As our regular readers will know, we’ve been exploring some of the filing issues that crop up in comment letters to individual companies from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
We continue to explore the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) comment letter archive this week – catch up with parts one and two on our website. These letters, sent to individual companies regarding issues in their financial statements, provide an overview of the kinds of errors cropping up in Inline XBRL filings.
As we discussed last week, comment letters from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) can be a useful resource – not just for the individual companies they are addressed to, but for many of us using Inline XBRL both stateside and elsewhere.
Among the range of resources available to filers with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) EDGAR system, comment letters are sometimes overlooked. These are sent by the Division of Corporate Finance to public companies where it finds room for improvement in their disclosures.
In the realm of Inline XBRL, quality assurance is paramount. Xmetric Ltd recently released a report highlighting their lessons learnt in diagnosing and resolving quality matters in FRC-tagged accounts across the UK and Ireland. The report is designed to inspire and guide software vendors and preparers to soar to new heights in tagging quality.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) has published a revised list of validation rules for its reporting standards, highlighting those which have been deactivated for incorrectness or for triggering IT problems.
The XBRL US Data Quality Committee (DQC) has approved three new validation rules, following a public review, taking the total available to 99.
The FRC Lab reports on lessons learnt from the first year of mandatory digital reporting in the UK. It finds that many companies are rising to the challenge of the ESEF format, and points the way forward on more that needs to be done on data quality.
EIOPA takes stock of data quality in Solvency II disclosures, and how it has developed since 2016. It finds significant improvements, due to “automated data quality processing solutions and advanced analytic tools together with built-in validations in the XBRL taxonomy.”
The XBRL US Data Quality Committee (DQC) has published its 19th ruleset, containing three proposed new validation rules.