provide a response to the feedback below

Your post provided an excellent overview of convergence under the Norwalk Agreement. I completely agree with your points about how FASB and IASB's collaboration has advanced global comparability in financial reporting. As you mentioned, convergence is about aligning U.S. GAAP and IFRS to be compatible in principle, even if not identical in wording. This process ensures that both standards produce consistent recognition, measurement, and disclosure outcomes, which enhances transparency and supports investors in comparing financial statements across jurisdictions. Throughout my research, I also highlighted that convergence involves a systematic approach, identifying differences, prioritizing them, and resolving them through joint projects or adopting the better standard.

While convergence has achieved major progress in areas like business combinations (ASC 805) and consolidations (ASC 810), several projects remain on the horizon. Current discussions suggest that new FASB, IASB, and SEC leadership could revive efforts in unresolved areas such as inventory costing, accounting for intangibles, fair value measurement, and presentation/disclosure issues. These areas continue to present key differences between GAAP and IFRS.

Given that convergence efforts have slowed in recent years, do you think the U.S. should eventually adopt IFRS fully for public companies, or is maintaining a distinct U.S. GAAP system more beneficial for domestic financial reporting and investor protection?