Just in case you had been wondering in your idle time how many pages long the Accounting Standards Codification would be in print form, I have the answer.
10,068 pages.
How thick is that if you stacked the five volumes on top of one another?
12.75 inches.
I’m working on a writing project for which it will be convenient to have a hard copy of the ASC, so I ordered a copy. Yipee! It arrived yesterday!
In case it seems like the volume of rules is growing faster than you can keep track, here is a seven-year comparison, looking at the physical size and volume count of the 2017 and 2010 editions:
| 2017 | 2010 | |
| thickness, inches | 10.75 | 7.00 |
| volumes | 5 | 4 |
I jotted down the last page number in each of the sections and have them listed below. Also brought into the discussion the page count from the 2010 edition. Since I put the info into a spreadsheet (of course!), took just a moment to calculate the seven-year change:
| 2017/18 | 2010 | change | |
| intro | 47 | 46 | 1 |
| general principles | 12 | 501 | (489) |
| presentation | 681 | – | 681 |
| assets | 1,155 | 703 | 452 |
| liabilities | 531 | 447 | 84 |
| equity | 97 | 80 | 17 |
| revenue | 767 | 68 | 499 |
| expenses | 107 | 900 | (793) |
| broad transactions | 2,858 | 1,805 | 1,053 |
| industry | 3,459 | 2,583 | 876 |
| glossary | 270 | 256 | 14 |
| index | 84 | 103 | (19) |
| total pages | 10,068 | 7,692 | 2,376 |
The tally does not include title pages, other front matter, blank pages between sections, or extra pages at end of each volume.
You aren’t just imagining that the volume of GAAP is exploding. One big reason for the increased page count (apart from the gazillion page Rev Rec ASU) is the ASC currently contains the pre-implementation and post-implementation rules for all the changes on the horizon.
So, yeah, I added up the page count in the hard copy of GAAP then blogged about it. Yeah, I’m weird. Pray for me as you feel led.
My previous page count of the ASC, IFRS-SME, SAS, and SSARS bodies of literature can be found here.
Wow, looks like we really need something like a separate set of accounting principles for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) – oh wait, nevermind.
Hi Jim:
Oh, maybe like something that is a hundred or two pages long, that will be updated every three years, that doesn’t have a few hundred pages describing the astounding hair-spitting details of derivatives, and massive re-writes of long-standing rules all over the place? What a fantastic idea!!
Jim
Yes, the AICPA should get on that!
But it does bring up a good point – maybe we should be more proactive in suggesting going to modified cash from some of our nonprofits. Good way to avoid the new lease and revenue standards.
Hi Jim:
Interesting idea. Charity small enough to not have a loan covenant for GAAP financials would not likely have a lot of restricted net assets. On the other hand, smaller charities aren’t likely to have much more than a simple lease or two and minimal revenue. FRF-SME isn’t available for not-for-profit entities.
A mess, huh?
Jim
Yes, what a mess. The FRF-SME isn’t a bad idea really, but in practice, it’s hard to learn another whole set of rules for a small number of clients.
Hi Jim:
Correct, although it is a small body of knowledge.
I serve the non-profit world, so FRF-SME is defined to be not-applicable to the entire sector. Thus I haven’t seen any actual use of FRF-SME. Have you seen it in use? If so, what sectors or types of companies are using it?
Jim
Pingback: FASB is the villain! - Tax and Accounting News