Call that a principles-based title. It gets the point across, but doesn't it make you just a little bit uneasy about the content of what you're about to read?

Well, that's perfectly normal for you to be uneasy perhaps, if you've been reading these posts for a while. But my point is that there's almost a mindless infatuation with "principles-based standards" going on in the big auditing firms. The simplification promised by moving to international accounting standards and all their "principled-ness" is coming down to the level expressed in that title.

Evidence: the Global Public Policy Symposium held in New York on Tuesday. At that conference, the Big 4 + 2, unveiled a joint presentation on "Principles-Based Accounting Standards." There's not a lot of really new thinking in it, but what's striking is the unanimity of the CEOs of those firms: they're all thinking in lockstep on the subject, all heartily endorsing IFRS. 

IFRS is a noble goal, as well as convergence of US standards with IFRS. But before blindly blaming every capital market problem on "rules-based" accounting standards, wouldn't it be a good idea to consider that IFRS is still pretty young at heart system - one that hasn't been road-tested with quite the same rigor as US GAAP?

And why do audit firms spend so much time trying to push for one system over another? Or why do they spend so much time on accounting principles in general? Shouldn't they work on auditing principles more than accounting principles? Just asking.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Thanks to the Financial Times and their accounting editor, Jennifer Hughes, for featuring in their "Accountancy" column our post about the time gap between earnings releases and 10-Qs. I hope many of their readers share our sentiments.