Journal Title: Stay away from PSAK
30-10-2009 IFRS - Category: Info IAI
The title above is not a form of provocation, agitation, or the like. Nor is the suggestion or invitation to deviate from PSAK. However, there will be a formal opportunity to deviate from PSAK. And it is set in PSAK, not elsewhere. We do not have trouble finding justification for deviating from PSAK, it is in PSAK own. In ED PSAK No.1 (Revised 2009) Presentation of Financial Statements of the some time ago DSAK IAI issued in paragraphs 17 until 22 governs the deviation from PSAK. Deviation from PSAK can be done when the compliance of PSAK it will give the wrong understanding, and contrary to the purpose of financial reports as stipulated in the basic framework (KDPPLK).
However, this deviation may be very rare since there should be no conflict between adherences to PSAK with financial reporting purposes in KDPPLK. As set forth in KDPPLK, one goal is KDPPLK as a reference for the authors of financial accounting standards (accounting standards setters) in performing their duties. When a PSAK developed from KDPPLK, then there should be no contradiction between PSAK with its reference source.
Management is given the task to conclude the conflict has occurred between a PSAK with financial reporting purposes. When management has concluded that, not necessarily the author management or financial reports can automatically deviate from PSAK in financial report preparation. These deviations can be done if the current regulatory framework to allow such deviation or at least not prohibited. If the current regulatory framework forbid, then the company should not deviate from PSAK and are required to disclose in the notes to financial statements.
In addition to regulatory frameworks should take into account the effect, deviations from PSAK only be done if the same deviation is also done by all firms in the same industry? In other words, deviations from PSAK not be done if there is one other company in the same industry comply with a PSAK considered contrary to the purposes of financial reporting. To understand the need for deviation from PSAK regulated in financial accounting standards applicable in Indonesia can be seen from some of the following factors:
Understanding IFRS convergence
The definition used IFRS convergence is beginning to understand whether the deviation from PSAK should be regulated in the financial accounting standards. Understand the convergence of opinion is the full IFRS adoption declared Indonesia to adopt in full all provisions of IFRS, including departures from IFRSs as stipulated in IAS 1 (2009): Presentation of Financial Statements paragraph 19-24. Definition of convergence with IFRS as adopted in line with the desired understanding by the IASB. The ultimate goal of IFRS convergence is the same as IFRS PSAK without the slightest modification.
On the other hand, without the need to define itself, IFRS convergence, based on the experience of some of IFRS convergence that have been done in Indonesia was not done in full adoption. For example, when IAS 17 was adopted into PSAK 30 (Revised 2007): Rent a different set of land leasing with IAS 17. Corporate governance system in Indonesia that has the board of directors and the board (dual board system) affect the determination of when the events after the balance sheet date, as another example of the difference between PSAK with IFRS.
Regulatory framework
The deviation from PSAK will provide an opportunity for a national regulatory framework for managing different or conflicting with PSAK, where deviations from PSAK can be done if the current regulatory framework requires that such deviations or not banned. Deviation from a PSAK also a justification that PSAK not perfect. This gives the opportunity or not handcuff the authors financial statements (by deviating from PSAK) to achieve the preparation of financial statements should be as stipulated in KDPPLK.
However, the regulations applicable in Indonesia requires companies to prepare financial statements in accordance with financial accounting standards, especially PSAK which is a major component of the financial accounting standards. If the PSAK allowed to deviate from PSAK, then this will confuse the company is required to compile the financial statements in accordance with financial accounting standards. This condition will be a contradiction or even counterproductive to the enforcement of regulations related to financial reporting. Viewed from the perspective of drafting a rule, PSAK is a rule and a rule set is it possible to deviate from these rules. By that logic will not be a rule set that is contrary to these rules or other regulations that still is a unified setting.
PSAK feared deviation from the moral hazard will arise related to the interpretation of the phrase”... compliance with the provisions of PSAK will give a wrong understanding of the conflict with the objective of financial statements prepared in Framework and Basis of Presentation of Financial Report ...”(see paragraph 1 ED PSAK 17). It is feared that the authors financial statements or management has occurred often conclude a conflict between financial reporting purposes with a PSAK, not an extremely rare situation occurs as mentioned in the ED PSAK 1 (Revised 2009).
PSAK versus KDPPLK
Destination deviation from PSAK to improve the relevance of information generated by the financial statements and it is in line with the objective of financial statements in KDPPLK. This implies that the purpose of financial statements in superior KDPPLK or superior to the existing arrangements in PSAK. So when there is conflict between the two, then the objective of financial statements in PSAK KDDPLK must defeat. However, in KDDPLK mentioned that in the event of conflict between the basic framework with PSAK, so that must be seeded PSAK. With the same analogy, why when management concludes that there conflict between PSAK with financial reporting purposes in the unseeded KDPPLK is KDPPLK, rather than vice versa.
Strict requirements
Requirements to deviate from a strict PSAK. Not easy for a company to be able to deviate from a provision of PSAK. These deviations can be done if the regulatory framework requires, or at least does not prohibit such deviations, and this is done by all firms in the same industry without exception. Both these conditions are not easy to fulfill.
In the industrial conditions of monopoly or oligopoly is this going to be easy to do. In fact, in industries with a high level of competition will generally be easier to reach consensus among companies as they face the common enemy. Surely we do not want PSAK head to head with the author's financial statements and regulators.
Conceptuality application
Deviation from the set of IFRS. IFRS relevant to the current context and applied internationally, and provide a space that allows each country to adopt IFRS in full to deviate from IFRS in order to accommodate the national regulatory framework. PSAK has a different context with IFRS, which applies only PSAK in Indonesia. When an IFRS adopted into a PSAK the IFRS is already undergoing the process by the national regulatory framework so that it no longer guarantee the PSAK settings that conflict with the applicable regulations. Leasing of land and the dual board system is an example of the above mentioned results.
Other state policy in comparison, Singapore and the Philippines have adopted the deviation from the financial accounting standards applicable in the country. Malaysia also has adopted about these irregularities, but will issue a guideline or interpretation to ensure that these deviations can only occur in rare circumstances, is not something that can be done at any time. While Australia did not adopt it.
Naria-Silfi-Yohana-3EB01
0 comments:
Posting Komentar