TY - JOUR
T1 - Formal participation in the IASB's due process of standard setting: A multi-issue/multi-period analysis
AU - Jorissen, Ann
AU - Lybaert, Nadine
AU - Orens, Raf
AU - van der Tas, Leo
PY - 2012/12
Y1 - 2012/12
N2 - This paper
sets out to enquire about the nature of constituents’ participation in the
IASB’s due process in terms of representation (constituents’ diversity and characteristics)
and drivers to participate. We choose to adopt a multi-issue/multi-period approach
to investigate constituents’ formal participation. An analysis of comment
letters sent directly to the IASB over the period 2002 – 2006, reveals that
preparers sent most letters followed by the accounting profession and standard
setters. With regard to timing, we find that preparers concentrate their
participation efforts at a later stage in the process compared to the other
constituents, who react earlier. Formal indirect participation in the IASB’s
due process by submitting comment letters to EFRAG is infrequently used by European
constituents. In those cases where constituents exert influence to both IASB
and EFRAG, they often use exactly the same comment letter. Concentrating on the
drivers to participate, the data reveal that preparers, accountants and
standard setters react significantly more when proposals have a major impact on
the accounting numbers of acompany. Users, stock exchanges and their
supervisory authorities write significantly more comment letters when
disclosure issues are at stake. Finally, participating preparers in the IASB’s
due process are larger and more profitable than non-participating preparers.
AB - This paper
sets out to enquire about the nature of constituents’ participation in the
IASB’s due process in terms of representation (constituents’ diversity and characteristics)
and drivers to participate. We choose to adopt a multi-issue/multi-period approach
to investigate constituents’ formal participation. An analysis of comment
letters sent directly to the IASB over the period 2002 – 2006, reveals that
preparers sent most letters followed by the accounting profession and standard
setters. With regard to timing, we find that preparers concentrate their
participation efforts at a later stage in the process compared to the other
constituents, who react earlier. Formal indirect participation in the IASB’s
due process by submitting comment letters to EFRAG is infrequently used by European
constituents. In those cases where constituents exert influence to both IASB
and EFRAG, they often use exactly the same comment letter. Concentrating on the
drivers to participate, the data reveal that preparers, accountants and
standard setters react significantly more when proposals have a major impact on
the accounting numbers of acompany. Users, stock exchanges and their
supervisory authorities write significantly more comment letters when
disclosure issues are at stake. Finally, participating preparers in the IASB’s
due process are larger and more profitable than non-participating preparers.
KW - IASB
KW - standard setting
KW - IAS/IFRS
KW - lobbying
KW - constituents’ diversity
KW - multi-issue/multi-period approach
UR - https://ssrn.com/abstract=1543208
U2 - 10.1080/09638180.2010.522775
DO - 10.1080/09638180.2010.522775
M3 - Article
SN - 0963-8180
VL - 21
SP - 693
EP - 729
JO - European Accounting Review
JF - European Accounting Review
IS - 4
ER -