The objective of this study is to show why “adoption” of one set of globally accepted accounting standards has been unachievable. By “adoption” we mean that a jurisdiction incorporates IFRS instantly as published by the IASB into its national accounting: in other words, the adoption is supported by the fact that the IASB is acknowledged as the legitimate body to draft and issue accounting standards. The IASB has only gained pseudo-“adoption” (not as written by the IASB) of its standards by several but not all countries. Legitimacy is the acceptance of an entity’s audience to act within the entity’s social values. For example, the due process of the FASB is attainable at a national level where national authorities (SEC) adopt, police and enforce compliance with national GAAP: this aspect is defined by the legitimacy theory as output legitimacy (Richardson and Eberlein 2011). However, while the IASB achieved a recognized and respected accounting board (consistent with input legitimacy) and an internationally recognized due process (consistent with throughput legitimacy); “adoption,” or achieving policing and enforcement (consistent with output legitimacy) of its standards globally has proven to be empirically illusive. Almost no country has “adopted” IFRS. Our study of the literature shows that national politics remain a critical component of standard-setting within and across countries and has eroded the output legitimacy strategy consistent with that taken-on by the IASB to globalize its accounting standards (Dahl 1999, Grant and Keohane 2005, Richardson and Eberlein 2011). […]
Key-Words: Politiche di bilancio
Figure 1 – Organization Structures Diagrammed to Reflect Similarities
Table 1 – Operating Income (in percent) – 2013 Annual Reports
