We’ve heard from various sources that top BV experts and representatives are considering how to formulate a response to the SEC’s recent call for “unification” of the BV profession and its standards. In the meantime, we are reminded of the article by Nancy Fannon (Fannon Valuation Group), Mark Hanson (Schenck Valuation and Litigation Support), and Edward Dupke (Clifton Gunderson), in the May 2011 BVUpdate, “Let’s Build on the New NACVA/IBA Standards Unification,” in which the authors state:
A conscious effort was made by NACVA and by IBA to have their common professional standards be in conformity with SSVS1. It is our belief that the unification and resulting conformity with AICPA will enhance clarity for both preparers and users of valuation reports. If a valuation analyst adheres to either of these two sets of professional standards in performing the valuation or calculation engagement, then the valuation analyst will likely be in compliance with both sets of standards.“On the positive side, the similarity of the NACVA/IBA valuation standards and the AICPA valuation standard is a testament to the efforts these organizations have made in the development process,” the authors conclude. “Such efforts provide strong encouragement for the valuation profession moving forward.”
In a follow-up article, “AICPA, NACVA, and IBA (at Least) Unify Standards,” in the July 2011 BVUpdate, Mark Kucik (Kucik Valuation Group) lauds the BV professionals who led the unification effort. “Ultimately, at the end of the day, the principals of the AICPA, NACVA, and IBA have come together,” he says, with a reminder that NACVA has posted the updated standards.