So the new ideas on discontinued operations being close to re-exposure by the FASB… with the goal of convergence. I’m reading the minutes on the website. The trend is toward “bigger” for discontinued operations which seems less than useful to most decision makers, I would think. Clearly small things to be discontinued should not be separately disclosed (overload, waste of processing time by users, etc.). But the current direction seems the opposite–too big. See below.

The Boards decided that a discontinued operation is a component that has either been disposed, or is classified as held for sale, and has the following characteristics:
1. Represents a separate major line of business or geographical area of operations,
2. Is part of a single coordinated plan to dispose of a separate major line of business or geographical area of operations, or
3. Is a business that meets the criteria to be classified as held for sale on acquisition.

Anybody else think this?

Oh, and per usual, I have a question. I’m confused… in minutes a while back, the definition of a disc-op was to be SFAS 131 operating segment. The proposed definition, above, is not quite the same, right? Could be smaller than a SFAS 131 segment?