1 / 15

US GAAP Financial Reporting Taxonomy Coverage - Usability – Consistency

US GAAP Financial Reporting Taxonomy Coverage - Usability – Consistency. J. Louis Matherne Chief of Taxonomy Development Financial Accounting Standards Board. Disclaimer.

asta
Download Presentation

US GAAP Financial Reporting Taxonomy Coverage - Usability – Consistency

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. US GAAP Financial Reporting TaxonomyCoverage - Usability – Consistency J. Louis Matherne Chief of Taxonomy Development Financial Accounting Standards Board

  2. Disclaimer The Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) disclaims responsibility for any private publication or statement of any FAF/FASB employee. This presentation expresses the author’s views and does not necessarily reflect those of the FAF/FASB or other members of the staff.

  3. FAF / FASB Role • The FAF / FASB assumed responsibilities for the US GAAP Financial Reporting Taxonomy (UGT), which was originally developed by XBRL US, Inc. under contract to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). • A key objective for moving the UGT development and maintenance responsibilities to the FAF/FASB was to achieve greater integration with the FASB’s standard-setting, codification, and related processes.

  4. Two-Year Goal • Enhance UGT by improving: • US GAAP coverage • Taxonomy element discovery • Extension rates • Consistency in use

  5. Approach • Keep taxonomy current with new Accounting Standards Updates • Perform best practice analysis – identify extension tags that should be included in the taxonomy • Improve user access to and feedback on taxonomy • Outreach to subject matter experts • Provide guidance for using taxonomy • Assure: • appropriate concept coverage • usability • consistency in use

  6. FASB XBRL Development Process SEC Final Review & Acceptance Update ProductionTaxonomy Research & Modeling Annual Release Findings • Accounting Standards Updates (IFRS Convergence) • Best Practice Analysis • Public Comments • SEC Findings • XBRL Team Research • ResearchLiterature • Analyze Filings • Solicit Guidance From SMEs, Industry Groups, & Taxonomy Advisory Group • Draft Revisions and Required Modeling • Senior Review • Validation With Sample Filings • Update “Evergreen” Taxonomy • Detailed Content and Architectural Review • Publish on FASB website &http://xbrl.fasb.org/us-gaap/2011/ Continuous Exposure & Review Instance Document Creation & Validation Taxonomy Advisory Group Guidance SEC Guidance & Review

  7. Best Practice Analysis • Review XBRL filing extension tags by disclosure. Group by nature: • Incorrect extensions • Company specific extensions • Common extensions for inclusion in UGT High volume of incorrect or company specific extensions may indicate a modeling problem • Focus: coverage and usability

  8. ASU Taxonomy Exposure Process • Accounting Standards Update (ASU) Exposure Process On FASB AgendaDeliberate ExposureDraft Final Ballot Deliberate Ballot • US GAAP Financial Reporting Taxonomy Exposure Process ExposeTaxonomyFragment Watch Engage Model Disclosure Revise Revise Final Steps (Includes IFRS Convergence) • Create example disclosure with ASU Project Team • Create elements & modeling • Create instance document • Expose as “taxonomy fragment” with illustrative instance document • Revise based on public feedback and Board deliberations • Release in base taxonomy as complete

  9. WebsiteTaxonomy Publish/View Taxonomy Publishing ASU fragments built on production taxonomy and developed in parallel until final Continuous Taxonomy Changes ASU1 Pub D ProTax Copy ASU1 Import SEC Copy SEC Copy SEC Copy SEC Copy SEC Copy ASU2 Pub D 1 A Production Taxonomy Public Comments(Yeti) ProTax Copy ASU2 ASU3 Pub D A Import A Best Practice Analysis MergedASU WIP C1 Mergechangesat Final ProTax Copy ASU3 Import 2 1 SEC Comments(Yeti) PRO“evergreen” B C 2 AnnualRelease D Validate fragment on each Pro revision • Periodic reconciliation between fragments • Publishing Process includes : • Decimate • Scripts • Workflow • Validation • Etc. • Detailed list of changes and how they should be handled in the merge process Validates Exception Report No D A C B Yes Update ProTax Copy ConflictReport

  10. ASU Taxonomy Fragment

  11. ASU Taxonomy Fragment

  12. ASU Fragment Illustration

  13. Taxonomy Improvements • Accounting Standards Updates • Expand disclosures for current practice • Updated modeling for existing taxonomy structures and rationalize dimensions • Improved linkage to the Accounting Standards Codification Pre-Codification references have been retained to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy • Text block coverage and new label convention

  14. Early Signs of Positive Change 23.9% 18.6% Filings 1807 31 679 17 10-Q filings since 30 September 2010

  15. Changing the world … one data point at a time Susan Yount, Office of Interactive Data

More Related