According To The Norwalk Agreement The Fasb Will Monitor

At the request of the SEC, the AICPA (formerly the American Institute of Accountants) formed two special committees, the Committee on Accounting Procedure (CAP) and the Committee on Accounting Terminology. [1] The objective of the CAP was to publish accounting statements (guidelines) and to create a research department. During its mandate, the CAP published 51 accounting research bulletins on a large number of accounting issues; However, the CAP bulletins were only recommendations and were not binding on the members of the Institute. The CAP has been criticised for its inability to agree on difficult issues. In response, the AICPA established a special committee. The efforts of the Special Committee paved the way for the creation of the Accounting Principles Board (APB). 72 Representation 7 shows an example of three successive rounds of D-P-I-E negotiation and cooperation between the AFSB/GAAP and IASB/IFRS. We see this as a hermeneutic triple spiral process and a path to tetranormalization. We propose that this process requires active moderation on the part of a third party, given that there is currently a “us against them” orientation, at least from the point of view of the SEC, which wishes to retain final control. Despite the progress made towards convergence, setbacks are pervasive.

And while the FASB and IASB remain committed to a convergence goal, objections and concerns demanded by voters like the SEC are blocking progress. Buono and Savall (2007) suggest that successful normalizations will tend to be more fruitful when internal and external powers come together in the decision-making process. Perhaps both boards should adopt a model of representation that can take into account all parties involved. .