Final answer:
Political pressures can lead to the FASB reversing its positions, as seen in the banking sector where controversial decisions by bank supervisors are influenced by the political landscape. This was particularly evident during the financial crisis of 2008-2009, when the banks' financial instability was questioned.
Step-by-step explanation:
The primary historical reason for the FASB reversing its positions when political pressures occur is often related to the complexities and controversy surrounding financial decisions, particularly in the banking sector. A bank supervisor's decision to close a bank or change its financial investments can invoke political pressure from various stakeholders.
In the case of the FASB, such decisions can become political, leading to reversals in their position when faced with opposition from powerful entities, such as bank owners or local politicians. A notable example of regulators coming under scrutiny occurred during the 2008-2009 recession, prompting questions about why the financial shakiness of banks wasn't anticipated before large losses accumulated.
While none of the listed reasons (cost of gathering data, difficulties in measurement, lack of authority, lack of SEC support) explicitly mention political influences, it is understood that political pressures can indirectly affect these areas. For example, if the SEC did not support the FASB position, it could be due to political undertones influencing decisions.