The perceived problems of each system
Discuss about the Contemporary Accounting Theory for Financial Regulation.
Financial regulation is considered as the laws and rules which are governed as per the financial concerns such as “banks, brokers and investment companies”. The various nature of the rules is promulgated by the “government regulators” for safeguarding the main interests of the “investors” and appraise the financial stability and maintain orderly market. The regulatory activities are set with the minimum standard of “capital, conduct, making regular inspections, and investigating and prosecuting misconduct”. The main objective of the financial regulation is seen with the presenting the data in a comprehensive manner and make sure investors are “receiving equal opportunity to share their interests” (Cascino & Gassen, 2015).
The study aims to review the “Australia and the United Kingdom regulatory requirement for financial reporting”. The important discussions have been identified with the issues in the individual countries. The study has discussed on the functioning of the regulatory environment and different types of the major decision makers involved. The primary discussion has been considered with the appropriate legislation. The next part of the discussion has shown the progress for the adoption of the “selected regulatory environment” and evaluate the “financial regulatory environment through the lens of Regulatory Capture Theory”. The final section has depicted the regulatory theory in the individual countries (Chen, Ng & Tsang, 2015).
The main intention of the IFRS implementation in Australia is seen with enhancing the “standards, comparability, accuracy and transparency of financial statements for a company within a particular period”. The main form of the IFRS regulation is determined with the concerns such as “lack of training, “problem for the entities, auditors, regulators as well as the interesting parties who are familiar with previous accounting standards”. Some of the main form of the issues in adhering the requirements of the IFRs has been further seen to be based on compliance to the to the political and legal environment. In some of the various types of the other situations the main form of the depictions has been seen to be related to the implementation of the IFRS system (Ijiri, 2018).
In some situations, the delay in the IFRS has been discerned as the main challenge which exist in the UK. Sluggish endorsement process has been also seen to be a major concern. It has been identified that the “European Financial Reporting Advisory Group’s (EFRAG)” has spotted the early issues in the adoption for the new standards prevailing in Europe. The response to the responses to Philippe Maystadt’s enquiries about IFRS in 2013 on behalf of the Commission”, is recognised with the Europe as the standard for modifying the international standard and implementation of the new standards at later stages. Moreover, the “IFRS 2 – Share-based payment” has gone down by 2.38%”. In addition to this, the IFRS is seen to discontinue several types of the activities which are associated to held for sale. “This is evident with the assets being reduced from the profit recognition by 0.35%” (Ji & Lu, 2014).
Working of Regulatory Environment
In “Australia AASB” is identified with an agency working as per regulations of “Australian Government”. This is observed with the “AASB standards are known as Australian Accounting Standards” consisting of the Australian equivalents to “International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs)”. The main adoption of the IFRS is considered with the “Australian Accounting Standards, the AASB made some modifications to IFRSs, including removing some options and adding some disclosures”. AASB has made certain modifications relating to the “Australian Accounting Standards” as the various types of the requirement are like the “IFRSs as issued by the IASB for for-profit entities”. The main form of the disclosures is retained as per the “non-IFRS compliant requirements” and the same is applied with the “not-for-profit and public-sector entities”. The differential reporting as prescribed by the “Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) in July 2010” has adopted with the “Reduced Disclosure Requirements’ (RDR)”. These requirements have been able to adhere to the “Australian Accounting Standards (which are equivalent to IFRSs), but with reduced disclosure requirements” (Kabir & Rahman, 2016).
The changes pertaining to the company law post implementation of “EU accounting directives” is mandatory to make the relevant amendments concerning the “UK and Republic of Ireland (ROI) accounting standards”. This is required for the maintaining the consistency among the “legal framework and financial reporting”. The different types of the legal framework for the opportunity has been identified with the suitable “accounting standards to support the new micro entities regime”. The different types of the modifications to the company has affected the small company regimes and minor amendments which had been drafted as per the “UK and Republic of Ireland accounting standards”. The company lay has distinguished the financial reporting framework namely – “IFRS and UK and Ireland GAAP (generally accepted accounting practice)”. The different types of the entities which are publicly listed is required to apply for the IFRS for preparing the group accounts and the entities are free to choose among “IFRS and UK and Ireland GAAP”. It has been also identified that the UK GAAP is comprised of the five regimes, three among which are available for the “FRS 102 The Financial Reporting Standard applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland” (Krahel, J. P., & Titera, 2015).
As discussed Deegan (2014), the effective implementation date of the IFRs in Australia is effective from the “1 January 2005”. As it has been identified that AASB commenced the adoption and review of the ongoing relevance which is mandatory for the IFRS requirement as per the “Australian for-profit and not-for-profit (NFP)”. There has been significant number of the studies which ahs been further able to focus on the reporting entities. In different situations the transition system is discerned with changes needed for the quality and maintaining the cost efficiency of the reporting requirements (Hla & Md Isa, 2015).
Country’s progress towards the adoption of IFRS
The IFRS accounting standard in the UK was designed by the Accounting Standards Board (ASB) from 1 August 1990”. On “2 July 2012, the FRC Board assumed responsibility for setting accounting standards”. Most of the accounting standards were seen to be develop as per the ASB’s “Financial Reporting Standards (FRSs)”. The important nature of the standard has been discerned with the “FRSSE (Financial Reporting Standard for Smaller Entities). FRSs are first usually issued as Exposure Drafts for consultation that are known as Financial Reporting Exposure Drafts (FREDs)”. It needs to be also noted that on “November 2012 FRC stated new standards as a part of the new UK GAAP framework” with the implementation of the “FRS 100: Application of Financial Reporting Requirements” and “FRS 101: Reduced disclosure framework” (Ramanna & Sletten, 2014).
The theory of “regulatory capture” relates to such a situation where the government failure is evident with government creating regulatory agency created to work in the interest of the special interest group or public. The application of such a theory has been depicted with such a situation when the special interest group dominates an industry. If implementation of the “regulatory capture” is seen in favour of the “interests of firms or political groups are prioritized over the interests of the public” then this leads to a loss for the society. The various types of the government agencies which are seen to be suffering from the “regulatory capture” are termed as “captured agencies”. The various types of the public interests are seen to be regulated by such captured agencies. In this situation the “gamekeeper turns poacher”. This theory “sets out to protect the ignored in favour for the regulatory interest”. The “regulatory capture theory” is related to that branch of the economics which is considered with “conceptualization of the government regulatory intervention” (Sugiyama & Islam, 2016).
The impartment discourse on the regulatory environment has identified “regulatory capture theory” varying in the different countries. Some of the various types of the other depictions of the financial report is seen with the compliance to the revised exposure drafts and standards. The main form of the changes is tracked in the agencies which are captured.
In Australia the “small business is seen to be the main victims of the regulatory capture theory”. It has been further discerned that an augmented focus is given to the “large industries, especially the public sectors to be regionally situated in the major areas across Australia”. The regional special interest groups are in the areas such as “New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia”. The small business sectors have been able to make an important contribution towards the “small businesses’ shares of national employment and output aggregates”.
Regulatory Capture Theory and its usefulness
In the U.K. the “Competition Act (1998) and Enterprise Act (2002)” is depicted to provide the regulators more power to act against the monopoly power. The two main examples have been discerned in form of “FSA and the Bank of England have been perpetual sufferers of “regulatory capture” by the banking industry. The “Governor of the Bank of England, Sir Mervin King” has been further able to accept the weight and complexity which is considered to be more difficult for the “regulators to operate”.
The second example is considered with the “alleged capture of the tax authorities (HMRC) by the UK’s mobile phone giant, Vodafone, who apparently negotiated a £6b tax reduction, reducing their tax bill for 2009-10 from £7b to £1b”. The effect of the five-year period has been considered with the “Enterprise Act (2002)” which not seen as a single main factor carteled by the OFT. This evident despite of charging heavy fines, covert collusion is difficult to prove. The new powers have been further able to provide the regulators to undertake the covert surveillance. It has been further determined that the tacit collusion is impossible to prove as per the different types of the “statistical techniques which may be used with the correlations among the proc movement in theory and practice”. This has been further considered as the main criticism for inadequate definition in the single market (Chen, Ng & Tsang, 2015).
Conclusion
The different types of the depiction made in the regulatory capture theory has been able to discussion on the situation where the government failure is evident with government creating regulatory agency created to work in the interest of the special interest group or public. The application of such a theory has been depicted with such a situation when the special interest group dominates an industry. It has been further identified that in case of the regulatory capture the firms are seen to be suffering from the “regulatory capture” and becoming “captured agencies”. The various types of the public interests are seen to be regulated by such captured agencies. In this situation the “gamekeeper turns poacher”. This theory “sets out to protect the ignored in favour for the regulatory interest”. The “regulatory capture theory” is related to that branch of the economics which is considered with “conceptualization of the government regulatory intervention”. The important discussion on the regulatory capture in the Australia is discerned with the “small business which are depicted to be the main victims of the regulatory capture theory”. It has been further discerned that an augmented focus is given to the “large industries, especially the public sectors to be regionally situated in the major areas across Australia”. The regional special interest groups are in the areas such as “New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia”. The important assessment on the application of the regulatory capture theory in the UK is seen with “Competition Act (1998) and Enterprise Act (2002)” is depicted to provide the regulators more power to act against the monopoly power. It has been interpreted that the aforementioned acts has acted in favour of the major government organizations. “FSA and the Bank of England have been perpetual sufferers of “regulatory capture” by the banking industry. In addition to this, “alleged capture of the tax authorities (HMRC) by the UK’s mobile phone giant, Vodafone, who apparently negotiated a £6b tax reduction, reducing their tax bill for 2009-10 from £7b to £1b”.
References
Cascino, S., & Gassen, J. (2015). What drives the comparability effect of mandatory IFRS adoption? Review of Accounting Studies, 20(1), 242–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-014-9296-5
Chen, L., Ng, J., & Tsang, A. (2015). The effect of mandatory IFRS adoption on international cross-listings. The Accounting Review, 90(4), 1395–1435. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50982
Deegan, C., 2014. Financial accounting theory. McGraw-Hill Education Australia.
Hla, D. T., & Md Isa, A. H. Bin. (2015). Globalisation of financial reporting standard of listed companies in asean two: Malaysia and singapore. International Journal of Business and Society, 16(1), 95–106.
Ijiri, Y. (2018). An introduction to corporate accounting standards: A review. Accounting, Economics and Law. https://doi.org/10.1515/ael-2017-0058
Ji, X.-D., & Lu, W. (2014). The value relevance and reliability of intangible assets?: Evidence from Australia before and after adopting IFRS. Asian Review of Accounting, 22(3), 182–216. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-10-2013-0064
Kabir, H., & Rahman, A. (2016). The role of corporate governance in accounting discretion under IFRS: Goodwill impairment in Australia. Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, 12(3), 290–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcae.2016.10.001
Krahel, J. P., & Titera, W. R. (2015). Consequences of big data and formalization on accounting and auditing standards. Accounting Horizons, 29(2), 409–422. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51065
Ramanna, K., & Sletten, E. (2014). Network effects in countries’ adoption of IFRS. Accounting Review, 89(4), 1517–1543. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50717
Sugiyama, S., & Islam, J. (2016). Empirical findings from the reconciliations in the first IFRS compliant reports prepared by Japanese-owned subsidiaries in Australia. Advances in Accounting, 35, 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2016.06.003
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
