The backdating scandals second

19 Nov

After losing two rounds in Appellate Court, Mayeda insanely hopes that the higher court will fall for her Trumpesque defense of lies and obfuscations and will dismiss the case before it is tried in front of a jury of twelve honest people.Because Los Angeles County self-insures we, the taxpayers of Los Angeles County will be deprived of vital services as Mayeda appeals while continuing to collect her 8,000 a year salary plus benefits to continue her reign of error as head of the DACC.So, with inspiration from Charles Niemeier, and apologies to David Letterman, here are my "Top Ten Reasons Why US Adoption of IFRS Is a Terrible Idea." #10: Another S-OX 404 Waiting to Happen It is a certainty that direct costs of conversion to IFRS will be in the billions of dollars, and much of it will go to auditors for new "services" like training, systems rejiggering and whatever else companies can be induced to pay for.If the continuing saga of the S-OX 404 debacle is any guide, it is also a safe bet that initial estimates, bearing the imprimatur of the audit firms and/or the SEC, will understate the actual costs by orders of magnitude. The politically correct answer is that conversion to IFRS will reduce the cost of capital by achieving comparability through principles-based standards. There is simply no evidence that IFRS will reduce the cost of capital, much less be able to cover the humongous costs of conversion.[Click here for the 2012 version.] Now that the SEC has proposed its "roadmap" for jettisoning US GAAP in favor of IFRS, critics are finally starting to build momentum.Charles Niemeier, outgoing PCAOB board member, delivered a brilliant critique of the SEC's plans to the New York State Society of CPAs.

On SEC-related matters, Niemeier is among the most experienced, qualified and thoughtful persons in the federal government.

Much of the contemporary interest in corporate governance is concerned with mitigation of the conflicts of interests between stakeholders.

In large firms where there is a separation of ownership and management and no controlling shareholder, the principal–agent issue arises between upper-management (the "agent") which may have very different interests, and by definition considerably more information, than shareholders (the "principals").

On the overseas front, reports that the UK-based Association of Investment Companies has expressed concern that investor needs are not being placed front and center in the deliberations of the IASB.

And what's more, newly proposed changes to the IASB's makeup may be little more than going through the motions.