This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Mapping the Road to IFRS: A Survey of CPAs in Public Practice
By Joseph M. Langmead and Jalal Soroosh
he essential elements of the SEC’s proposed road map for adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) by U.S. public companies were reaffirmed by the current members of the SEC earlier this year, and the accounting community continues to consider their implications. Anticipation of such a significant change has led accountants to a range of responses, from passive watchfulness to active preparation and training. The originally proposed road map, issued for comment on November 14, 2008, identified 2014 as the proposed date for the largest U.S. public companies to convert to IFRS, with smaller public companies converting over the two ensuing years. A defined group of companies would be permitted to convert earlier than 2014, and the whole conversion process would be subject to satisfactory progress on convergence (of U.S. GAAP and IFRS) and a number of other defined conditions by 2011. While the change of administration in Washington has caused some observers to speculate about a loss of momentum, the SEC’s February 2010 reaffirmation, along with recent statements by the current chairman and chief accountant, keeps the road map essentially on track while moving the proposed adoption date from 2014 to 2015. This article considers the results of a recent survey of CPAs in public practice to evaluate their opinions about IFRS and the value of IFRS for U.S. companies. Recognizing the global nature of modern financial and capital markets, the International Accounting Standards Board
IFRS and the SEC
(IASB) and its U.S. counterpart, FASB, made a commitment to work together to minimize and, where possible, eliminate differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS. This commitment toward convergence was formalized in 2002 and has since been renewed. Many standards on both sides have been modified to reduce such differences, several new or replacement standards have been developed jointly, and several more are
in process. Significant differences remain and will not likely be eliminated in the immediate future, but the convergence process has largely been seen as successful. The SEC’s 2008 road map is predicated on continued progress in the convergence process but does not depend on complete convergence before U.S. companies become required to adopt IFRS. Its overriding concern is a single set of highAUGUST 2010 / THE CPA JOURNAL
KPMG also recently published the summary of its August 2009 IFRS Faculty Survey of accounting educators conducted in coordination with the annual meeting of the American Accounting Association (“2009 IFRS Faculty Survey: Executive Summary.049 responses (“AICPA IFRS Preparedness Survey Results. Basically.” www. the trajectory of change is toward IFRS as the only viable candidate for “globally accepted” accounting standards.” www. The large international accounting firms have been active in assembling and providing resource materials to their constituencies as well as to colleges and universities. but satisfactory integration should be targeted for no later than 2011. companies filing with the SEC when such companies employ IFRS in the manner prescribed by the IASB. A similar survey was conducted in 2008. there has often followed a level of interest in IFRS by private organizations. subject to satisfactory convergence progress by 2011 and the successful status of certain other key identified conditions at that time. The AICPA has recognized this set of standards as an available alternative to U.kpmg. of whom 70% supported the road map as is or modified. GAAP information on the part of non-U. while another 24% said that they had some knowledge of and familiarity with specific concepts. which face a major expansion of the accounting curriculum. as private organizations seek to maintain or establish various forms of relationship. several surveys of key groups affected have been conducted. only 30% of respondents expressed positive interest in IFRS adoption if they were given such a choice at that time. from academia to company managers to public practitioners.quality standards in use internationally in the relatively near term. private entities.S. Somewhat surprisingly. This is quite likely to occur in the United States as well. and nearly 45% saw no benefits to such adoption. Thus. public companies would be required to convert to IFRS beginning in 2015. The SEC’s priority for a rather imminent migration to IFRS became evident to most practitioners in 2007 with the elimination of the requirement to provide supplemental U. and organizational (52%) dimensions. the IASB has developed. The results reveal that the biggest challenge for academia is making room for IFRS content in an alreadyfull accounting curriculum.com/us/ifrs/2009results). GAAP reduced. deloitte. Only 12% believed the road map should be rejected entirely.S. the panel is planning to evaluate how standards setting for private companies in the United States compares to standards setAUGUST 2010 / THE CPA JOURNAL ting in other countries. U. Thus.amr. Majorities stated that their assessments of the impact of IFRS adoption included accounting (78%). Nearly 47% thought that the road map dates for adoption should be deferred.aicpa. the AICPA has also teamed up with the Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF) and the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA) to establish a blue-ribbon panel to address accounting standards for private companies and how such standards can best meet the needs of U. The enormity of the changes triggered by the proposals in the road map has fostered much discussion in all parts of the accounting profession. com/facultyportal/NR/rdonlyres/D91975C9 -BB7A-44CD-9B23-830A07651E7F/ 0/AAA_KPMGIFRSSurveyExecSummary FINAL11609.” www. visibility.com/dttpubs/2008ifrssurvey . Parallel with the development of a single set of standards for use by listed companies around the world. Respondents generally support speedy adoption of the road map and EXHIBIT 1 Respondent Categories (self-identified) Local Staff Senior Manager Partner Sole Practitioner Total 5 (7%) 5 (7%) 6 (9%) 41 (59%) 12 (17%) 69 (39%) Regional 2 (6%) 4 (11%) 12 (34%) 17 (49%) 0 (0%) 35 (20%) National 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%) 0 (0%) 8 (5%) International 4 (6%) 11 (17%) 25 (40%) 23 (37%) 0 (0%) 63 (36%) Total 11 (6%) 20 (11%) 47 (27%) 85 (49%) 12 (7%) 175 (100%) 31 . and recently completed. a less complex version of IFRS designed for small and medium-sized entities.S. while the SEC views convergence as a legitimate and important process by which IFRS can be improved and its unnecessary differences with U. Recently. Deloitte’s September 2009 survey of financial professionals. Less than 30% of respondents were in public practice. In this survey.org/download/news/ 2009/IFRS_Poll_Results. the practitioners likely affected by the movement toward IFRS span the entire membership of the AICPA. This article summarizes a number of them to help set the stage for the survey the authors conducted. This last result echoes some of the more cautious findings of a similar survey conducted by Deloitte in 2008 (“2008 IFRS Surveys About IFRS in the United States Survey: Where Are We Today?” www.S. and finance managers from a wide range of industries yielded approximately 150 respondents. The AICPA surveyed all sectors of its membership in March 2009 about IFRS preparedness and received 1. and transparency with public companies. In jurisdictions around the world where IFRS has become accepted for public companies. including those that have adopted IFRS. technology (63%).S.iasplus. with the most popular modification being to delay the timing by a year. Among other issues. Only 10% of respondents were already prepared or actively preparing to support IFRS adoption. users.pdf).ppt). Only 6% of the respondents said that they had advanced knowledge of IFRS.S. In the past year.S. This was effectively an explicit recognition of IFRS as an acceptable set of accounting standards in the United States. GAAP for U. only about one-third of respondents thought that IFRS adoption would make the United States more competitive globally (“IFRS Survey Results 2009: Current Issues.pdf). tax (66%). CFOs.
46 3. Judgments required in IFRS will be an important source of uncertainty and inconsistency among U. the authors employed the AICPA’s categorization of firm size. A five-scale survey instrument was mailed to them.14 3. 4. Asked whether IFRS is a step in the right direction. I Their readiness for IFRS. and I Their recommendations regarding adoption of IFRS. because these accounting professionals are the public guardians of the quality of financial information. IFRS is not as comprehensive as U. which is based on number of practitioners. The questionnaire incorporates a fivepoint scale ranging from strongly agree (5) to strongly disagree (1).” A point on which a significant majority of the respondents agreed was the fact that judgments required in IFRS will be an important source of uncertainty and inconsistency among U.S. the average was 3.59 3.S. Those bright lines were developed because of past abuses of judgment.53 2. 13% 11% 22% 25% 5% 3% 2 14% 18% 19% 19% 8% 10% 3 30% 30% 47% 42% 35% 13% 4 31% 21% 6% 14% 29% 38% Strongly disagree 5 11% 20% 5% 1% 23% 37% Mean 3. the sample mix was also comparable to that of the total population. These percentages skewed more positively for national and international firms.000 members in public practice. only about 41% of them agreed. Thus.21 2. 6. this skepticism can be detrimental. Without their support and preparedness. I Impact of IFRS. GAAP). Overall perspective on IFRS. this survey targeted CPAs in public practice in firms of all sizes. 75% of the respondents in national and international firms agreed with this notion. They perform the attest and review functions and. 3. particularly throughout smaller firms. Exhibit 1 provides a summary of the respondents. 175 useable responses were received. One of the EXHIBIT 2 Participants’ Overall Perspective of IFRS Strongly agree 1 1. As a further test of representativeness. I Adoption issues. IFRS will develop into something resembling U.83 for those with national/international firms. including small ones.95 32 AUGUST 2010 / THE CPA JOURNAL . GAAP. while 27% disagreed and 30% were neutral. Although there appears to be a level of acceptance of IFRS. they are often the primary resource called upon by management to assist and evaluate in the conversion and integration processes. IFRS is a step in the right direction.S. Again. while only 9% of them disagreed.indicate that up to one-quarter of their accounting faculty has more than a superficial knowledge of IFRS. On the survey’s five-point scale. This is important.S. It asked participants to express their views in the following five groups of questions: I Their overall perspective on IFRS. preparers. The authors obtained from the AICPA a representative sample (1. The primary objective of the authors’ survey was to determine whether CPAs in public practice are ready for IFRS and support the change to it. “IFRS lacks the bright lines simply because it is new. 5. Another perspective on the principles-based character of IFRS is that it is a temporary attribute that will be eroded with experience.S. This observation did not significantly change with firm size. While we did not apply formal statistical analytical tools. GAAP.S. skepticism is apparent. Respondents also did not strongly agree that principles-based standards (the usual characterization given to IFRS) were superior to bright-line rules (the corresponding characterization of U. SEC adoption of its road map proposal is also a likely first step toward IFRS adoption by private entities that will seek to remain transparent to the public companies with which they do business currently and in the future. GAAP. the responses indicate a reasonable representation from all firm sizes and we are thus will- The Current Survey ing to make judgmental observations based on size of firm as well as other criteria. One respondent noted. For example.028) from across all of the approximately 105. Overall. IFRS is superior to U. My firm’s clients are generally in favor of IFRS. with respect to their stated firm size using named categories (instead of number of practitioners in the firm) and their position in the firm. Given that 59% of AICPA members who are practicing CPAs are in Key Findings and Observations firms of fewer than 50 practitioners. since the success of the change can be undermined if a substantial segment of the profession believes it is unwise. Principles-based standards are superior to bright-line rules. such a significant change will not be possible. only 43% agreed. In this regard. As time goes by. when independence considerations do not interfere. with about one-third disagreeing and the rest remaining neutral. the findings do not indicate strong support for IFRS. As we have noted. preparers. 2.14 for all respondents and 3.
Readiness for IFRS. This belief was shared by respondents in large firms and smaller firms. The survey posed several questions in this regard. more than 50% of the respondents believed that IFRS is not as comprehensive as U.respondents commented. presumably. interesting to observe that only 46% of the respondents in large firms believed that their clients need to apply IFRS to stay competitive. discussed in the next section. this low percentage was partly skewed by the responses given by the CPAs in smaller firms. Overall. It is. a large majority of respondents. reduction of accounting costs over the long term. regardless of their firm size. The CPA in public practice is on the front line of those who need to understand IFRS issues and. subjective impressions by the interested parties are all we have. Impact of IFRS.” On this question. Without this group’s full acceptance of and commitment to IFRS as well as readiness to tackle difficult IFRS issues. to stay competitive). Obviously. however. including a lack of experience and knowledge by the preparers and the auditors and the belief that more judgment will be necessary in preparing such statements. there are two more basic questions to consider: 1) Do companies need to convert to IFRS (e. while only 13% disagreed with that statement and about 35% were neutral. This survey was intended to obtain their frank opinions as to how prepared they really are for IFRS and to determine how these CPAs evaluated their clients’ readiness for IFRS. Only about 15% of the CPAs in local and regional firms indicated that they possess a satisfactory knowledge of IFRS.. that the need to apply IFRS is more marked for some of the larger firms’ clients. The results were certainly interesting and in some ways alarming. Given the choice. more importantly. however. the challenge is to determine whether the benefits exceed the costs. and easier access to capital. To attract the capital they need globally at a competitive cost. Again. only 26% of them agreed (mean. For example. that widespread adoption of IFRS represents an important improvement to comparability among companies around the world. 57% of the respondents believed that IFRS financial statements will be more difficult to audit. such as comparability. 66% of them believed that their clients will be ready in two to five years and another 34% said they will be ready in more than five years.S. Exhibit 2 provides a summary of the questions asked of participants with regard to their overall perspective of IFRS. and only as high as 3. this survey did not produce a consensus among respondents. the change to IFRS is more a necessity than a choice. there is a lot less agreement that the benefits of IFRS exceed the cost. to audit IFRS financial statements. For example. Given this need to apply IFRS to stay competitive. quantifying the benefits is much less practicable.98 (out of 5). Obviously. This percentage dropped to 56% for the CPAs in larger firms. even 41% of the respondents in the national and international firms. This difference between client and auditor may prove significant as the prospect of IFRS adoption becomes more real. however. this perceived lack of a market need to adopt IFRS by CPAs in public practice clearly indicates that change may be premature. Interestingly. Furthermore. On average. and only 37% believed it will happen in two to five years. this was shared regardless of firm size. they need more time to prepare. while 29% disagreed and the rest were uncertain. 2. clients. only 53% of all respondents and 73% of CPAs in large national and international firms agreed. Comparability of financial statements and the benefits arising from it are considered primary in the case for IFRS.S. Although in the road map the SEC estimates the cost of conversion to be over $5 billion. Further. CPAs in smaller firms were admittedly far from being ready for or knowledgeable about IFRS. The CPAs in larger national and international firms seem to be more in favor of it. Although there seems to be some agreement that IFRS will be beneficial. respondents seem to still favor U. For these U. 71% of all respondents agreed that the resources needed to prepare for IFRS represent a substantial burden on their clients. The SEC and the proponents of IFRS have asserted other benefits. which are often seen as the biggest supporters of IFRS. agreed that financial statement users will experience signifiAUGUST 2010 / THE CPA JOURNAL cant challenges in evaluating companies newly adopting IFRS. As discussed below. With an average of 2. as only 56% of them indicated that their firm will be ready for IFRS in two to five years and another 39% said they will be ready in more than five years.1 for CPAs in national and international firms. Exhibit 3 summarizes the questions concerning the impact of IFRS. Overall. only 32% of all respondents agreed.S.g. 63% of them agreed that their clients would adopt IFRS in more than five years. In the end. Obviously. In addition to several specific issues related to the interested parties’ abilities and readiness for IFRS. Adoption issues. One of the challenges in the process of converting to a new set of standards is to understand the ramifications. Although the CPAs in larger national and international firms appear to be more pre- 33 . GAAP.46 for all participants. 71%. Further. 74% of the respondents agreed. Another cost that is difficult to measure depends on how users will be affected by this change. by an average of 3.76) that their clients should apply IFRS to stay competitive. however. the success of the conversion is in doubt. The primary challenge in the migration to IFRS is the readiness of the parties who must carry it out. respondents did not indicate a strong agreement that their clients were in favor of IFRS. we noticed an interesting difference between what CPAs in large accounting firms want their clients to do and what those clients are willing or able to do. but such an anticipated benefit is not yet widely shared by CPAs in public accounting. and 2) Do they have a choice? Once again. It should also be noted. this agreement is accompanied by some skepticism. 70% of CPAs in large firms selected two to five years. and the other 30% selected more than five years.42 out of a maximum of 5. In the absence of an objective mechanism to calculate such costs and benefits. GAAP over IFRS. an entity’s financial statements must be comparable to those of other foreign companies. When asked when they would recommend that their clients adopt IFRS. “The judgment required by IFRS is an open door for plaintiff attempts to file lawsuits regarding judgments at time of audit when they use hindsight. some benefits. The average for this question was 2. Also. as 48% agreed and 11% disagreed that the benefits exceed the cost. there are many costs and complications associated with the change and. as 55% of them agreed that their clients have a large enough relationship with international companies to warrant the use of IFRS. agreed with this difficulty. There may be varying reasons for this perceived difficulty.
and another 48% will be ready in two to five years. however. These results indicate opportunities for these CPAs to retool themselves for IFRS now to offer value-added services to their clients. Recommendations of respondents. Also. the authors observed a high degree of consensus regardless of the firm size. would prefer a substantial convergence before an adoption of IFRS. For example. There is a general consensus that a gradual convergence in the next several years is preferred over an immediate adoption.94 3.42 6. Financial statement users will experience significant challenges in evaluating companies newly adopting IFRS. 80% of them indicated that their clients will experience substantial difficulties in dealing with various effects of IFRS on their information systems. 13% 16% 40% 24% 8% 2. with the remaining 15% ready immediately. given the likelihood that larger firms stand to benefit from the change to IFRS through a range of support engagements for clients converting to IFRS—even when they may be precluded from the financial statement audit for independence reasons—they too express concern over the quality of IFRS and the readiness of their clients to deal with IFRS. This client preference was even more apparent among CPAs in larger firms.98 34 AUGUST 2010 / THE CPA JOURNAL . the other third were neutral. Less than one-quarter of these same respondents believed that their clients now possessed a satisfactory level of knowledge of IFRS. 5. however. CPAs from all firm sizes indicated that their clients. 2. as 68% of them preferred convergence before adoption. KPMG. who are crucial in any migration to IFRS by organizations public or private. Seventy percent of these CPAs. income taxes. 6% 2% 11% 8% 3% 13% 25% 24% 23% 31% 35% 29% 30% 35% 24% 3. This study also revealed that about 46% of CPAs in large firms believe that they can audit IFRS financial statements immediately.pared for IFRS. Furthermore. and the AICPA. too. most of the respondents believe that U. As one of the respondents pointed out. “Most clients have lost focus on IFRS readiness in the short term to focus more on the impact of the recession. and 15% in more than five years. Surprisingly. With regard to recommendations about IFRS. IFRS financial statements will be more difficult to audit. This view was shared by the respondents in large firms. indicate that their clients will be ready for IFRS in two to five years.71 3.S. 61% of the large-firm CPAs indicated that the staff in their firms will experience difficulties in dealing with clients who implement IFRS due to the less detailed nature of the standards and substantial need to use judgment in their application. their readiness is not as pervasive as might be appropriate for a successful launch of a new set of standards at a rapid pace. debt agreements. Unlike recent surveys conducted by Deloitte. The widespread adoption of IFRS represents an important improvement to comparability among companies around the world. According to respondents.62 3. 5% 2% 2 14% 8% 3 25% 19% 4 28% 36% Strongly disagree 5 29% 35% Mean 3. One aspect of this lack of readiness appears related to the nature of IFRS and the use of judgment. and needs for training and project management. The survey showed that about one-third of the respondents with large firms believed they had a satisfactory knowledge of IFRS—an average of 3. The resources needed to prepare for IFRS represent a substantial burden to my clients.” Finally. com- pensation arrangements and plans. Close to twothirds of the respondents preferred a substantial convergence of U. GAAP and IFRS before required adoption of IFRS. another point of consensus among respondents was that the success of IFRS adoption heavily depends on its inclusion and integration into the college and university curriculum.99 3. Their acknowledgment of unpre- Strong Reservations EXHIBIT 3 Impact of IFRS Strongly agree 1 1. The resources needed to prepare for IFRS represent a substantial burden on my firm. 4.S. The benefits of IFRS exceed the cost. 59% of them indicated that their clients will tend to experience significant difficulties with the less detailed nature of IFRS or the use of more judgment in applying it. GAAP is better than IFRS. as 76% of them responded that their clients prefer convergence before adoption.00 out of 5—with another third indicating that they did not have it. Overall. the interest of the current survey was to ascertain the view of CPAs in public practice. CPAs in smaller firms took a more apparently negative view of IFRS than their counterparts in larger national/international firms. the outlook is not much different for the clients of large firms regarding readiness for IFRS.
Changing the target date for adoption of IFRS from 2014 to 2015 as part of the reaffirmation of the road map by the SEC on February 24.” Without such tolerance for judgment.S. are welcome developments to CPAs who share these concerns. GAAP to IFRS. even by terms of the proposed road map itself. Loyola University Maryland. FASB. Such a proposal is currently being considered in the United Kingdom. PhD.S. suggests a less-than-optimal situation for companies and CPAs. indeed restraint. private companies. according to CPAs in public practice at firms both large and small.paredness to deal with IFRS indicates an urgency and an opportunity in the public accounting profession for CPAs in public practice to retool themselves to carry out their responsibilities as auditors and to provide value-added services to clients even when the role of auditor may need to be foregone for reasons of independence. CMA. CPAs in smaller firms are not enthusiastic about IFRS—indeed. This second stage of IFRS momentum for private companies is premature in the United States since. experience is similar to that of other countries. Another issue is the degree of circumspection. The opinions of CPAs in public practice. Langmead. Without a confident acceptance of IFRS by smaller firms and their clients. “[With] the fact that IFRS are more principles-based standards. widespread use of IFRS by both public and private companies in the United States is approaching rapidly. especially in smaller firms. Jalal Soroosh. and U. STD. It is important to note here that the dynamics and interplay of convergence and conversion/adoption are different for private and publicly held companies. CPA. Meanwhile. Adoption of IFRS for listed companies elsewhere has often led national standards-setting bodies to consider jettisoning their home-country accounting models for private companies in favor of IFRS for all entities. may mitigate some of this concern. is a partner (retired) of KPMG and an executive in residence at the Sellinger School of Business and Management. While not yet inevitable. along with the SEC’s deferral of the proposed adoption date to 2015. MBA. at least if the U.S. many assert that the SEC should have given more time for convergence before a full-blown adoption of IFRS. GAAP to IFRS are substantial and the benefits arguable. need to take advantage of the same remaining window of time to retool themselves to be able to deal with IFRS and to support their clients who adopt it. Thus. GAAP with IFRS before an adoption of IFRS. IFRS for small and medium-sized entities (SMEs) is already available and implementable in the United States for private companies. Other recent surveys of relevant groups such as financial officers and CPAs in private as well as in public accounting roles reveal similar concerns. are especially relevant when considering such a substantial issue as a migration from U. Some practitioners believe that the SEC moved too quickly on this important issue. that the SEC will exercise in the new circumstances where IFRS is allowed to be a truly global system. IFRS for SMEs does not depend on such efforts for its legitimacy in the United States now or in the future. a path that would not likely serve the larger public interest in the long run. the accounting regulators (SEC and PCAOB) will have to have a higher tolerance for the use of professional judgment in the implementation of standards. How will CPAs in public practice find their footing in a new “principles based” world where second-guessing and hindsight are so much more likely to raise questions about prior judgments and estimates? As a respondent stated. Loyola University Maryland. The degree of readiness necessary to implement such a significant change within the timetable proposed by the SEC road map is probably insufficient.S.” The strong reservations on the part of CPAs in smaller firms create another need to bring CPAs to a new level of competence if the United States does indeed go down the path of conversion to IFRS within the next five years. While it will no doubt be amended as further convergence efforts bear fruit and as IFRS continues to evolve.S. for example. regardless of firm size. in small as well as large firms.S. among other things. of course. should take appropriate actions to let the SEC. Recent efforts by FASB and the IASB to expedite convergence. along with a lack of widespread readiness by the parties involved to meet the timeline proposed in the SEC’s road map. their views and concerns should be explicitly considered in any major developments that impact the profession. 2010. with substantial reservations. GAAP for U. they are deeply skeptical.S. as well as in other parts of the profession. AUGUST 2010 / THE CPA JOURNAL The survey’s findings reveal a cautious acceptance. entity and for those who insist that convergence be allowed to mature more fully before any adoption decision. prefer significantly more convergence of U. This preference for more convergence before conversion. 35 .S. GAAP). by selfinterested managers pushing the proverbial envelope wherever latitude is allowed. Baltimore. is a professor of accounting at the Sellinger School of Business and Management. As one respondent commented. All CPAs in public practice. which will add to the cost of financial reporting and effectively reduce reliability and usefulness. the profession risks taking a road to big GAAP (IFRS) and small GAAP (U. for accountants who remain skeptical of the benefits of IFRS adoption by any U. Baltimore. “I have doubts whether in the current environment that the current timetables will survive. That later process is slated for 2011 in the road map and has now been reaffirmed. CPAs. we may see many restatements of financial statements. It is up to practitioners to use this window to make sure that the SEC’s actions regarding IFRS are at the right speed and in the right direction. yet subject to interpretive judgment that will inevitably be influenced by local and regional traditions and. Considering that the costs to migrate from U. as well as enforcement actions and shareholder suits. Given the fact that more than 60% of CPAs in public practice are in smaller firms. of IFRS by CPAs in public practice. auditing and reporting standards acknowledge it as a satisfactory alternative basis of accounting to U. the formal “adoption” of IFRS for public companies will be subject to a later decision-making process that is to be influenced by.S. and the AICPA know about any dissatisfaction with the speed at which adoption is moving forward. K Joseph M. there is still time both for convergence progress and for more input into the process by which both IFRS adoption and satisfactory convergence are evaluated. Apart from the momentum already created by its availability and legitimacy. The survey found that a majority of respondents. a satisfactory degree of further convergence. IFRS for SMEs will gain further momentum if and when the SEC approves its road map. A sufficiently comprehensive version of IFRS for SMEs was finalized recently.