Sleeve length for overcoat

We had this one about the same time last year. Your shirt sleeves should be longer then your jacket sleeves. When you look at your wrist watch, you shouldn't need to pull anything back. If your jacket sleeves were longer than your shirt sleeves, you would wear away the edge of the jacket sleeve away faster, plus it is cheaper to replace a shirt, even an excellent Kabbaz shirt, then it is to replace an excellent suit. Furthermore, it looks out of place on my side of the pond not to show any shirt cuff on a jacket - imagine not being able to see any of the shirt collar when wearing a jacket.

The overcoat should finish at the same level of the shirt, not beyond it. Same wear argument, and the coat is supposed to keep away the worst of the possible things that could soil the clothes worn under your coat. I was taught that you shouldn't show any shirt cuff when wearing a coat - so make sure you have the right shirt sleeve length.

Plus your coat is not there to keep your hands warm, that's what gloves are for! Now American gloves are notoriously short - don't know the history of that one, and if I was faced with too short gloves, then I would want longer coat sleeves. So when you don't wear gloves, your coat wears prematurely, and it looks like you have borrowed your older, taller brother's coat. Thus the argument for the coat sleeve to finish the same as the shirt sleeve. One used to be able to tell an American, even a weel dressed one, by having too long suit sleeves. The Brits tended to have too short sleeves, showing a lot of cuff - had a few older clients come in with their Huntsman and Poole suits, and was informed that was their style back in the 70s.

Who is right? Whichever story you like the sound of. In the mean time, I will put on my longer peccary gloves that cover my wrist and keep it nice and warm - but drat, I have to take off the gloves to look at my wrist watch. So there is no definitive answer, if there was, there would be no AAAC, just a book of rules.