GAAP VS. IFRS
Debra K. Godfrey
September 28, 2015
ACC/291
University of Phoenix
GAAP VS. IFRS
The United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP) and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are both effective ways to report financially account for one’s business assets but they have several differences. In this paper I will attempt to outline a few of the more significant differences and allow you to make up your mind as to which of these two systems is the better one.
The first difference that is widely accepted between the two methods is that U.S. GAAP is rules based and IFRS is principle based. This means that IFRS allows more for adaption of the circumstances and allows for professional judgment while U.S. GAAP is more stringent and less forgiving. The argument back and forth is that the rules for U.S. GAPP are too large and broad stroked which doesn’t allow for different odd situations, while it is argued that the IFRS is too biased which can allow for too much manipulation.
A primary difference between the U.S. GAAP and the IFRS is the way the business financial statements report the value of the company’s property and holdings. The U.S. GAAP method utilizes the Historic Cost Principle (HCP) while the IFRS uses the Fair Market Value (FMV). Under the HCP the asset owned by the company if forever recorded at the price for which it was initially purchased while the FMV approach allows for a periodic re-assessment of the current value of the asset.
This has both positive and negative effects based on the economy and the housing market. Over time you would expect that the value of property to rise, for example if a company had bought my parents 2 bedroom home for the listed price of $19,500 in 1980 knowing that the same house is now appraised at $105,000 then it would be beneficial to re appraise the house under the FMV as the asset is worth a lot more than the...