunists Would Have Downplayed the Implications, The Accounting Onion, June 5 (Retrievable online at http://accountingonion.typepad.com/theaccountingonion/2010/06/failed-convergence-of-rd-accounting-only-politicians-and-opportunists-would-have-downplayed-the-implications.html)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.