Derecognition of Property, Plant, Equi ...
Derecognition of an asset occurs whenever it is disposed of or it is... Read More
A joint IASB-FASB project was begun in October 2004 with the objective of developing a common conceptual framework for financial reporting.
The differences between IFRS and US GAAP which affect the conceptual framework and the general financial reporting requirements have been reduced by the IASB and FASB agreement on (i) the purpose and scope of the Conceptual Framework (2010), (ii) the objective of general purpose financial reporting, and (iii) the qualitative characteristics of useful financial information.
Today, there are several differences remaining between IFRS and US GAAP. Users of financial statements must, therefore, be prepared to consider how these different reporting standards could potentially impact financial reports, and influence the comparability of financial performance between companies as well as their relative security valuations.
Comparison of IFRS and US GAAP Frameworks
The differences between IFRS and US GAAP in relation to the financial statement elements (definition, recognition, and measurement) include the following:
- Performance Elements: The IASB framework recognizes two elements in relation to financial performance: revenue and expenses. In addition to revenue and expenses, however, the FASB framework includes three other elements: gains, losses, and comprehensive income.
- Financial Position Elements: Whereas the IASB framework defines an asset as a resource from which future economic benefits are expected to flow, the FASB framework defines an asset as a future economic benefit. The term “probable” is also used to define the assets and liabilities elements under the FASB framework, even though the term has a different meaning under the IASB framework.
- Recognition of Elements: The IASB framework includes the term “probable” as part of its recognition criteria by requiring that it be probable that any future economic benefit will flow to/from a reporting entity. The FASB framework, on the other hand, does not include the term “probable” in its recognition criteria.
- Measurement of Elements: Measurement attributes such as historical cost, current cost, settlement value, current market value, and present value, are broadly consistent under the IASB and FASB frameworks. Both frameworks, however, lack fully developed measurement concepts.
Question
Which of the following statements is correct?
A. The IASB framework defines an asset as a future economic benefit.
B. The IASB framework defines an asset as a resource from which future economic benefits are expected to flow.
C. The term “probable” is part of the FASB framework recognition criteria.
Solution
The correct answer is B.
The IASB framework defines an asset as a resource from which future economic benefits are expected to flow. Option A is incorrect because it is the FASB framework and not the IASB framework which defines an asset as a future economic benefit. Option C is incorrect too because “probable” forms part of the IASB framework recognition criteria and not that of the FASB framework.
Reading 22 LOS 22f:
Compare key concepts of financial reporting standards under IFRS and US generally accepted accounting principles (US GAAP) reporting systems
Sergio Torrico
2021-07-23
Excelente para el FRM 2
Escribo esta revisión en español para los hispanohablantes, soy de Bolivia, y utilicé
AnalystPrep para dudas y consultas sobre mi preparación para el FRM nivel 2 (lo tomé una sola vez y aprobé muy bien), siempre tuve un soporte claro, directo y rápido, el material sale rápido cuando hay cambios en el temario de GARP, y los ejercicios y exámenes son muy útiles para practicar.
diana
2021-07-17
So helpful. I have been using the videos to prepare for the CFA Level II exam. The videos signpost the reading contents, explain the concepts and provide additional context for specific concepts.
The fun light-hearted analogies are also a welcome break to some very dry content.
I usually watch the videos before going into more in-depth reading and they are a good way to avoid being overwhelmed by the sheer volume of content when you look at the readings.
Kriti Dhawan
2021-07-16
A great curriculum provider. James sir explains the concept so well that rather than memorising it, you tend to intuitively understand and absorb them.
Thank you ! Grateful I saw this at the right time for my CFA prep.
nikhil kumar
2021-06-28
Very well explained and gives a great insight about topics in a very short time. Glad to have found Professor Forjan's lectures.
Marwan
2021-06-22
Great support throughout the course by the team, did not feel neglected
Benjamin anonymous
2021-05-10
I loved using AnalystPrep for FRM.
QBank is huge, videos are great.
Would recommend to a friend
Daniel Glyn
2021-03-24
I have finished my FRM1 thanks to AnalystPrep. And now using AnalystPrep for my FRM2 preparation. Professor Forjan is brilliant. He gives such good explanations and analogies. And more than anything makes learning fun. A big thank you to Analystprep and Professor Forjan. 5 stars all the way!
michael walshe
2021-03-18
Professor James' videos are excellent for understanding the underlying theories behind financial engineering / financial analysis. The AnalystPrep videos were better than any of the others that I searched through on YouTube for providing a clear explanation of some concepts, such as Portfolio theory, CAPM, and Arbitrage Pricing theory. Watching these cleared up many of the unclarities I had in my head. Highly recommended.