Back to Resources

    What Do Auditors Actually Want to See in Your GAAP Conversion Package?

    January 3, 2026

    You’ve done the work. Your team spent months converting the financials from local GAAP to US GAAP. The numbers reconcile. The journal entries are in. You feel ready for the audit.

    Then your auditors send their list.

    It includes: a qualitative difference matrix, accounting policy memos for each significant area, standalone topic memos for revenue recognition and share-based compensation, sub-ledger calculation workbooks tied to each adjustment, first-time adoption financial statements, and a disclosure checklist. 

    This is the documentation gap, and it catches nearly every team that goes through a GAAP conversion in-house.

    Why the Gap Exists

    The GAAP conversion and the documentation are not the same thing. The conversion is the accounting analysis: what are the differences, what adjustments are needed, what do the restated numbers look like? The documentation is the audit evidence: the written record that allows an auditor to independently verify every judgment call, policy election, and number in the converted statements.

    Teams that complete the conversion in-house often focus entirely on the first part. Documentation is treated as something you write up in the week before the audit starts. That’s too late, and the result is usually a scramble that delays the audit and costs more than it should.

    Here’s what the documentation package actually needs to contain.

    1. The Qualitative Difference Matrix

    This is the foundation. It maps every significant balance sheet and income statement category and sets out, side by side, your current accounting policy under your existing GAAP and the required policy under US GAAP.

    For each category (revenue, fixed assets, intangibles, employee benefits, leases, provisions, share-based compensation), the matrix should describe:

    • What your current policy is under local GAAP or IFRS
    • What US GAAP requires for the same category
    • Whether there’s a difference that requires adjustment
    • The go-forward accounting treatment under US GAAP

     

    This document gives auditors the roadmap for the entire conversion. Without it, the audit starts without a shared framework, which is a recipe for back-and-forth throughout the process.

    2. The Conversion Approach Memo

    Alongside the difference matrix, you need an overall memo documenting the scope and methodology of the conversion. This covers:

    • What reporting framework you’re converting from (German GAAP, FRS 102, IFRS, Belgian GAAP, or tax-basis)
    • What you’re converting to, and which specific periods are in scope
    • How you identified and assessed the accounting differences
    • Any peer benchmarking or industry practice references used
    • The basis of preparation for the first-time financial statements

     

    This memo anchors the entire conversion. It tells auditors not just what you did, but how you approached it.

    3. Individual Topic Memos for High-Risk Areas

    For areas of significant judgment or complexity, the difference matrix isn’t enough. You need standalone technical memos for areas such as:

    • Revenue recognition. If you have contracts with multiple elements, variable pricing, or software components, you need a full ASC 606 analysis memo. This walks through the five-step model, addresses principal vs. agent questions where relevant, and documents your policy elections. Auditors pay particular attention here.
    • Share-based compensation. Equity awards are valued differently under US GAAP (ASC 718) than under most European frameworks. The memo should document valuation assumptions, treatment of forfeitures, and any modifications to existing award terms.
    • Intangible assets. Internally developed software, customer relationships, and other intangibles are often treated differently on conversion. The memo should document what qualifies for recognition, the basis of valuation, and your amortization policy.
    • Provisions and contingencies. US GAAP (ASC 450) has specific recognition thresholds that differ from IAS 37 and most local standards. Any restructuring charges, legal provisions, or contingent liabilities need their own documentation.

    For each topic, the memo should be short, focused, and defensible. The goal is a clear explanation of what the issue is, what US GAAP requires, and what policy you’ve applied. Not an academic survey of the standard.

    4. Sub-Ledger Calculation Workbooks

    For each numerical adjustment in the conversion, auditors need to see the underlying calculation. The workbook should show:

    • The inputs and assumptions
    • The calculation methodology
    • The resulting journal entry
    • A tie-out to the adjustment in the financial statements

     

    The key requirement is traceability. An auditor sitting down with the workbook should be able to follow the logic from starting balance to adjustment to restated number without having to ask questions. If they need to ask, the documentation isn’t complete.

    5. The Disclosure Checklist

    Financial statements under US GAAP come with significant disclosure requirements, many of which differ from what European companies are used to. The disclosure checklist documents every required note disclosure, whether it’s included in the financial statements, and if it’s excluded, the justification for that exclusion.

    This demonstrates to auditors that you’ve thought through the disclosure requirements systematically, not just included whatever seemed relevant. Missing a disclosure in a first-time US GAAP statement is a common audit comment. A completed checklist reduces that risk significantly.

    What Happens Without This Package

    Companies that arrive at their first audit with just the converted numbers and a general ledger consistently face the same outcome: a long and expensive initial audit as auditors reconstruct the documentation themselves (and charge accordingly), followed by audit comments that delay sign-off. In some cases, the documentation gaps are significant enough that parts of the conversion need to be re-done.

    Building the documentation as you go through the conversion, rather than after, is almost always more efficient. The analysis is fresh, the judgments are documented in context, and auditors have something to work with from day one.

    Where to Start

    Set up a discovery call to chat through the process in more detail and see what files need to be prepared.