Answer
Thinking about the monetary results of many accounting standards, it isn't astounding that specific vested parties wind up critical and vocal (some supporting, some restricting) when guidelines are being defined. The FASB's subsidiary accounting standard is no special case. Numerous from the banking industry, for instance, condemned the standard as excessively mind-boggling and prompting superfluous profit unpredictability. They additionally showed that the proposition might discourage management of risk and sometimes could display misleading budgetary data.
Accordingly, Congress is regularly drawn closer to put weight on the FASB to change its decisions. In the stock option debate, the industry was very successful in going to Congress to drive the FASB to change its decisions. In the subsidiary debate, Rep. Richard Baker presented a bill which would constrain the SEC to affirm every standard issued by the FASB formally. In addition, this would also delay adoption as well as extra politicization of the standards-setting process.
Work Step by Step
Dingell remarked that Congress should avoid messing with the standards setting process and shielded the FASB's way to deal with creating accepted accounting standards.
