¹ See Regine Buchheim/Kati Beiersdorf, New Developments in Management Reporting – The Modernisation of the Annual Report, 6 German Law Journal 861-868 (2005) www.germanlawjournal.com.Google Scholar

² See Directive 2003/51/EC of June, 18th, 2003, Art. 1(14)(a), Art. 2(2)(a).Google Scholar

Cite as: Dobler, Michael, National and International Developments in Risk Reporting: May the German Accounting Standard 5 Lead the Way Internationally?, in: 6 German Law Journal 1191 (2005), at: www.germanlawjournal.com/pdf/Vol06No08/PDF_Vol_06_No_08_1191-1200_Developments_Dobler.pdf Google Scholar

³ See, e.g., Kajüter, Peter/Winkler, Carsten, Die Risikoberichterstattung der DAX100-Unternehmen im Zeitvergleich, 3 Zeitschrift für kapitalmarktorientierte Rechnungslegung 228 (2003); GASC, Deutscher Standardisierungsrat beschließt Neuausrichtung, Press Release www.standardsetter.drsc/docs/press_releases/gasb_restructuring.html (July 25th, 2003).Google Scholar

⁴ See § 342 HGB; Dieter Ordelheide, Germany – Group Accounts, Transnational Accounting 1385-1368 (Dieter Ordelheide/KPMG (eds.), 4th ed. 2001).Google Scholar

⁵ For a discussion see Michael Dobler, Auditing Corporate Risk Management – A Critical Analysis of a German Particularity, 1 The ICFAI Journal of Audit Practice No. 2 51-52, 56-57 (2004).Google Scholar

⁶ See Directive 2003/51/EC, Art. 1(4)(a) amending Art. 46(1)(a) of Directive 78/660/EEC, and Directive 2003/51/EC, Art. 2(10)(a) amending Art. 36(1) of Directive 83/349/EEC.Google Scholar

⁷ See Directive 2001/65/EC of September 21st, 2001, Art. 1 (4) amending Art. 46(2) of Directive 78/660/EEC, and Directive 2001/65/EC, Art. 2 (3) amending Art. 36(2) of Directive 83/349/EEC.Google Scholar

⁸ See IDW RS HFA 1.29-36 (IDW Stellungnahme zur Rechnungslegung Hauptfachausschuß 1).Google Scholar

⁹ In a general decision, the local court of Duisburg decided that bulletins of the IDW may have particular authority. However, they cannot substitute the legal interpretation by a court. See Amtsgericht Duisburg, Beschluß v. 31.12.1993, 23 HR B 3193, 47 Der Betrieb 466-467 (1994).Google Scholar

¹⁰ See GAS 5.1, .3. GAS 5.8 recommends to apply GAS 5 to risk reports of individual companies.Google Scholar

¹¹ See Deutscher Rechnungslegungsänderungsstandard 3, issued on July 15th, 2005, Art. 9.Google Scholar

¹² GAS 5.9.Google Scholar

¹³ See GAS 5.30-33.Google Scholar

¹⁴ See GAS 5.12-13.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See GAS 5.15.Google Scholar

¹⁶ See GAS 5.18-19.Google Scholar

¹⁷ See GAS 5.20, cumulatively requiring „reliable and recognised methods“, the absence of „undue economic expense“ and effects of the quantification on „the decision of users“.Google Scholar

¹⁸ See GAS 5.23-24.Google Scholar

¹⁹ See GAS 5.25.Google Scholar

²⁰ See GAS 5.26-27.Google Scholar

²¹ See GAS 5.31.Google Scholar

²² See GAS 5.21.Google Scholar

²³ See GAS 5.28-29.Google Scholar

²⁴ See IDW RS HFA 1.52; GAS 15.83.Google Scholar

²⁵ See GAS 5.30-33; GAS 15.83, .91.Google Scholar

²⁶ See IDW RS HFA 1.52.Google Scholar

²⁷ See Regulation 1606/2002 of July, 19th, 2002; § 315a HGB implemented by the BilReG.Google Scholar

²⁸ See, e.g., Statement of Auditing Standards (SAS) 69; Miller/Redding/Bahnson, The FASB – The People, the Process and the Politics 61 (4th ed., Boston et al. 1998).Google Scholar

²⁹ See Form 20-F, Item; Form 10-K, Item 7; Regulation S-K, Item 303.Google Scholar

³⁰ See Statement of Financial Accounting Standards SFAS 5.9-12; SFAS 5.17 read in connection with Accounting Research Bulletin ARB 50; SOP 94-6.11-16.Google Scholar

³¹ See SFAS 133.44-45.Google Scholar

³² See Statement of Position SOP 94-6.11-16.Google Scholar

³³ See SOP 94-6.21-24; SFAS 131.39, .108.Google Scholar

³⁴ See International Accounting Standard IAS 37.10, .89-92.Google Scholar

³⁵ See IAS 32.52-85; ED 7.Google Scholar

³⁶ See IAS 1.116-122.Google Scholar

³⁷ See IAS 1.23-24.Google Scholar

³⁸ See Donald E. Kieso/Jerry J. Weygandt/Terry D. Warfield, Intermediate Accounting 1296 (11th ed. 2003).Google Scholar

³⁹ One could argue that SOP 94-6 in the US is also a standard dealing with risk related disclosures. However, SOP 94-6 must be read in connection with SFAS and only addresses some specific risk disclosures.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ To digress briefly, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales issued a proposal for a Statement of Business Risk in 1997. However, the proposal did not become a standard.Google Scholar

⁴¹ See, e.g., IAS 1.116.Google Scholar

⁴² See Draft-GAS 5.B3 (Reasoning).Google Scholar

⁴³ While GAS are available in English language in general, Draft-GAS 5 is the first and only draft of a GASB-standard issued in English. See www.standardsetter.de/drsc/docs/drafts/5_eng.html for Draft-GAS 5 published on November 24th, 2000.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ For a detailed analysis of GAS 5 see Michael Dobler, Risikoberichterstattung – Eine ökonomische Analyse 162-181 (Frankfurt am Main 2004).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ See Directive 2004/109/EC of December 15th, 2004, Art. 4(2)(b) and (c), Art. 5(3).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ See www.iasb.org/meetings/iasb_observernotes.asp for notes on the IASB meeting in June 2005, the status of the project, and the planned Discussion Paper.Google Scholar