Relevance and faithful representation are identified by standard‐setters as fundamental qualitative characteristics for useful accounting information. We critically assess whether current pension measurement guidance under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) results in pension measurement that achieves these characteristics. We argue that: (1) conceptual justification is inconsistent with current guidance; (2) IFRS and US GAAP provide differing justifications; and (3) existing guidance applies inconsistent measurement principles and uses principles that are inconsistent with other standards. We conclude that current guidance does not achieve representational faithfulness. Next, we introduce two alternative approaches to pension liability measurement—going concern and settlement—which use consistent measurement principles and thus are more representationally faithful than current standards. We summarize empirical evidence, suggesting that both alternative measures demonstrate stronger relevance to equity and debt investors than current measurement. We conclude by recommending that standard‐setters: (1) use settlement measurement for pension liabilities; and (2) require disclosures that would enable users to re‐estimate pension liabilities using different parameters that would suit their particular needs and consider the characteristics of the plans themselves. We believe that our recommendations would improve the relevance and faithful representation of pension liabilities.
Anantharaman et al. (Tue,) studied this question.