Topics discussed during the DPOC meeting were:
Update on technical activities
Updates were given on the progress of the major projects as well as research, implementation and maintenance projects on the IASB's work plan.
- The DPOC noted the issuance of IFRS 9 as the most significant development since its last meeting in July 2014.
- On insurance contracts the DPOC was updated on progress following the responses, outreach and fieldwork that had been undertaken on the proposals in the IASB's revised Exposure Draft. The DPOC noted that, while there was broad support for the proposals, there remained some significant areas of concern, in particular around complexity and accounting mismatches. The DPOC questioned the IASB representatives on the diverse views of constituents on the proposals and how the concerns were being considered and reported on by the Board.
- The DPOC noted that the comprehensive review of the IFRS for SMEs was continuing, and that the IASB at its October 2014 meeting was scheduled to start discussing the issues raised in the responses to the ED.
- A brief discussion on convergence and what had been achieved led to noting that the most notable success had been the issue in May 2015 of IFRS 15.
- On the conceptual framework project, the DPOC was informed that there had been some slight slippage in the timetable and that an ED was now scheduled to be published in early 2015 rather than by the end of 2014. The DPOC noted some preliminary decisions the IASB has made and advised that the rationale for the IASB's view should be set out clearly in the Basis of Conclusions in the forthcoming ED.
The DPOC was also updated on the progress of the projects on macro hedge accounting, the disclosure initiative, and on rate-regulated activities. Further, the DPOC was updated on the progress of a number of the research projects on the IASB's work plan. The DPOC questioned whether the IASB was undertaking all the work itself on the programme, given the resource constraints, and the IASB stated that it has recognised that it needed to consider more the prioritisation and resource allocation. Other updates provided concerned various implementation and maintenance projects and the XBRL Taxonomy.
At this meeting, the DPOC paid particular attention to the progress on the leases project, in particular considering the concerns raised by some stakeholders and comments that stakeholder views were not always given due weight.The technical staff's view was that the due process requirements had been fully adhered to and had been applied in an appropriate manner for such an important and controversial project. The DPOC acknowledged that theIASB could not respond to each individual comment letter or submission received, especially on projects such as leases that generated a very high level of response, but noted it was important that there was communication from the IASB summarising the major issues raised with the Board and the rationale for the Board's tentative decisions. Following the discussions with the DPOC, the IASB committed to review its public disclosure of the rationale used to reach tentative decisions and conclusions, with special attention to issues that received substantial debate in the exposure process.
Effects Analysis Consultative Group
The DPOC received a progress report on the work of the Effects Analysis Consultative Group (EACG), which had been set up to advise the IASB in developing an agreed methodology for field testing and effects analyses. The DPOC was content with the near final draft report. The DPOC also agreed that it was important that the report was finalised and published as soon as possible, so that the proposals could be embedded into the IASB's process as quickly as possible, to the extent that they were not already reflected in the due process.
Update on consultative groups
The DPOC noted an update on the meetings of a number of the IASB's consultative groups since July 2014 and a forward schedule of group meetings. The Chairman reminded the DPOC that it had a responsibility to monitor the effectiveness of the bodies and consultative groups that supported the IASB and encouraged that a representative of the DPOC should observe at least part of the meetings of each of the major groups once a year and report back to the Committee to validate the breadth of attendance and an appreciation of the quality of dialogue.
The DPOC considered an EFRAG letter proposing that a public 'fatal flaw' review prior to finalising a new Standard or major amendment should be included as a formal step in the IASB's due process. The staff and the IASB will review the suggestion and to revert to the DPOC with the results.
Please click for the full summary of the meeting on the IASB's website.