Principles‐ versus rules‐based accounting standards: the FASB's standard setting strategy

George J. Benston, Michael Bromwich and Alfred Wagenhofer

Abacus, 2006, vol. 42, issue 2, 165-188

Abstract: In response to criticism of rules‐based accounting standards and Section 108(d) of the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002, the SEC proposed principles‐based (or ‘objectives‐oriented’) standards. We identify several shortcomings with this approach and focus on two of them. First, the format (type) of a standard is dependent on the contents of what the standard regulates. Given the asset/liability approach combined with fair values, we argue that the combination of this measurement concept with principles‐based standards is inconsistent because it requires significant guidance for management judgment. Second, we propose the inclusion of a true‐and‐fair override as a necessary requirement for any format that is more than ‘principles‐only’ to deal with inconsistencies between principles and guidance. We discuss the benefits of this override and present evidence from the United Kingdom's experience.

Date: 2006
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (40)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6281.2006.00196.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:abacus:v:42:y:2006:i:2:p:165-188

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0001-3072

Access Statistics for this article

Abacus is currently edited by G.W. Dean and S. Jones

More articles in Abacus from Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().