'Prons and Cons of Corporate Reporting Essay\r'

'We succinctly lay out arguments put forward both for and against the regulating of corporate disclosure and standard-setting. We so examine current developments suggesting that be standard-setting is at riskiness of becoming entangled in a tissue of political forces with potentially significant consequences. The crisis has brought into sharp snap the reality that the regulation of corporate reporting is simply one piece of a larger restrictive configuration, and that forces are at play that would subjugate invoice standard-setting to broader regulatory demands.\r\nRecent actions by the European electric charge relating to IFRS 9 and proposed legislation in the US social intercourse to create a systemic risk council look to illustrate this point. We conclude by discussing in particular proposition the recent fair value vie as a case study of the way in which bank regulatory policy and accounting standard-setting decisions were together with determined as a potentially socially optimal means to mitigate the effects of the pecuniary crisis. Keywords: regulation; corporate reporting; politics 1. mental home\r\nHistory attests to the influence of crisis and scandals as an impetus for regulatory intervention by politicians (Banner, 1997; Reinhart and Rogoff, 2008). After a series of scandals in the UK in the 1990s culminating in the develop of Barings Bank, there was a dramatic shift in the structure of nnancial regulation that consolidated regulation responsibilities downstairs the auspices of the Financial Services Authority. A quaver of financial scandals epitomised by the Enron debacle catalysed swift and sweep ciianges to US securities regulations with the passage of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002.\r\nToday, in the issue of the financial crisis of 2007-2009, financial accounting standard-setting finds itself drawn into the playing field of complex political processes focused on restructuring the regulation of the world’s financia l markets. The crisis has ignited woddwide debate on issues of systemic risk and the contribution play by financial regulation in creating and exasperate the crisis. Proposals abound for how regulation of financial markets and financial institutions should be interchanged to mitigate the potential •The authors are at Kenan-Flagler moving in School, University of North Carolina.\r\nThis paper has been prepared for presentation and news at the Information for Better Markets Conference, sponsored by the bestow of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales, 14-15 December 2009. We thank Dan Amiram, Mary Barth, Elieia Cowins, Martien Lubberink, Brian Singleton-Green and Steve Zeff for right-hand comments. Correspondence should be addressed to: Professor Robert Bushman, Kenan-Flagler telephone line School, The Unversity of North Carolina, CB #3490, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3490, USA. E-mail: Bushman@unc. edu. for such large-scale financial meltdowns in the fixture.\r\nThe scope of regulatory issues to a lower place debate spans many aspects of the financial system, including the alleged role played by financial accounting standards in deepening the trajectory of the crisis. The crisis has energised politicians, regulators, and economists to scrutinise financial accounting standards as never before, creating significant pressure for change (see, e. g. G-20, 2009). Given mounting momentum for potentially uttermost reaching regulatory change, this is an opportune moment to musical note back and carefiilly consider how to organise the analysis of efticient regulatory choice.\r\n'