e-Financial Statement with multiple standards using XBRL

We recognize that there are so many categories of companies, tangible vs intangible products, manufacturing vs distributors, small vs large, holding vs subsidiaries, public vs private, profit vs non-profit entities, international vs local, etc not mentioning different companies would fall into different configurations of the categories.

But users of the financial statements wanted to use the financial statements to grasp the relativity of the company's state with other companies, and so, accountants are expected to have the expertise to create a financial statement that could embody the solution of this need of the information.

Until now multiple accounting standards organization created their accounting standards as guidance for their members to achieve this comparability utility. However the ever-increasing magnitude of complexity and fluidity of the world, in respect to ever-changing needs, technologies, laws, market demographics, etc made me skeptical of the ability of one standard to be able to accommodate all of these overwhelming points of views.

But we already have the programming technology and the XBRL For you who have never heard of XBRL, it is a protocol that could be followed by accounting programs to communicate with each other, like contents on the internet followed some standardized protocols so they could be conveyed and understood by reader machines in order to then be displayed to other human beings as accurately as they appeared in the original.

Using XBRL, makers of the financial statements and the auditors could work to make multiple financial statements for one company, based on different accounting standards, compacted into a format that would enable users to switch between the interpretations instantly.

Then accounting standards organization wouldn't have to compete to be the "ONE" organization that oversees the only "ONE" accounting standard used in the world. That would be a bad idea. Instead, let's have many standards organization competing to be most liked by some demographics of users of the financial statements.

To summarize some of the advantages of this idea:
1. Users of the financial statements could compare different companies in many more ways of their choice.
2. Accountants have more reason to collaborate with other accountants and IT professionals, leaving the expectation for an accountant to must master everything obsolete.
3. Increased accuracy in decision making due to the availability of more perspectives of analysis.

Holding company's auditor's opinion v.02

In order to give users of financial statements better audit opinions in terms of Holding Companies, we could do something like this.

Holding Company XYZ, list of component companies:

Holding Interim Company XYZ, auditor BIG1, opinion: unqualified, Holding's Overall Balance sheet contribution 50%, Holding's Overall Revenue contribution 20%, Holding's Overall Cost contribution 20%.

Company ZYX, auditor BIG2, opinion: unqualified, Holding's Overall Balance sheet contribution 40%, Holding's Overall Revenue contribution 80%, Holding's Overall Cost contribution 78%.

Company NEWB1, auditor BIG3, opinion: qualified, Holding's Overall Balance sheet contribution 5%, Holding's Overall Revenue contribution 0%, Holding's Overall Cost contribution 1%.

Company NEWB2, auditor BIG4, opinion: qualified, Holding's Overall Balance sheet contribution 5%, Holding's Overall Revenue contribution 0%, Holding's Overall Cost contribution 1%.

Summary:
Unqualified Opinion: 90/100/98 %
Qualified Opinion: 10/0/2 %

The reason why this might be a better way of doing it is, a qualified opinion should not taint the whole Consolidation more than its significance.

And qualified was not meant to mean bad reports or useless reports, and people treat it like it is. Which is not fair and not real.

Stockholm Syndrome

Some may think that the point of view of inclination that I've proposed defies logic in a way that good intentions or good inclinations could result in bad outcome.

For example, someone who inclines to save a puppy's life ended up killing the puppy because of bad CPR. If he/she didn't administer the CPR the puppy might have survived. So the inclination to save the puppy's life is not strengthened by acting upon the inclination to save the puppy's life. So that doesn't make sense.

But in that case, we must acknowledge the status quo of the hierarchy of the inclinations. And the games they play. It's like chess, there are traps everywhere. And just because we have been kept hostage for a long long time, doesn't mean ultimately the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Instead,

Sooner or later, the road to hell will be completely blocked with good intentions.

Picking up where we left off in this war

Humanity has been fighting against Evil for thousands of years.
Ever since "Adam and Eve" ate the fruit of good and evil, we have been fighting.
How old are you? Do you really attempt to fight against thousands of years of war with your own wit, your own intelligence?

In order to completely and permanently uproot power from evil, you have to pick up where we left off. And to do that we should honor the legacies of our warriors, the scientific journals, the laws, and the wisdom.

Intelligence deals with knowledge known, Wisdom deals with the unknown.

Stand in the shoulders of giants, be a part of the giant,
Win,
For the Inclination to Keep on Inclining Forever.