Revenue recognition: full retrospective, modified retrospective, or somewhere in-between
Companies looking to implement the new revenue standard are faced with the difficult choice of going full retrospective, modified retrospective, or somewhere in-between. Those at the forefront of implementing the standard are starting to favor the idea of presenting three complete years of historical data under the new rules, but ...
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT
You are not logged in and do not have access to members-only content.
If you are already a registered user or a member, SIGN IN now.
Related articles
-
Article
New revenue recognition rules prompt wide variety of adoption strategies
With new revenue recognition rules fast approaching, public companies everywhere are preparing as best they can, but an uncertain future awaits everyone. Tammy Whitehouse looks at what’s behind implementation delays.
-
ArticleFrench investigators target anticompetitive practices in largest accounting firms
Major accountancy firms in France are under investigation for anti-competitive practices. The French competition watchdog embarked on a series of “unannounced inspections” and removed documents relating to audit and reporting on Jan. 13.
-
OpinionSOX was built for humans. AI doesn’t fit that model.
For more than two decades, assurance and compliance frameworks have rested on a simple assumption: Material decisions are made by people. Post‑Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) assurance reset worked because it aligned accountability with human behavior. That assumption shapes how internal controls are designed, how accountability is assigned, and how assurance is ...