The IASB considered the recent activities of the IFRIC, particularly focussing on the project dealing with the effect of a minimum funding requirement on the IAS 19 asset ceiling. The IFRIC recognised that they would be unable to produce anything before the end of this year, and so published some guidance in the September 2005 IFRIC Update. The Board considered this guidance, and noted that it was similar to guidance that was considered in developing the amendments to IAS 19. The majority of the Board had no problem with the guidance, although several Board members believed it was unnecessary for the IFRIC to proceed with this project on the basis that the answers given were readily determinable from IAS 19. However, the Board agreed that the extent of the debate around what a reduction in future premiums means is indicative that IFRIC guidance was required.

In further consideration of the IFRIC's activities, one Board member noted a fundamental objection to the statements made in the August 2005 IFRIC Update in respect of regulatory assets. Particularly, he objected to the assertion that certain assets that would be recognised under SFAS 71 Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation did not meet the criteria for recognition as assets under IFRSs. The Board member noted that he had yet to be presented with any valid examples of this phenomenon, and believed that all of the examples that had been suggested to date were in fact items that did not fall within the scope of SFAS 71. The Board noted that the more important point is that if you have an asset that falls within the scope of IAS 38, consideration of SFAS 71 is inappropriate because intangible assets are adequately dealt with under IFRSs.

The Chairman of the IFRIC said that the items published in the IFRIC Update are not authoritative guidance, but rather are intended to be helpful without forming IFRS interpretations.