The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that all filers be reviewed at least every three years. Over the last couple years, the SEC's Division of Corporation Finance studied the filings of more than 100 foreign private issuers. Those studies resulted in comment letters on the filings, and they're available in fairly raw form at the SEC's website. They were just waiting for someone to come along and stratify them so that some conclusions could be drawn about a) the state of foreign private issuer filings, relative to GAAP or IFRS application and b) how the SEC handled the reviews.
Fortunately, someone did come along: Deloitte. They've put together a report that's available for the right price (free) which puts together some interesting observations. From their summary:
"In the comment letters we reviewed, we noted several overall themes:
- Focus was more on the primary IFRS financial statements than on the U.S. GAAP reconciliation.
- Presentation and disclosure were significant areas of focus across industries.
- Recognition and measurement comments varied by industry.
- There was a particular interest in “converged” standards.
- Comments were geared toward understanding the judgments made and assumptions used in applying IFRSs."
That first observation is interesting - and it meshes well with the SEC's mention (in the proposing release for the IFRS/GAAP reconciliation elimination) that its first practical experience with IFRS came with its review of the FPI filings. And the fact that the focuse was more on primary IFRS financials than on the GAAP reconciliation hints at where the SEC's mind has been for the last couple of years.
On average, there were 19 comments for each filer.
The report also mentions that "certain" comments were issued on a forward-looking basis - meaning, comments were made to the effect that "something wasn't disclosed completely, but you can do it right next year." The report also mentions that a few comments required restatement. It makes sense that the SEC wouldn't drill companies too hard - as enthusiastic as they've been about encouraging the spread of IFRS, it wouldn't be too wise to make it look like adoption would require restatements or a lot of head-butting with the SEC staff. Look at the corporate angst over something as elemental as internal controls. IFRS proponents don't want to experience that kind of wrath.