For 23 years, nations have developed their own national accounting standards. Some were more rules-based, others based on principles. The United States has developed rules-based SGAAPs, while in Europe, IFRS has prevailed. Establishing accounting standards in the United States has been and remains a political process. The policy takes place between the various members of the board of directors and the boards of directors. In addition, accounting bodies face a number of externalities such as technological change and markets. B, pressure from leaders and industry groups and changes in tax and security legislation. In addition, the proclamation of accounting rules in the United States has been influenced by regulatory interventions [z.B the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)] and even by congressional legislation. Continued engagement will facilitate the development of standards that recognize and address differences between legal systems without compromising the quality of financial reporting. Legal systems and laws, the regulatory framework, market structures and corporate governance differ and are important factors that characterize financial reporting.  Countries are also different in the development of their capital markets and national institutions. These complexities reinforce the FASB and IASB`s assessment that different words, formulations, translations and guidelines may be needed to achieve the level of comparability investors need to provide financial information in different reporting countries. 46The SEC released its final personnel report on July 13, 2012,”Work Plan for the Consideration of Incorporating International Financial Reporting Standards into the Financial Reporting System for U.S.
Issuers.” According to the report, “regardless of the outcome of the Commission`s decision to include IFRS, the General Staff expects that the SEC and other U.S. voters will continue to participate in the development or application of IFRS or both” (SEC, 2012, p. 1). Although many reasons have been put forward for the lack of support for IFRS convergence, the SEC riding was cited as non-partisan (SEC, 2012, p. 3). The report found that at the beginning of its convergence project study, it became clear that the definition of IASB standards was not supported, among other things, by the vast majority of U.S. capital market participants and did not appear to be consistent with the methods of creating other major capital markets in the world (SEC). 2012, p. 2). There have been other problems, such as the feasibility and applicability of IFRS, as well as concerns about the protection of governance in U.S. capital markets, which are currently controlled by the SEC.
66Etranormalization (Savall-Zaret, 2005) is an invitation to address standards in accounting, trade, human relations and the environment (including quality) to address the contradictions and uncertainties between standards , as the different nations practice. We are focusing here on accounting standards that differ between the United States and Europe. We will propose it in the socio-economic approach, Savall, Zardet and Bonnet (2008). In particular, they suggest that a number of diagnoses, projects can be carried out, implemented and evaluated so that a bottom-up dynamic as presented in Chart 5. While it is now clear that U.S. GAAP and IFRS will continue to co-exist in our public capital markets for the foreseeable future, it is equally clear that efforts to improve the respective standards and reduce the gaps between them should continue.