The UK Guidelines for Company Risk Reporting−An Evaluation

The study attempts to analyze the ins and outs of the risk reporting guidelines in UK. The guidelines advocate for the voluntary adoption of risk reporting through annual reports of the company. This voluntary reporting of risk will ensure the transparency and efficiency of the company management that eventually help the company to obtain funds from the capital market with the possible lowest cost. They also advise to disclose material / relevant risk information in a proper way so that the users can take their economic decision based on those disclosed information. On the other hand, company need not to disclose the commercially sensitive risk information, as it can give advantage to the rival companies. This risk reporting guidelines are also having some weaknesses. Such as, they mention about inverse relationship between level of disclosed risk information and cost of capital without any empirical evidence. Guidelines give a vague direction about the commercial sensitive risk information because companies can hide some important risk information on the ground of commercial sensitivity if needed. Other lacking include unavailability of suitable / reliable risk identification and measurement tools, expectation about common knowledge and so on

A Comparative Study of Fair Value Measurements in SFAS No.157 and IFRS Discussion Paper

The disclosure of fair value in financial reporting is of great interest and useful to preparers, auditors, users and regulators. The purpose of our article is that the Discussion Paper on Fair Value Measurement (DP) which International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) published in November 2006 is in analyzing. The DP is aimed at addressing requests from a number of interested parties seeking additional guidance on the measurement of fair value. International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) already require some assets, liabilities and equity instruments to be measured at fair value in some circumstances. However, guidance on measuring fair value is dispersed throughout IFRS and is not always consistent. The DP is not about expanding the use of fair value in financial reporting, but about how to codify, clarify and simplify the guidance that is at present dispersed widely in IFRS. In the US the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has already issued an accounting standard in September 2006, SFAS No.157 “Fair Value Measurements”, on which work was well advanced before the IASB launched its own project. Three statements were issued by publicity of SFAS No157. The first issue is the Exposure Draft “Fair Value Measurement” in June 2004, the second issue is Working Draft “Fair Value Measurement” in October 2005, and revised Working Draft issued in March 2006. SFAS No.157 establishes a single definition of fair value together with a framework for measuring fair value for financial reports prepared in accordance with US generally accepted accounting principles. Consistently with its commitment to the convergence of IFRS and US GAAP, IASB decided to use the US standard as the starting point for its own deliberations. The DP is the first stage of the IASB’s fair value measurement project. Comparing DP with SFAS No.157 and the three statements in our article, it comes out that DP almost agree with SFAS No.157 as concerns fair value measurement concept.公正価値測定でのディスクロージャーは，財務報告の利用者にとっては有用性が高い。しかし，個々の会計基準において用いられている公正価値測定の会計処理が異なっているため，それらの比較 可能性や信頼性が保たれていない。そのためか，公正価値測定の導入拡大に対して懐疑的な見解が見受けられる。 本稿の目的は，国際会計基準審議会（IASB）が２００６年１１月に公表した討議資料「公正価値測定」１（IASB DP）において収められている公正価値測定に関する予備的見解を分析することにある。この予備的見解は，公正価値測定の首尾一貫した会計上の手続きを行うために，米国の財務会計基準審議会（FASB）が２００６年９月に公表した財務会計基準書第１５７号「公正価値測定」２（SFAS１５７）を出発点として，換言すれば，叩き台として展開されている。そこで，本稿では，SFAS１５７との比較によって 明らかにした論点を通して，予備的見解の理解を進めていくことにする。 SFAS１５７の公表までには３つのステートメントが公表されていた。それは，２００４年６月公表の公開草案「公正価値測定」３（ED），２００５年１０月公表のワーキングドラフト「公正価値測定」４（０５WD），２００６年３月公表の改訂ワーキングドラフト「公正価値測定」５（０６WD）である。本稿では，これらのSFAS １５７公表までの過程で変遷していったいくつかの論点を整理し，それら変遷の理由の検討を通して，さらに予備的見解の理解を深めていくことにする。これらの理解は，公正価値測定でのディスクロージャーをどのように拡大していくべきかについての検討の手がかりとなる

Research Project on the Design for the Optimum Disclosure System Volume 2: Sustainable Growth of Japanese Companies and the Direction of Non-financial Information Disclosure (Japanese)

For quite some time there has been a debate surrounding the issue requiring companies to disclose not only financial information but also non-financial information, as shown in recent efforts for enhanced business reporting (EBR). This discussion paper explores non-financial information in three aspects: social and environmental information, intellectual capital information, and risk information, and it also examines the extent and reasons for the disclosure of non-financial information. In addition, the question about the media is also discussed with consideration to the trend for integrated reporting and XBRL. Ultimately, non-financial information should fuse with financial information and evolve to become integrated reporting. XBRL can only realize its potential if both non-financial information and financial information are integrated. However, there are many obstacles for realizing integrated reporting at one time. Therefore, to stimulate a change in investor behavior and company behavior, as argued by some international organizations such as IIFC, there is an urgent demand for extended reporting that integrates information on sustainability and information on intellectual capital as a source of company competitive advantage. For such non-financial information, there is a necessity to discuss questions related to an expansion in management's disclosure responsibility, as well as the corresponding judgment in auditing. There is also a necessity to discuss questions concerning how to reduce the cost of auditing and how to construct an assurance system that helps to improve the reliability of information and to limit the overextension of non-financial information.