The Board discussed a proposed disclosure package to accompany the forthcoming exposure draft of amendments to IAS 19 Employee Benefits.
Board members noted with approbation that the volume of disclosures was much more reasonable than previously suggested, but several continued to be concerned that repetitions and redundancies remained. It was also suggested that a limited field test should be conducted before the exposure draft is issued. A company with pension obligations in multiple jurisdictions should be asked to prepare the proposed disclosures. The goal would be to identify any aspects of the proposed disclosure package that may be difficult to understand or impracticable to implement.
The Board also asked for clarification about the extent of the interim reporting requirements suggested by the staff proposal. Although the staff responded that the forthcoming Improvements to IFRSs Standard would include improved language in IAS 34 that would clarify the general principle of 'tell users what has changed' since the last annual (or interim) report, it was clear that some Board members were not as confident as the staff that the Board's intentions would be understood.
A Board member was also concerned about the practicability of the staff's proposals with respect to sensitivity analysis, in particular that relating to the significant components of the actuarial assumptions.
The Board agreed that the staff should continue to work with the Board member project advisors to address the Board's concerns and proceed to the pre-ballot draft stage. Mr Yamada reserved his vote, indicating that he may dissent on the basis of the proposed presentation of pension expense in the statement of comprehensive income.
The Board also directed the staff to be clear in the exposure draft that the proposed exemption for pension plan assets from the disclosure requirements of the forthcoming IFRS on fair value measurement was an exemption from disclosures only (and not measurement). The staff noted this direction.