The attributes of a good principle-based standard:

• Is written in plain English
• Is easily explained
• Makes intuitive sense
• Fairly presents the facts.

The changes that are necessary for principle-based standards to succeed:

• Training changes
• Greater user sophistication
• No second-guessing by regulators
• Don't ask for rules/interpretations
• Support for careful judgement

• MIT OCW does not require any registration, grant a degree or certificate, or provide access to MIT faculty.
• MIT OCW does give self-learners free access, on a course by course basis, to such materials as the instructor's lecture notes, assignments and solutions, and review materials, usually in PDF format. Sometimes self-learners get access to student on-line discussion groups.

CPA Australia strongly supports the AASB's decision to have the same requirements as in the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in respect of for-profit entities.... CPA Australia considers that in order for for-profit entities to obtain the full benefits of the Australian adoption of IFRSs, it is important that the same requirements as IFRSs are in the AIFRSs. Some of our members have expressed to us their concern that some of the options within IFRSs do not result in the highest quality financial reporting. We understand their concerns. However, following our analysis of all the options within IFRSs we do not think that any of those options require the AASB when acting in accordance with section 227 of the Australian Securities and Investment Commission Act 2001 to temper the operation of the Financial Reporting Council's directive to the AASB as it relates to for-profit entities – "...the accounting standards applicable to reporting entities under the Act will be the standards issued by the International Accounting Standards Board...".

• Listed companies. All listed companies will be required to prepare their annual financial statements under K-IFRSs beginning in 2011. Listed companies other than financial institutions will be permitted to do so beginning in 2009. Until adopting K-IFRSs, listed companies will continue to use current Korean Accounting Standards.
• Unlisted companies. Unlisted companies will be allowed to use 'simplified accounting procedures' that KASB will adopt by 2011 but may elect to issue K-IFRS financial statements. Until KASB's simplified standards are in place, unlisted companies will continue to use their current Koeran Accounting Standards.
• Consolidation. Currently, Korean companies both listed and unlisted are required to prepare separate company financial statements as their primary published financial statements. In addition they submit consolidated financial statements to the government, and consolidation is based on greater than 30% ownership. Under IFRSs, where there is a parent-subsidiary relationship, consolidated financial statements are required as the primary statements, with consolidation on the basis of control (generally greater than 50% ownership).
• Interim reports. While all listed companies must prepare quarterly and semiannual financial statements, those with assets below KRW2 trillion (about US$2.2 billion) will not be required to prepare interim statements on a consolidated basis until 2013. All must disclose non-financial items quarterly and semiannually on a consolidated basis.

Despite the recommendation in your report, and in the Schumer-Bloomberg study, that Congress amend the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, I want to state clearly this morning that I disagree. While of course it's up to the Congress to determine its legislative priorities, both the House and the Senate have formally asked my advice on this point, in hearings on the subject of Sarbanes-Oxley, and I have repeatedly given it. We don't need to change the law, we need to change the way the law is implemented. It is the implementation of the law that has caused the excessive burden, not the law itself. That's an important distinction. I don't believe these important investor protections, which are even now only a few years old, should be opened up for amendment, or that they need to be.

The SEC has the power and the necessary flexibility to implement the law in a way that makes sense for investors and markets. And your input is a valuable tool in helping us make those changes so that Section 404 operates as intended. In particular, we've been able to phase in the application of the internal controls requirements of Section 404, with appropriate deferrals for public companies of different sizes – so that even today, nearly five years after the Act, smaller public companies are not yet required to comply with this provision.