You are running an unsupported version of Internet Explorer, please upgrade.

Search for:

Providing Solutions On Your Path to Innovation

Achieving Success When Selling to the World’s Largest Buyer

Providing Solutions On Your Path to Innovation

Achieving Success When Selling to the World’s Largest Buyer

Providing Solutions On Your Path to Innovation

Achieving Success When Selling to the World’s Largest Buyer

Providing Solutions On Your Path to Innovation

Achieving Success When Selling to the World’s Largest Buyer

Providing Solutions On Your Path to Innovation

Achieving Success When Selling to the World’s Largest Buyer

Federal Tax Reform: Opportunity Zones

Community Revitalization by Rewarding Private Investment

Section 199A Deduction for Pass-Through Entities

A Deduction of Up to 20% of Qualified Business Income

THIncIT

Leveraging Technologies to Improve 
Efficiency

How Can We Guide You?

Cherry Bekaert

AICPA Board to Align Materiality with U.S. Standard-Setters

At a meeting in January, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ (“AICPA”) Auditing Standards Board (“ASB”) agreed to align its “materiality” definition with the definitions used by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”), Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), and Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”). The narrow project aims to remove inconsistencies in the definition among AICPA Professional Standards and the Supreme Court, SEC, FASB, and the PCAOB.

The effort comes after the FASB’s decision last year to revert to its original “materiality” definition from 1980 to 2010. The FASB revised its definition to align its concept of materiality to determine what information should be included and omitted from a financial statement used by the SEC, PCAOB, and the U.S. judicial system under Concepts Statement No. 8, Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting: Notes to the Financial Statements.

The ASB’s definition of materiality is similar to the International Accounting Standards Board definition, but the board now believes it is more appropriate to be consistent with U.S. standard setters than international standard-setters.

A board discussion on the draft document for the project is scheduled for Friday, March 8.