Answer
Contentions for the politicization of the accounting rule-setting process:
1. The general accounting profession, through bodies, for example, the Accounting Principles Board, made standards which business entities and people "had" to follow. For a long time, these organizations and people had little say about what the rules would be, regardless of the fact that their economic prosperity was affected to a considerable degree by those principles. It is just normal that they would attempt to control or influence the variables that decide their economic prosperity.
2. Accounting is dependant on public confidence for its prosperity. Thus, the main issues are not exclusively technical, so every individual having a bona fide interest in the output of accounting ought to have some effect on that output.
3. There are various clashes between the different interest groups. Despite this, the bargain is fundamental, especially since the critical issues in accounting are esteem decisions, not the sort which is solvable, as we have traditionally accepted, utilizing deterministic models. Just along these lines (sensible bargain) will the financial community have confidence in the objectivity and fairness of accounting rule-setting.
4. Throughout the years, accountants have been not able to develop, based on technical accounting components, rules which would realize the much-desired acceptability and uniformity. This inability itself demonstrates rule-setting is primarily consensual in nature.
Work Step by Step
Politicizing the accounting rule-setting process would give members of the public more control of the implemented principles and dilute the powers of the accounting profession.
