IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/blg/reveco/v76y2024i4p38-47.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants In The Standards Review Process: An Analysis Of Ifrs For Smes

Author

Listed:
  • MARINA Alexandra-Gabriela

    (Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu)

  • BOGOSLOV Ioana Andreea

    (Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu)

  • SITEA Daria Maria

    (Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu)

Abstract

The IFRS for SMEs is a simplified framework of financial reporting standards designed specifically for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The IASB issued this standard to cater to entities that do not have public accountability but still need to prepare high-quality financial statements for internal and external stakeholders. This study focuses on comprehending and appreciating the crucial influence of stakeholders in developing accounting standards. Their involvement is not merely a factor but an essential element of the standard-setting process. We will conduct a qualitative analysis of comments letters from the First Comprehensive Review of IFRS for SMEs, acknowledging the importance of each contribution. The analysis will also delve into the relationships between the IASB and the stakeholders, aiming to uncover insights into stakeholder influences and IASB independence during the review process. The IASB has been criticized for not considering the perspectives of users and owners in establishing requirements, particularly in the IFRS for SMEs. The analysis reveals a high similarity between Europe and other Global organisations, mainly due to their European origins. However, responses from Oceania show the lowest similarity, mainly due to limited comment letters. Professional organizations, Accounting Regulatory Bodies, and Accounting, audit, and consultant firms share common concerns, while Insurance Agencies show lower similarity due to differing concerns and vocabulary. The IASB should consider the interests of all stakeholders, but the lack of clarity on revision criteria may undermine its legitimacy and transparency. Therefore, it is crucial to provide clear and transparent revision criteria to ensure universally accepted standards and enhance stakeholder confidence in the process.

Suggested Citation

  • MARINA Alexandra-Gabriela & BOGOSLOV Ioana Andreea & SITEA Daria Maria, 2024. "Determinants In The Standards Review Process: An Analysis Of Ifrs For Smes," Revista Economica, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 76(4), pages 38-47, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:blg:reveco:v:76:y:2024:i:4:p:38-47
    DOI: 10.56043/reveco-2024-0033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economice.ulbsibiu.ro/revista.economica/archive/76403marina&bogoslov&sitea.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.56043/reveco-2024-0033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Handley & Sue Wright & Elaine Evans, 2018. "SME Reporting in Australia: Where to Now for Decision†usefulness?," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 28(2), pages 251-265, June.
    2. Bamber, Matthew & McMeeking, Kevin, 2016. "An examination of international accounting standard-setting due process and the implications for legitimacy," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 59-73.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Molina Sánchez, Horacio & Bautista Mesa, Rafael, 2018. "La participación en el /Participation in the IASB Due Process," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 36, pages 429-458, Mayo.
    2. Durocher, Sylvain & Picard, Claire-France & Dugal, Léa, 2024. "Giving sense to and making sense of OCI: When each component makes sense, but the whole does not," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    3. Bamber, Matthew & McMeeking, Kevin & Petrovic, Nikola, 2018. "Mandatory Financial Reporting Processes and Outcomes," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 227-245.
    4. Vinnari, Eija & Dillard, Jesse, 2016. "(ANT)agonistics: Pluralistic politicization of, and by, accounting and its technologies," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 25-44.
    5. Esther Pittroff, 2021. "The legitimacy of global accounting rules: a note on the challenges from path-dependence theory," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 25(2), pages 379-396, June.
    6. Paola Ramassa & Alberto Quagli, 2024. "Interpreting IFRS: The Evolving Role of Agenda Decisions," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 60(2), pages 205-235, June.
    7. Anna Samsonova-Taddei & W. Stuart Turley, 2019. "Accountability in an Independent Regulatory Setting: The Use of Impact Assessment in the Regulation of Financial Reporting in the UK," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 1053-1076, April.
    8. Karen Handley & Elaine Evans & Sue Wright, 2020. "Understanding participation in accounting standard‐setting: the case of AASB ED 192 Revised Differential Reporting Framework," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(4), pages 3621-3645, December.
    9. Flauzeliton José Aparecido Gonçalves & André Aroldo Freitas De Moura & Fabio Yoshio Suguri Motoki, 2022. "What influences the implementation of IFRS for SMEs? The Brazilian case," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2947-2992, June.
    10. Stenka, Renata, 2022. "Beyond intentionality in accounting regulation: Habitual strategizing by the IASB," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Stenka, Renata & Jaworska, Sylvia, 2019. "The use of made-up users," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    12. Warren, Rebecca, 2024. "Maintaining and extending hegemony: The politics of accounting standard setting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    13. Samindi Ishara Hewa & Rajni Mala & Jinhua Chen, 2020. "IASB's independence in the due process: an examination of interest groups’ influence on the development of IFRS 9," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(3), pages 2585-2615, September.
    14. Hedi Baazaoui, 2020. "For A New Method Of Calculating The Disclosure Index," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 9(2), pages 9-24.
    15. Beaumont, Stacey & Clarkson, Peter & Tutticci, Irene, 2018. "Identifying lobbying strategies: An analysis of public responses to the Productivity Commission Inquiry into executive remuneration in Australia," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 288-306.
    16. Christian Rainero & Giuseppe Modarelli & Alessandro Migliavacca & Riccardo Coda, 2021. "Early Traces of Materiality and Relevance Principles in Luca Pacioli’s Tractatus XI," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(9), pages 153-153, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    IASB; Stakeholders; IFRS for SMEs; Stakeholder theory; Legitimacy theory;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M1 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration
    • M4 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:blg:reveco:v:76:y:2024:i:4:p:38-47. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Eduard Alexandru Stoica (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feulbro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.