Paragraphs QC38 and 39 of the IASB Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting state:

QC38: In applying the cost constraint, the Board assesses whether the benefits of reporting particular information are likely to justify the costs incurred to provide and use that information. When applying the cost constraint in developing a proposed financial reporting standard, the Board seeks information from providers of financial information, users, auditors, academics and others about the expected nature and quantity of the benefits and costs of that standard.

In most situations, assessments are based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative information.
QC39: Because of the inherent subjectivity, different individuals’ assessments of the costs and benefits of reporting particular items of financial information will vary. Therefore, the Board seeks to consider costs and benefits in relation to financial reporting generally, and not just in relation to individual reporting entities. That does not mean that assessments of costs and benefits always justify the same reporting requirements for all entities. Differences may be appropriate because of different sizes of entities, different ways of raising capital (publicly or privately), different users’ needs or other factors.

Do you think that cost–benefit considerations will be different in different countries? If so, how would cost–benefit considerations be determined by a global accounting standard-setter such as the IASB?