국제회계기준 도입에 따른 공정가치 측정과 공정가치 평가기관의 품질제고에 대한 연구

International Financial Reporting Standards(IFRS) are scheduled to be fully adopted in Korea by 2011. Since IFRS require or allow some assets, liabilities and equity instruments to be measured at fair value, transition to IFRS in Korea will require more understandings about the use of fair value and additional guidance on the measurements of fair value. However, the extant guidance on measuring fair value is dispersed across several standards under IFRS and it is not always consistent. To replace the dispersed guidance in IFRS with a single source of guidance for all fair value measurements, the International Accounting Standards Board(IASB) is undertaking the fair value measurement project. This single source of guidance will reduce complexity and improve consistency in its application, clarify the definition of fair value, and enhance disclosures about fair value. Since the IASB takes into account convergence between IFRS and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the US(US GAAP) to develop high quality and compatible accounting standards, it uses the Financial Accounting Standards Board(FASB)'s fair value measurement standard, SFAS 157, as a starting point for its fair value measurement project. Hence, with the completion of the project, we expect that the future guidance on measuring fair value in IFRS will be affected by US GAAP. This study reviews the definition of fair value, its measurements and disclosure requirements about fair value measurements in IFRS as well as in US GAAP. As IFRS are still in a dynamic development caused by the ongoing convergence between IFRS and US GAAP, the adopters of IFRS have to be familiar with both global regulations concurrently. We introduce key differences identified between the definition of fair value in US GAAP and the current IFRS. Since, even with an understanding of the definition of fair value, there are further uncertainties about the application of the fair value measurements, we present some examples of the related disclosures in practice. Those examples will help reduce the confusion about and misunderstandings of fair value measurements when the fair value measurements are applied in Korea. This study also discusses regulatory frameworks of asset valuation in other countries and makes a suggestion to improve the quality of the professional valuers and their valuations in Korea. In the light of the fair value measurements, the professional valuers will play an important role to reduce a considerable degree of subjectivity, especially when the quoted market prices are not observable. Since IFRS do not explicitly mention the requirements for the professional valuers, we have to make inferences about them from outside sources. We conjecture that the use of in-house valuations is common for financial assets and liabilities, while the fair value measurements for nonfinancial assets heavily rely on professional valuers. In the real estate sector, the International Valuation Standards(IVS) are widely accepted across countries without a specific authority concerned and hence each domestic setting body adopts them as general standards voluntarily. As current valuation guidance on the use of professional valuers in Korea has been developed for the limited purposes of M&A, IPO, or tax matters, it is not sufficient for financial reporting purposes in IFRS. With the adoption of IFRS, regulatory frameworks to improve the quality of the professional valuers in Korea will be required. In this regard, we suggest two approaches. One is a market-based approach and the other is a regulation-based approach. Under the market-based approach, the minimum requirements for the qualification of the professional valuers are set and the professional valuers do their jobs following some authoritative valuation standards such as IVS. This process is similar with those in the US or other developed countries. Under the regulation-based approach, the details of qualifications of the professional valuers are enacted by the National Law and enforced by the government authorities. The qualified professional valuers are designated by authorities concerned and their measurements of fair value are approved publicly. After weighing the pros and cons about both approaches, we recommend that the market-based approach be preferred in Korea because it will go well with IFRS which are in favor of the principle-based application as well.