I am not convinced of a need to abandon U.S. GAAP in favor of IFRS. That is not to say that U.S. GAAP is perfect. Nor is IFRS perfect. I’m also not convinced that providing financial statements in two different sets of accounting standards would be beneficial for either investors or issuers. With complexity in both businesses and products on the rise, it seems that presenting information in a dueling set of financial reporting standards does not really aid in understanding.

To be frank, this debate between dueling standards needs to move on. Neither regime worked ideally in the financial crisis, and neither may serve investors well in today’s post-financial crisis, technologically disrupted, and data-driven world. In practice and in reality, accounting standards may vary between jurisdictions due to legal and cultural factors, as well as differences in perspective. Remember, IFRS is not consistently implemented around the world.

Ms. Stein acknowledged that convergence “makes sense” but suggested “reimagining” accounting regimes to use technology and globalization to “minimize differences and maximize global investment and access to capital.”

The full transcript of Ms. Stein’s speech is available on the SEC's Web site.

The stan­dards apply to the fol­low­ing in­dus­tries:

• Aerospace and defense.
• Chemicals.
• Containers and packaging.
• Electrical and electronic equipment.
• Industrial machinery and goods.

The new pro­vi­sional stan­dards and cor­re­spond­ing in­dus­try briefs are avail­able on the SASB’s Web site.

For a de­tailed summary of the meeting, see De­loitte’s March EITF Snap­shot.

• Revenue recognition research projects — The FASB and IASB both voted to propose practical expedients upon transition. In addition, the FASB made tentative decisions related to (1) sales tax presentation, (2) noncash consideration, and (3) collectibility. For more information, see Deloitte’s related Heads Up.
• Agenda prioritization— The FASB voted to do the following:
  • Add these projects to its agenda:
    • Accounting for interest income on callable debt securities.
    • Simplifying the equity method of accounting.
    • Accounting for measurement-period adjustment in a business combination.
  • Add these issues to the EITF’s agenda:
    • Effect of derivative contract novations on existing hedge accounting relationships.
    • Accounting for embedded put and call options in debt instruments.
  • Not to address these issues:
    • Income statement presentation of credit card and other payment processing costs.
    • Accounting for reacquired rights in a business combination.
    • Balance sheet offsetting of payables and receivables arising from securities lending transactions that are cleared through a regulated central counterparty and subject to a master netting arrangement.

• Conceptual framework: measurement — The FASB discussed a concept for use in determining the initial carrying amounts of assets and liabilities. No tentative decisions were made.

In addition, the FASB has provided its tentative decisions notes regarding this meeting on its Web site.

See the project page for more information.

• Financial instruments: impairment — The FASB made tentative decisions related to transition requirements for debt securities, purchased credit-impaired assets and all other assets, and disclosures. This meeting represents the substantial completion of the project. The Board directed the staff to draft a final ASU to obtain stakeholder feedback on the revised guidance. For an overview of the tentative decisions reached in the impairment project, see Deloitte’s related Heads Up newsletter. For more information, see the meeting minutes on the FASB’s Web site.
• Insurance: disclosures about short-duration contracts — The FASB made tentative decisions about whether (1) disclosures about claims development should be presented as required supplementary information, (2) tentative disclosure requirements for claim count information should be amended, (3) incurred but not reported amounts presented in the claims development tables should also include amounts for expected development related to reported claims, and (4) effective dates. In addition, the Board directed the staff to draft a final ASU for a vote by written ballot. For more information, see Deloitte’s related journal entry and the meeting minutes on the FASB's Web site.

• Fair value measurement disclosure requirements — The FASB made tentative decisions related to (1) modifying or eliminating certain disclosure requirements, (2) adding a new disclosure requirement for gains and losses, and (3) whether to move disclosure requirements to industry-specific Codification topics. For more information, see Deloitte’s related journal entry and the meeting minutes on the FASB's Web site.
• Financial statements of not-for-profit entities — The FASB tentatively decided that the expected benefits justify the expected costs and complexities of implementing a proposed ASU and directed the staff to draft a proposal for public comment. For more information, see the meeting minutes on the FASB’s Web site.

The im­ple­men­ta­tion guide con­tains ex­am­ples il­lus­trat­ing four dis­clo­sure scenarios:

1. Certain transfers of financial assets accounted for as sales with agreements that cause the transferor to retain substantially all of the exposure to the economic return on the transferred financial asset.
2. Repurchase agreements, securities lending transactions, and repurchase-to-maturity transactions accounted for as secured borrowings.
3. Repurchase agreements, securities lending transactions, and repurchase-to-maturity transactions accounted for as secured borrowings, alternative.
4. Repurchase agreements accounted for as secured borrowings.

Com­ments on the UGT im­ple­men­ta­tion guide are due by May 1, 2015. The guide is avail­able on the FASB’s Web site.

Statement 72 clarifies the definition of fair value and provides guidance on fair value valuation techniques, the fair value measurement hierarchy, and disclosures. The Statement is effective for periods beginning after June 15, 2015.

For more information, see Deloitte's State Government Spotlight and the press release, Statement, and GASB in Focus article on the GASB’s Web site.