31 July 2010: IASB seeks user views on the offsetting of assets and liabilities

The IASB has released a questionnaire for financial statement users regarding the offsetting of financial assets and liabilities. The survey focuses on whether and how users of financial statements adjust for offsetting of financial instruments. This project was added to the agenda at the June IASB-FASB meeting in response to stakeholder concerns (including those of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the Financial Stability Board) about differences between IFRS and US-GAAP standards on balance sheet netting of derivative contracts and other financial instruments that can result in material differences in financial reporting by financial institutions. The questionnaire is targeted at users of financial statements, requesting feedback in areas such as: Which of gross or net values of financial asset and liability positions, and in particular derivatives, is useful for financial statement analysis Whether gross or net values should be presented on the face of the statement of financial position (balance sheet) When offsetting (netting) should be permitted (conditional or unconditional rights, different types of risk). The deadline to complete the questionnaire is 20 August 2010. The questionnaire can be accessed through the IASB website. More information on the project is available in our Financial Instruments - Balance Sheet Offsetting project page.

31 July 2010: EITF Snapshot for July 2010

We have posted the July 2010 edition of EITF Snapshot (PDF 130k) summarising the 29 July 2010 meeting of FASB's Emerging Issues Task Force. EITF Snapshot, published by Deloitte & Touche LLP (USA), enables readers to identify relevant topics and to understand quickly the meeting's outcome. Past issues can be downloaded Here. This EITF Snapshot covers the following issue discussed by the EITF at the meeting: Issue 09-G Accounting for Costs Associated With Acquiring or Renewing Insurance Contracts – Final consensus Issue 09-H5 Health Care Entities: Revenue Recognition – No consensus reached Issue 09-K Health Care Entities: Presentation of Insurance Claims and Related Insurance Recoveries – Partial consensus reached Issue 09-L Health Care Entities: Measuring Charity Care for Disclosure – Final consensus Issue 10-A How the Carrying Amount of a Reporting Unit Should Be Calculated When Performing Step 1 of the Goodwill Impairment Test – No consensus reached Issue 10-B Accounting for Multiple Foreign Currency Exchange Rates – No consensus reached Issue 10-C Accounting for Participant Loans in Employee Benefit Plan Financial Statements – Consensus-for-exposure Issue 10-D Accounting for Certain Fees Associated With Recently Enacted Health Care Legislation – Consensus-for-exposure Initial EITF consensuses (known as 'consensuses-for-exposure') are exposed for a comment period after ratification by the FASB. At its first scheduled meeting after the comment period, the EITF considers comments received and, as warranted, affirms its consensuses-for-exposure as final consensuses. Those consensuses are then provided to the Board for final ratification.

31 July 2010: Financial Reporting Framework in Kosovo

We have created a new Jurisdiction Page for Kosovo on IAS Plus. In Kosovo, the Law requires all corporations (except "small corporations"), publicly-owned enterprises, and socially-owned enterprises to prepare their financial statements in conformity with Kosovo Accounting Standards (KAS) or IFRS. Banks and insurance companies are required to prepare financial statements in compliance with IFRS and the accounting requirements set forth by the Banking and Payments Authority of Kosovo (BPK). However, since no mechanism currently exists for enforcing compliance with accounting and financial reporting requirements there is widespread non-compliance with both IFRS and KAS.

30 July 2010: Deloitte comment letter on the discussion paper on extractive activities

Deloitte's IFRS Global Office has submitted a letter of comment to the IASB on Discussion paper DP/2010/1 Extractive Activities (PDF 82k). Below is an excerpt from the letter: ...We agree with the view expressed in the Discussion Paper that the use of a market-based measure is not justifiable on cost-benefit grounds and is not supported by industry participants, analysts and other users of the financial statements. We agree with the project team’s recommendation with respect to the definitions of reserves and resources to be used in any IFRS on extractive activities and the need for common definitions for all extractive activities within the scope of any future IFRS. However, we believe that it is important that the definitions ultimately chosen are accepted by industry and consistent across all jurisdictions to avoid the need for multiple reserve and resource determinations and reconciliations. Therefore, we urge the Board to cooperate closely with national standard-setters, securities markets regulators and industry bodies to ensure acceptance and consistency in definitions. In our view, the Discussion Paper does not articulate clearly the nature of the asset arising from extractive activities. Further research is required to determine the nature of the asset(s) and the justification for capitalising subsequent expenditures within the context of the Conceptual Framework. We also believe that further research is necessary to develop an appropriate impairment model for such assets. We agree with the overall disclosure objectives proposed by the Discussion Paper, provided that those objectives do not lead to a requirement to disclose fair values. However, we have significant concerns about the nature and extent of the disclosures proposed, in particular the level of disaggregation required, the need for sensitivity analyses and the cost of preparing the proposed disclosures. All of our past letters of comment to the IASB are Here.

30 July 2010: Deloitte newsletter on IFRSs in Canada

The July edition of Deloitte Canada's IFRS newsletter Countdown has been issued. This edition focuses on: Beyond the audit committee: What boards do (and do not) need to know about IFRS The Real Deal – the focus this month is on Discontinued Operations An update on international standard setting activities Click here to download the July 2010 edition of Countdown (PDF 439k). A French translation is available (PDF 1,491k). Click here to visit our Canada country page

30 July 2010: Deloitte press release on IASB Insurance Contracts proposals

Further to our earlier story, Deloitte has issued a press release commenting on the issue of ED/2010/8 Insurance Contracts. The ED proposes fundamental changes to the financial reporting of insurance companies applying IFRS, with a goal of making it more consistent and transparent than it has been so far. Excerpts from the press release: "Given the increased adoption of IFRS worldwide, it is no exaggeration to suggest that this proposed accounting standard would have a global impact and could fundamentally change the way insurance companies measure, report, and evaluate performance of their insurance contracts," said Joel Osnoss, Global IFRS Leader, Clients & Markets, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. Francesco Nagari, Global IFRS Insurance Leader at Deloitte United Kingdom, commented: "The publication of the Exposure Draft is a landmark stage in the IASB’s 13-year project to develop a consistent standard for insurance accounting and will have a significant impact on insurers across the world. Under the proposed IFRS, all insurance contracts, both life and non-life, will be measured using the same building blocks based on discounted probability-weighted best estimate cash flows." Click for: Press release Deloitte on the publication of the IASB Exposure Draft of the new International Reporting Standard for Insurance Contracts Our Insurance contracts project summary.

30 July 2010: India-Japan Joint Working Group on IFRS

Various government and accounting organisations from India and Japan have formed the India-Japan Joint Working Group as a common platform between the two countries to discuss IFRS-related matters. The first meeting of the Joint Working Group was held in Tokyo, Japan from 26-28 July 2010. At the meeting, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed which primarily focuses on: An exchange of views on legal and regulatory and other issues arising out of application of or convergence with IFRSs and exploring the possibilities of mutual cooperation Addressing critical issues relating to application of, or convergence with, IFRSs and reaching consensus through a process of consultation mutually agreed to Fostering a strong and cohesive profession by providing leadership on emerging issues, coordinating with global, other regional, intra-regional organisations, member bodies and associates to achieve appropriate strategic objectives. The next meeting of the group will be held in India in 2011. Click for: Accounting Standards Board of Japan (ASBJ) press release Inauguration of India-Japan Dialogue (PDF 41k) Our India country page Our Japan country page.

30 July 2010: New publications from Deloitte Brazil

Deloitte Brazil has published Brazilian editions of IFRS for SMEs in your Pocket (PDF 360k) and 2009 Model financial statements (PDF 406k), both in Portuguese. The IFRS for SMEs is particularly relevant in Brazil mainly after the signature of the Memorandum of Understanding among the IASB, Brazilian Federal Council of Accounting (CFC) and the Brazilian Accounting Pronouncements Committee (CPC) in January 2010, during a visit of Sir. David Tweedie (IASB Chairman) to Brazil. In December 2009, the Brazilian Accounting Pronouncements Committee (CPC) adopted a Portuguese version of the IFRS for SMEs as an option for SMEs in Brazil. By Resolution 1255 of 2009, the CPC's SME standard was endorsed by the Brazilian Federal Accounting Council (CFC), the national professional body. Click for: IFRS para PMEs ao seu alcance 2010 (IFRS for SMEs in Your Pocket in Portuguese, 84 pages, PDF 360k) Normas Internacionais de Relatório Financeiro - Modelo de demonstrações financeiras para 2009 (2009 Model financial statements in Portuguese, 124 pages, PDF 1,270k) IFRS for SMEs in Your Pocket (Global Edition, English, PDF 406k) Model financial statements and checklists Our Brazil country page Our IFRS for SMEs page.

30 July 2010: IASB publishes exposure draft for new IFRS – Insurance Contracts

The IASB has published for public comment an exposure draft of a proposed IFRS for insurance contracts. Exposure Draft ED/2010/8 Insurance Contracts proposes a single IFRS that all insurers, in all jurisdictions, could apply to all contract types on a consistent basis. The proposed IFRS would apply to writers of both insurance and reinsurance contracts. A summary of the key proposals follows: Scope and recognition The proposed IFRS would apply to all insurance contracts as defined. An insurance contract would be recognised at the earlier of: the insurer being on risk to provide coverage to the policyholder for insured events; and the signing of the insurance contract. An insurer would derecognise an insurance liability when it is extinguished. Measurement Measurement of the insurance contract is based on a 'building block approach' that portrays a current assessment of the contract, using the following: an unbiased, probability-weighted average (expected value) of future cash flows expected to arise as the insurer fulfils the contract; the effect of time value of money; and a margin. The building blocks would be used to measure the combination of rights and obligations arising from an insurance contract rather than to measure the rights separately from the obligations. The combination of rights and obligations would be presented on a net basis. Disclosure With respect to disclosure, the ED proposes that entities should disclose qualitative and quantitative information about: the amounts, recognised in its financial statements, arising from insurance contracts; and the nature and extent of risks arising from insurance contracts. ED/2010/8 is open for comment until 30 November 2010. Click for: IASB press release (PDF 36k) Access to the exposure draft (link to IASB website) Our Insurance contracts project summary.

29 July 2010: IFRS Insights – Update on convergence and conversion

We have posted the IFRS Insights Newsletter for July 2010 (PDF 397k) from Deloitte & Touche LLP (United States). IFRS Insights is a newsletter on IFRSs aimed at US companies. This issue includes: The latest FASB and IASB convergence activities; a detailed table with the target date for each convergence project is included Technology considerations related to the SEC's "dual-reporting" requirements An overview of the financial statement presentation project An industry update for power and utilities companies We have Permanent Links to all IFRS Insights on our USA country page.

29 July 2010: Stay Tuned Online – IFRS and UK GAAP update

The Deloitte London IFRS Centre of Excellence is running a series of hour-long Internet-based financial reporting updates, aimed at helping finance teams keep up to speed with IFRSs and other financial reporting issues. Each update lasts no more than an hour, and sessions are normally held three times a year, approximately at the end of March, July, and November. We intend to make a recording of each session available on IAS Plus for a period of at least four months from the date of the presentation. The topics covered in the July 2010 webcast: Latest IFRS developments IFRS 3(2008) – now in force ED/2010/6 Revenue from Contracts with Customers New UK Corporate Governance Code Other UK GAAP developments To access the recording Click Here. There is a permanent link on our UK Country Page.

29 July 2010: Canada proposes a two-year delay in IFRS implementation for rate-regulated activities

During the Board meeting in July 2010 the IASB noted that it seemed unlikely for the Board to reach a decision concerning the accounting for rate-regulated activities that would allow a solution to be found in time for the adoption of IFRSs by Canada. The IASB considered four alternatives of how to move forward with the project: a "fast-tracked" standard, an interim solution for pending initial adopters of IFRS while later considering a longer term solution, an amendment to IFRS 1 to permit the continued use of previous national GAAP for rate regulated activities for first time adopters, or continue with the existing project under its current timeframe. The IASB finally agreed to continue its current project under the existing timeframe without amending IFRS 1. The Canadian Accounting Standards Board (AcSB) has now reacted by proposing a two-year delay in IFRS implementation for qualifying entities with rate-regulated activities since "Financial statement preparers in Canada currently recognizing regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities require certainty about how they should account for the effects of the actions of their rate regulator when adopting IFRSs for the first time." The new implementation date would be 1 January 2013, with earlier application permitted. Click for: The AcSB's Exposure Draft (PDF 91k, link to the AcSB's website) Our project page for rate-regulated activities Our Canada country page

29 July 2010: FASB goes it alone on accounting for repurchase agreements (repos)

At its meeting held on 28 July 2010, the FASB chairman announced that he added a limited scope project to the FASB's agenda to improve accounting for repurchase agreements (repos) or other agreements that both entitle and obligate the transferor to repurchase or redeem financial assets before their maturity. Although this is not a joint project with the IASB, the FASB intends to consider how the proposed improvements are similar to or different from IFRS. When the IASB and FASB decided in June 2010 to amend their convergence workplan, the IASB's derecognition project was removed from the current priority list to be reconsidered again sometime after June 2011. Prior to this workplan change, the IASB had issued ED/2009/3 Derecognition, which would have changed the way in which repos where accounted for, proposing to treat these transactions as sale transactions. Constituents overwhelmingly disagreed with the proposed approach as described in the ED, noting these transactions were almost universally perceived as financing and that their treatment as sale transactions would increase volatility in profit or loss that had no economic substance. The IASB and FASB had also debated alternative accounting treatments for repos in light of this constituent feedback before deferring the project. Click for: Summary of FASB meeting on 28 July 2010 (link to FASB website) Our derecognition project page (summary of discussions on repos and derecognition in general)

29 July 2010: IAASB Chairman reappointed

The Board of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) has reappointed Prof. Arnold Schilder to lead the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), the independent standard-setting board supported by IFAC, for the period 2012–2014. Click for IFAC press release (link to IFAC website). Background information about the IAASB is available on our IAASB page.

28 July 2010: IASB targets analyst views in fair value measurement questionnaire

The IASB has published a questionnaire for financial statement users on its June 2010 exposure draft ED/2010/7 Measurement Uncertainty Analysis Disclosure for Fair Value Measurements - Limited re-exposure of proposed disclosure. The ED proposes that companies disclose sensitivity information ('measurement uncertainty analysis') about all 'Level 3' fair value measurements included in financial statements - not just for financial instruments, but also other items such as investment properties, biological assets and property, plant and equipment measured on the revaluation basis. The questionnaire is targeted at users of financial statements, particularly analysts, and requests feedback in areas such as: The usefulness of 'measurement uncertainty analysis' to different categories of assets and liabilities How measurement uncertainty analysis information is used - 'worst case' or 'best case' scenarios, or for other uses Whether information presented by class of asset and liability is sufficient Additional disclosures that would be useful. The deadline to complete the questionnaire is 7 September 2010. The questionnaire can be accessed on the IASB website. More information on the proposals is available in our IFRS in Focus newsletter (PDF 60k) and our Fair value measurement project page.

28 July 2010: Accounting & Auditing Standards Board in Bhutan

The lhengye zhungtshog (cabinet) of Bhutan has approved the formation of an accounting and auditing standards board of Bhutan (AASBB) on 26 July. The board will set Bhutanese accounting and auditing standards in line with international standards. So far there is no defined Bhutanese GAAP. The provision of the Companies Act of Bhutan (2000) that listed companies must present their financial statements in compliance with GAAP is usually construed to mean India GAAP. The AASBB will also develop plans for the formation of chartered institutes and chartered accountants qualification in the country and harmonise financial reporting formats.

28 July 2010: Canadian guide on IFRS transition

The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA) has published The IFRS Changeover: A Guide for Users of Financial Reports. The guide is designed to help users of external financial reports better understand the potential impacts of Canada’s transition to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Deloitte (Canada) Partner, Peter Chant, participated in the preparation of the publication. The guide has been published by the CICA's Canadian Performance Reporting Board and is available online at www.cica.ca/cpr. More information on IFRS in Canada can be found on our Canada country page.

27 July 2010: Illustrative Examples in XBRL for the IFRS Taxonomy 2010

The IFRS Foundation has published illustrative examples in eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) for the IFRS Taxonomy 2010. The purpose of these examples is to illustrate the use of the IFRS Taxonomy in financial statements, in accordance with the XBRL architecture outlined in The IFRS Taxonomy Guide. Click Here to access the illustrative examples in XBRL on the Foundation's website.

27 July 2010: Consultation on proposals to reform the UK’s financial regulatory framework

The UK Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Mark Hoban MP, launched a government consultation on the implementation of reforms to financial regulation. The plan is to overhaul the system of financial regulation, giving the Bank of England powers over macro prudential regulation, through a newly established Financial Policy Committee (FPC) to avoid a repeat of the financial crisis. Among the potential macro-prudential tools suggested as additions to the UK’s economic policy framework, is forward-looking loss provisioning. The dynamic provisioning system employed by Spain during the financial crisis is offered as a useful practical example. This system links loss provisions to the credit cycle, so banks are forced to hold higher provisions when credit is growing strongly. The IASB has discussed a dynamic provisioning model, but has decided against it in favour of its expected loss model. Click for: Consulation document A new approach to financial regulation: judgement, focus and stability (PDF 1.307k) Press release (PDF 44k) Our credit crunch page Our IAS 39 impairment and provisioning page

27 July 2010: Updated EFRAG 'endorsement status report'

The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) has updated its report showing the status of endorsement, under the EU Accounting Regulation, of each IFRS, including standards, interpretations, and amendments. Click to download the Endorsement Status Report as of 26 July 2010 (PDF 122k). Currently, the following two IASB pronouncements await endorsement action: IFRS 9 Financial Instruments Improvements to IFRSs You can always find the endorsement status report Here.

27 July 2010: IFRS Foundation podcast summary of July 2010 IASB meeting

The IFRS Foundation has made available a podcast summary of discussions and decisions at the IASB meeting held on 19-23 July 2010. The summary covers insurance, leases, rate-regulated activity, financial instruments, impairment and income taxes. The podcast is available on the IFRS Foundation website. Our Deloitte observer notes from the meeting are available here.

27 July 2010: Broad agreement on Basel Committee capital and liquidity reform package

The Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, met on 26 July 2010 to review the Basel Committee's capital and liquidity reform package, reaching broad agreement on the overall design of the package. Mr Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank and Chairman of the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, said that "the agreements reached today are a landmark achievement to strengthen banking sector resilience in a manner that reflects the key lessons of the crisis." The proposals change the treatment of various accounting balances, including an override of local GAAP in favour of IFRSs in relation to some intangibles. Some IFRS-related extracts from the proposals follow: Allow IFRS treatment where different from national GAAP (eg software) A level playing field is established through an option to use IFRS in determining the level of intangible assets if national GAAP results in a wider range of assets (eg certain software assets) being classified as intangible. Definition of the leverage ratio For all derivatives (including credit derivatives), apply Basel II netting plus a simple measure of potential future exposure based on the standardised factors of the current exposure method. This ensures that all derivatives are converted in a consistent manner to a "loan equivalent" amount... [This] would also strengthen the treatment of derivatives relative to the purely accounting based measure (and provide a simple way of addressing differences between IFRS and GAAP). Forward looking provisioning While capital focuses on unexpected losses, the Committee also has developed a concrete proposal to operationalise the expected loss approach to provisioning proposed by the IASB. The Committee sent a comment letter to the IASB on 30 June 2010 in which it spelled out its proposed approach. The Committee has been in close dialogue with the IASB on this topic. The Committee is expected to finalise the regulatory buffers before the end of this year. The Governors and Heads of Supervision agreed to finalise the calibration and phase-in arrangements at their meeting in September. Click for: Annex summarising the key broad agreements of the Governors and Heads of Supervision (PDF 47k) Press release (link to Bank for International Settlements website) Our credit crunch page Our IAS 39 impairment and provisioning page

27 July 2010: Heads Up on PCAOB confirmation proposals

Further to our story of 13 July, Deloitte (United States) has published a new Heads Up newsletter (PDF 128k) discussing the United States Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) proposed auditing standard, Confirmation (Release No. 2010-003). The proposed standard would supersede PCAOB AU Section 330, The Confirmation Process, which establishes the requirements for and provides guidance on the confirmation process in audits. An extract from the newsletter: It appears likely that the provisions in the proposed standard expanding required confirmation procedures will result in (1) an overall increase in confirmation requests being sent by auditors and therefore needing to be responded to by confirming parties and (2) requests being made of confirming parties for confirmation of data or information that may not have been historically requested. Click for: Heads Up Newsletter PCAOB Issues Proposed Standard on Audit Confirmations (PDF 128k) PCAOB Exposure Draft (PDF 295k) Heads Up archive Our PCAOB page

26 July 2010: Insurance accounting newsletter in German

Deloitte (United Kingdom) is publishing a series of Insurance Accounting Newsletters. We post these regularly on our IAS Plus Insurance Project Page. Deloitte (Germany) is translating some of these newsletters into German. The latest is: Versicherungsbilanzierung 11: Konvergenz in letzter Minute (PDF 390k) Translation of UK Issue 16: Last minute convergence (PDF 125k) All of the earlier insurance newsletters available in German are on our Germany Country Page. The Exposure Draft on insurance accounting is expected to be published later this week.

26 July 2010: Updated survey on extended use of IFRSs in European Union

Since 2005, the European Union Accounting Regulation has required that European companies listed in a European securities market must use IFRSs to prepare their consolidated financial statements. The Regulation gave EU member states the options to: Require or permit IFRSs for unlisted companies Require or permit IFRSs in parent company (unconsolidated) financial statements Permit companies whose only listed securities are debt securities to delay IFRS adoption until 2007 Permit companies that are listed on exchanges outside of the EU and that currently prepare their primary financial statements using a non-EU GAAP (in most cases this would be US GAAP) to delay IFRS adoption until 2007. The European Commission has updated its earlier surveys of EU and EEA member states concerning their decisions regarding the four options above. Click to download the results of the updated survey: Table on Use of IFRS Options 30 EU Member and EEA States (PDF 64k)

26 July 2010: EU formally adopts IFRIC 19

The European Union has published the Commission Regulation (EC) No 662/2010 endorsing IFRIC 19 Extinguishing Financial Liabilities with Equity Instruments. The Interpretation applies when a debtor extinguishes a liability fully or partly by issuing equity instruments to the creditor. IFRIC 19 addresses only the accounting by the entity that issues the equity instruments; it does not address the accounting by the creditor (lender). Currently only two IASB pronouncements await endorsement action.

26 July 2010: Guide for US companies on preparing for possible Irish GAAP changes

Deloitte (United States) has published IFRS: Changes in the Irish Statutory Reporting Environment - Potential Implications for U.S. Companies (PDF 308k). The publication discusses the preparations U.S. companies should be undertaking now to respond to the possible replacement of Irish GAAP with full IFRS or IFRS for SMEs. This change will require careful planning by companies to meet this potential requirement effectively, and use this change as a foundation to prepare for IFRS requirements in other jurisdictions. You will find more information about financial reporting in Ireland on our Ireland Page.

24 July 2010: Agenda project pages updated

We have updated the following pages on IAS Plus to reflect the discussions and decisions at the IASB meeting held July 19-23, 2010: Amendments to IFRS 1 – Fixed Dates Annual Improvements 2009-2011 Consolidation Conceptual Framework – Phase C: Measurement Derecognition Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity Financial Instruments: Comprehenesive Revision of IAS 39 – Classifiction (FVO for Financial Liabilities) Financial Instruments: Comprehenesive Revision of IAS 39 – Hedge Accounting Financial Instruments: Comprehenesive Revision of IAS 39 – Impairment Income Taxes Insurance Contracts Leases Rate-regulated Activities

24 July 2010: Updated summary of agenda rejections by the Interpretations Committee

We have updated our Summary of Issues Not Added to the Agenda of the Interpretations Committee to reflect the Committee's final decisions at its May and July 2010 meetings not to add the following topics to its agenda. Our summary now includes 185 issues: IFRS 1 First-time Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards – Accounting for costs included in self-constructed assets on transition IFRS 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations – Reversal of disposal group impairment losses relating to goodwill IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements – Going concern disclosure IAS 26 Accounting and Reporting by Retirement Benefit Plans – Valuation of plan assets IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement – Impairment of financial assets reclassified from available-for-sale to loans and receivables

23 July 2010: Notes from day 5 of July 2010 IASB meeting

The IASB is holding a meeting on 19-23 July 2010 at the IASB's office in London, some of which is a joint meeting with the FASB. The topics discussed on day 5 were as follows (click through to detailed Deloitte observer notes for that topic): Hedge Accounting Fair Value Option Impairment Click here to go to the preliminary and unofficial Notes Taken by Deloitte Observers for the entire meeting.

23 July 2010: CEBS publishes results of its 2010 EU-wide bank stress tests

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) published the results of its 'stress tests' of 91 European banks. CEBS has published the following documents on its website: CEBS Press release Summary report Q & As Joint press release (CEBS, ECB, and European Commission) Summary of results (PDF 5mb)

23 July 2010: Canadian Securities Administrators publishes review of IFRS transition efforts

The Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) has published IFRS Transition Disclosure Review, which discusses the quality of issuers' disclosures about their transition to IFRSs. This review focuses on issuers' disclosures related to its IFRS transition efforts. Click here to view the press release. You will find more information about financial reporting in Canada on our Canada Page.

23 July 2010: Two new publications from Deloitte

	We've posted two new Deloitte publications dealing with IFRS issues and developments:
	IFRIC Review IFRIC Review is a new communication that examines matters discussed at the IASB's IFRS Interpretations Committee (IFRIC). The July edition (PDF 84k) discusses the IFRIC meeting held on 8-9 July 2010. All issues of IFRIC Review will be available Here.
	IFRS Alert IFRS Alert highlights important IFRS accounting developments that may require immediate action. This IFRS Alert (PDF 67k) provides an update on potential accounting implications as a result of recent actions taken by the Venezuelan government regarding foreign currency exchange controls. All IFRS Alerts will be available Here. You can access all our Deloitte IFRS publications Here.

23 July 2010: Heads Up on FASB ASU on receivables disclosures

Further to our earlier story, Deloitte (United States) has published a new Heads Up newsletter (PDF 132k) discussing the FASB's newly issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2010-20, Disclosures About the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. The ASU requires more robust and disaggregated disclosures about the credit quality of an entity’s financing receivables and its allowance for credit losses. The objective of enhancing these disclosures is to improve financial statement users’ understanding of: the nature of an entity’s credit risk associated with its financing receivables; and the entity’s assessment of that risk in estimating its allowance for credit losses as well as changes in the allowance and the reasons for those changes The disclosure requirements are similar to those required by IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures, however the IFRS 7 disclosures are wider in scope. Click for: Heads Up Newsletter FASB Goes "ALLL"-In, Requires Entities to Show Their Cards - Board Enhances Disclosures About the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses (PDF 132k) Heads Up archive FASB webinar on the proposals (link to FASB website) Our summary of IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures

23 July 2010: Canadian guide to interim financial reporting

Deloitte (Canada) has published IAS 34 – Interim financial reporting: A Canadian perspective, a comprehensive reference source on interim financial reporting for financial statement preparers and users with a working knowledge of Canadian GAAP and securities requirements. The guide is available in English and French. The guide includes suggested model interim financial statements for a Canadian issuer in the post-IFRS changeover regime. These are based on the model interim financial statements provided in our global publication but tailored so that they look and feel, to the user, much more like the Canadian interims they have seen in the past without taking away from the mandatory IAS 34 requirements. Click for: IAS 34 – Interim financial reporting: A Canadian perspective (English, PDF 684k, July 2010, 95 pages) IAS 34 – Information financière intermédiaire: Le point de vue canadien (French, PDF 777k, July 2010, 100 pages) Interim Financial Reporting – A Guide to IAS 34 (global publication, PDF 1,205k, March 2009, 76 pages) Our summary of IAS 34 Interim Financial Reporting Our IFRS related publications

22 July 2010: Notes from day 4 of July 2010 IASB meeting

The IASB is holding a meeting on 19-23 July 2010 at the IASB's office in London, some of which is a joint meeting with the FASB. The topics discussed on day 4 were as follows (click through to detailed Deloitte observer notes for that topic): Leases (continued, partially joint with FASB) Insurance Contracts (joint with FASB) Hedge Accounting Rate-regulated Activities Consolidation IAS 29 – Reporting in accordance with IFRS after a period of chronic hyperinflation Click here to go to the preliminary and unofficial Notes Taken by Deloitte Observers for the entire meeting.

22 July 2010: Reserve Bank of India to address IFRS implementation issues in banking sector

The Reserve Bank of India has set up a working group to address "...implementation issues and facilitate formulation of operational guidelines in the context of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) convergence for the Indian banking system." The group will address the following issues: Classification and measurement of financial assets Classification and measurement of financial liabilities and hedge accounting, including balance sheet issues of corporates and their implications. Amortised cost and impairment Fair value measurement Presentation, disclosures and balance sheet formats Derecognition, consolidation and residuary issues Click here to view the press release.

22 July 2010: IASB-FASB meeting – Agenda changes

The agenda for the July 2010 IASB meeting has been changed again. We have updated our page with the Next Meeting Agenda accordingly. Hedge Accounting was not discussed yesterday but moved to today. Also, there will be a short session on Rate-regulated Activities to discuss the way forward. On Tuesday the IASB hat concluded that it seems unlikely for the Board to reach a decision that would allow for a solution to be found in time for the adoption of IFRSs by Canada.

22 July 2010: FASB issues ASU on receivables disclosures, releases webinar on new requirements

The FASB has issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2010-20, Receivables (Topic 310): Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. Companies will be required to provide more information about the credit quality of their financing receivables in the disclosures to financial statements, such as aging information and credit quality indicators. The FASB has released a webinar on the requirements, which will be available until October 2010. The effective date differs for public and nonpublic companies: For public companies, the amendments that require disclosures as of the end of a reporting period are effective for periods ending on or after 15 December 2010. The amendments that require disclosures about activity that occurs during a reporting period are effective for periods beginning on or after 15 December 2010. For nonpublic companies, the amendments are effective for annual reporting periods ending on or after 15 December 2011. On convergence with IFRSs, the ASU notes: How Do the Provisions Compare with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)? The disclosures required by the amendments in this Update are similar, but not identical, to those required by IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures. However, the scope of IFRS 7 includes all financial instruments, not just financing receivables and the allowance for credit losses. The FASB decided to limit the scope of this Update because it does not want to delay the improved transparency in an entity’s financial statements about the allowance for credit losses and the credit quality of financing receivables. The FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) currently have a joint project on accounting for financial instruments, including disclosures. Click for: ASU Update 2010-20, Receivables (Topic 310): Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses (link to FASB website) FASB press release (link to FASB website) FASB webinar on the proposals (link to FASB website) Our project page on the joint Financial Instruments project Our summary of IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures

22 July 2010: Additional FASB meeting on Thursday July 22

The US FASB will hold an additional Board meeting on 22 July 2010 commencing at 7:00am to discuss the Leases project. The FASB intends to discuss application guidance on when to apply which accounting model and accounting for sale and leasebacks. This meeting will precede the joint meeting with the IASB later in the day. If necessary, the Board will also discuss minor issues on technical projects, agenda decision announcements, or administrative matters. Click here for the Notice of Meeting (link to FASB website).

22 July 2010: Notes from day 3 of July 2010 IASB meeting

The IASB is holding a meeting on 19-23 July 2010 at the IASB's office in London, some of which is a joint meeting with the FASB. The topics discussed on day 3 were as follows (click through to detailed Deloitte observer notes for that topic): IFRS Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) Update Amendments to IFRS 1 - Fixed dates Annual Improvements Conceptual Framework - Measurement IFRS Advisory Council Update Leases (joint meeting with FASB, continued from Monday 19 July) Leases (IASB only) Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity Click here to go to the preliminary and unofficial Notes Taken by Deloitte Observers for the meeting.

21 July 2010: Audit firms from 86 countries are registered with PCAOB

The 2009 Annual Report (PDF 936k) of the US Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) reports that over 930 non-US auditing firms in 87 countries were registered with the PCAOB by year-end 2009. Also, during 2009, the PCAOB conducted 82 non-US inspections of firms located in 26 countries. You can find our PCAOB page Here.

21 July 2010: The Future of UK GAAP

In August 2009 the Accounting Standards Board (ASB) had issued a consultation paper Policy Proposal: the Future of UK GAAP, which set out proposals for the future reporting requirements for UK and Irish entities. The deadline for comments on the proposal ended 1 February 2010. The ASB’s next steps include developing and drafting a Financial Reporting Exposure Draft (FRED) for consultation. The FRED will include an impact assessment. The ASB has now issued a request for responses to aid the development of that impact assessment. The request for responses Assessing the impact of the Accounting Standards Board proposals for the future of UK and Irish Financial Reporting can be downloaded here (PDF 75k). The deadline for responses is 20 August 2010.

21 July 2010: Additional Board meeting on 24 August

The IASB will hold an additional Board meeting on 24 August 2010 from 11:00 to 15:00 to discuss the Financial Instruments project. The IASB accelerates its work on this issue in order to meet the Q2 2011 deadline for replacing IAS 39 with a new standard. Together with the additional Board meeting on 3 August 2010, the extra meeting will enable the staff to make faster progress on this project.

21 July 2010: Heads Up on FASB proposed ASU on contingencies

As noted in our earlier story, the FASB has issued a proposed accounting standards update (ASU) on the disclosure of certain loss contingencies. Deloitte (United States) has issued a Heads Up Newsletter (PDF 156k) providing a summary of the proposals. On convergence with IFRSs, the newsletter notes: The proposed ASU is not part of the FASB's and IASB's current efforts to converge U.S. GAAP and IFRSs, as outlined in the boards' Memorandum of Understanding. However, the disclosures that would be required under the proposed ASU are similar to those required under IAS 37. The IASB is currently deliberating amendments to IAS 37 that would, among other things, improve the guidance on identifying, recognizing, and measuring liabilities. While such amendments would reduce the differences between IAS 37 and U.S. GAAP, they are significantly broader in scope than those in the FASB’s proposed ASU. Click for: Heads Up Newsletter Raising the Volume on the Remote - FASB Proposes Guidance on Expanded Disclosures for Certain Loss Contingencies (PDF 156k) Heads Up archive IAS Plus Update Newsletter on the IASB's liability proposals (PDF 88k) Our project page on the IASB's liabilities project

20 July 2010: Notes from day 2 of July 2010 IASB meeting

The IASB is holding a meeting on 19-23 July 2010 at the IASB's office in London, some of which is a joint meeting with the FASB. The topics discussed on day 2 were as follows (click through to detailed Deloitte observer notes for that topic): Derecognition Rate-regulated Activities Income Taxes Click here to go to the preliminary and unofficial Notes Taken by Deloitte Observers for the meeting.

20 July 2010: FASB issues proposed ASU on contingencies

The FASB has issued a proposed accounting standards update (ASU) Contingencies (Topic 450): Disclosure of Certain Loss Contingencies. Paragraphs BC47 and BC48 discuss the similarities and differences with IFRSs (IAS 37).

20 July 2010: IVSC Issues two documents for consultation

The International Valuation Professional Board (IVPB) of the International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC) has released two documents for consultation: Proposed Code of Ethics for Professional Valuers (511k) Definition of a Professional Valuer (545k) Comments will be accepted until 30 September.

20 July 2010: Deloitte virtual symposium – A Deeper Dive into IFRS

On 23 July from 13:00 to 15:00 EDT, Deloitte's IFRS University Consortium will host a webcast for professors and academics in the university community. The following topics will be covered: Employee Benefits Share-based Payments Provisions Income Taxes This webcast is open to academics who are Consortium members. Click here for more information about Deloitte's IFRS University Consortium. Members may register for the webcast (registration closes Thursday, 22 July).

20 July 2010: IASB meeting scheduled for 3 August

The IASB has scheduled a meeting on 3 August from 11:00 to 14:00 to discuss the Financial Instruments project.

20 July 2010: IASB-FASB meeting – Agenda changes

The agenda for the July 2010 IASB meeting has been changed. There have been changes to the agenda and running order for Wednesday 21 and Thursday 22 July: An additional Leases joint meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday The Insurance Contracts joint meeting scheduled for Thursday has been cancelled IAS 29 has moved to Thursday The afternoon sessions on Thursday may be brought forward if the tentative Thursday Leases session is cancelled An IFRS Advisory Council update has been added to the agenda for Wednesday We have updated our page with the Next Meeting Agenda accordingly.

20 July 2010: Notes from day 1 of July 2010 IASB-FASB meeting

The IASB and FASB are holding a joint meeting on 19-23 July 2010 at the IASB's office in London. The topics discussed on the first day of the meeting were as follows (click through to detailed Deloitte observer notes for that topic): Leases Insurance Contracts Click here to go to the preliminary and unofficial Notes Taken by Deloitte Observers for the meeting.

20 July 2010: Updated EFRAG 'endorsement status report'

The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) has updated its report showing the status of endorsement, under the EU Accounting Regulation, of each IFRS, including standards, interpretations, and amendments. Click to download the Endorsement Status Report as of 20 July 2010 (PDF 124k). Currently, the following three IASB pronouncements await endorsement action: IFRS 9 Financial Instruments IFRIC 19 Extinguishing Financial Liabilities with Equity Instruments Improvements to IFRSs You can always find the endorsement status report Here.

20 July 2010: EU formally adopts revised IAS 24/amendment to IFRS 8 and amendments to IFRIC 14

The European Union has published the Commission Regulation (EC) No 632/2010 (Revised IAS 24 Related Party Disclosure and Amendment to IFRS 8 Operating Segments) and the Commission Regulation (EC) No 633/2010 (Amendments to IFRIC 14 Prepayments of a Minimum Funding Requirement) endorsing the amendments adopted by the IASB in November 2009. Thus currently only three IASB pronouncements await endorsement action.

20 July 2010: 18th World Congress of Accountants to be held 8-11 November 2010

The 18th World Congress of Accountants is being held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on 8-11 November 2010. World Congress is the flagship event of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) and the 2010 event is expected to attract more than 6,000 delegates from 157 members and associates of IFAC in 123 countries and jurisdictions, representing over 2.5 million accountants. Since its inception in 1904, the World Congress has been held every five years since 1977 and every four years since 2002. The theme for the 2010 Congress is "Sustaining Value Creation". Speakers are drawn from international and national standard setters, accounting organisations, accounting firms, regulators, commerce and other groups. Topics to be covered include: Accountants – Sustaining Value Creation in the Borderless Economy IFRS Convergence: The Way Forward Convergence: The Regulators’ Perspective Function of National Standard Setters in an International Environment – Is Relevance Lost? IFRS for SMEs: Becoming a World Class Player Fair Value Accounting - Valuation Specialists in the Corporate Reporting Chain The Effect of Shariah Principles on Accounting Methods for Islamic Banks International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) Agenda Public Sector Accounting: Overcoming the Issues and Challenges International Ethics Standards Board (IESBA) – Adopting the New Code of Ethics eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) More information (including the full programme) is available from the World Congress of Accountants 2010 website. You can find our IFAC page Here.

17 July 2010: Deloitte comment letter on the fair value option for financial liabilities

Deloittes' IFRS Global Office has submitted a letter of comment to the IASB on Exposure Draft 2010/4 Fair Value Option for Financial Liabilities (PDF 45k). Below is an excerpt from the letter: We agree with the Board's objective to address the issue of own credit risk in the measurement of financial liabilities and further agree with the Board's decision to retain the basic model contained in IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement for classifying and measuring financial liabilities. However, we disagree with the Board's conclusion that credit risk can be identified following the approach set out in IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures. The Board needs to articulate clearly the principle that underlies the mechanics of identification of credit risk and we believe that it is only the changes in fair value due to changes in one's own credit risk that should be identified separately and reported in other comprehensive income (OCI). In our view, own credit risk represents the risk that a reporting entity will not perform its financial obligations under a contract. All of our past letters of comment to the IASB are Here.

17 July 2010: CESR members elect new Chair and Vice Chair

On 16 July 2010, the members of the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR) elected Carlos Tavares, Chairman of the Comissão do Mercado de Valores Mobiliários at the CMVM, as Chair of CESR and Jean Guill, Director General of the Commission de surveillance du secteur financier (CSSF), as Vice Chair of CESR. Click for CESR Press Release (PDF 137k).

17 July 2010: Canadian Securities Administrators publishes results of its continuous disclosure review program

On 7 July 2010, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) published CSA Staff Notice 51-3324 Continuous Disclosure Review Program Activities for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 (PDF 137k). The Notice summarizes the results of the CSA's continuous disclosure (CD) review program, which included the following issue-oriented reviews: Certification IFRS Transition Disclosure Executive Compensation Mining Technical Disclosure Oil and Gas Technical Disclosure Going Concern Asset Impairment Forward-Looking Information Press Releases Defined Benefit Pension Plans Complaints You will find more information about financial reporting in Canada on our Canada Page.

16 July 2010: Deloitte comment letter on conceptual framework for financial reporting

Deloitte's IFRS Global Office has submitted a letter of comment to the IASB on Exposure Draft 2010/2 Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting – The Reporting Entity (PDF 51k). Below is an excerpt from the letter: We generally agree with the proposals. In particular, we agree with the proposed definition of a reporting entity and with the requirement that a parent should present consolidated financial statements when it controls another entity. However, we do not believe that it is appropriate to define the concept of control as part of this chapter of the Conceptual Framework. We agree with the conclusion that parent-only financial statements may provide useful information. However, we do not believe that the Conceptual Framework should specify the timing and the manner in which parent-only financial statements should be presented in relation to consolidated financial statements. All of our past letters of comment to the IASB are Here.

16 July 2010: US reform act introduces new disclosures for payments to governments, puts pressure on IASB on PWYP disclosures

The US Senate has passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The Act, subject to Presidential approval, introduces a large number of reforms to the US financial system in regulation, investor and consumer protection, corporate governance and reporting. The Act also introduces new disclosures in relation to extractive activities around amounts paid to governments. The Act requires: Public Disclosure. Requires public disclosure to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of payments made to the US and foreign governments relating to the commercial development of oil, natural gas, and minerals SEC Filing Disclosure. The SEC must require those engaged in the commercial development of oil, natural gas or minerals to include information about payments they or their subsidiaries, partners or affiliates have made to the US or a foreign government for such development in an annual report and post this information online. These reforms effectively introduce the 'Publish What You Pay' (PWYP) proposals which are currently being considered as part of the IASB's Extractive Activities project. There have already been calls for the IASB to adopt the equivalent requirements in the Discussion Paper as soon as possible. Any response by the IASB would be limited by its due process requirements, including in the first instance a decision by the IASB to take the Extractives Activities project onto its agenda. This development may make constituent comment on the IASB Discussion Paper more important. IASB DP/2010/1 Extractive Activities is open for comment until 30 July 2010. Related information: Our Extractives Activities project page

15 July 2010: Proposed international auditing standard on using the work of internal auditors

The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) has proposed a revised International Standard on Auditing (ISA) that addresses the external auditor's responsibilities relating to using internal auditors' work during an audit. The proposed standard, ISA 610 Using the Work of Internal Auditors, aims to enhance the external auditor's performance by providing a stronger framework for evaluating and using the work and assistance of an entity's internal auditors. Click here for IAASB Press Release (IFAC website), which includes a link to download the proposal. Comments are due by 15 November 2010.

15 July 2010: IFRS insurance accounting newsletter

Deloitte (United Kingdom) has published the July 2010 issue of Insurance Accounting Newsletter. This issue is titled Last minute convergence and focuses on the discussions of the three special meetings and the normal Board monthly meeting in June 2010 during which the Boards resolved a number of major longstanding disagreements. The expected publication date of the Exposure Draft is July 2010 and further public Board meetings are not expected to take place before the Boards vote on the ED. Click to download Issue 16 of the Insurance Accounting Newsletter (PDF 125k). There are permanent links all issues of the newsletter on IAS Plus Insurance Project Page.

14 July 2010: Podcast of July 2010 IFRS Interpretations Committee meeting

The IFRS Foundation has made available a podcast summary of the main topics and project discussed at the July 2010 IFRS Interpretations Committee meeting. The podcast is available on the IFRS Foundation website.

14 July 2010: Retired Deloitte Partner to lead FASB, GASB standards review

The Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF) announced that Mark Schroeder, a recently retired senior partner at Deloitte & Touche LLP, has been named post-implementation review leader for standards issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). Click here to read the news release.

14 July 2010: Two IFRS publications in Spanish

We have posted the following Spanish language IFRS in Focus publications from Deloitte (Colombia). You will find all of our resources in Spanish Here. IFRS in Focus (edición en español), Junio 2010: IASB propone cambios a la presentación de la utilidad o pérdida y a los otros ingresos comprensivos en el IAS 1 (PDF 37k) Spanish version of: IASB proposes changes to the presentation of profit or loss and other comprehensive income in IAS 1 (PDF 68k) IFRS in Focus (edición en español), Junio 2010: IASB y FASB modifican la estrategia de la convergencia (PDF 68k) Spanish version of: IASB and FASB modify convergence strategy (PDF 78k)

14 July 2010: Webcasts on IFRS for SMEs

The World Bank has published on their website a two-part webcast presentation by IASB member Paul Pacter entitled An Overview of the IFRS for SMEs. The presentation is based on the first of the 20 training modules used in the IASB's 'Train the trainer' workshops for the IFRS for Small and Medium-sized Entities (IFRS for SMEs). The first module reviews the requirements in each of the 35 sections of the IFRS for SMEs and highlights differences with full IFRSs. Each part of the webcast is approximately one hour long. Click for: Webcast presentation on the first module (link to World Bank website) All training modules used in the IASB's 'Train the trainer' workshops for the IFRS for SMEs (link to IASB website)

14 July 2010: Agenda for July 2010 IASB meeting has been changed

The agenda for the July 2010 IASB meeting has been changed. There have been changes to the agenda and running order on Thursday 22 July 2010 and Friday 23 July 2010. Consolidations will now be an IASB-only meeting. We have updated our page with the Next Meeting Agenda accordingly.

13 July 2010: PCAOB Proposes New Auditing Standard on Confirmation

At its meeting on 13 July, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board approved for public comment a proposed audit standard Confirmation. If approved, this Standards will supersede the current PCAOB standard, AU sec. 330, The Confirmation Process. Click here to download the exposure draft (PDF 295k). Comments are due 13 September 2010.

13 July 2010: CESR summaries of IFRS enforcement decisions

The Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR) has published its eighth batch of extracts from its confidential database of enforcement decisions taken by EU national enforcers of financial information. From time to time, CESR publishes extracts of selected decisions as a source of information to foster appropriate and consistent application of IFRSs in the EU. Topics covered in batch #8 of CESR's extracts: Fair value of financial instruments Disclosure of financial instruments Classification of assets and liabilities Impairment testing of intangible assets Impairment of intangible assets Intangible assets Revenue recognition Impairment of trade receivables Disclosure of financial instruments - liquidity risk Earnings per share Related party disclosures Presentation of the income statement Impairment of assets Click to download this and earlier decision summaries: Batch #8 of IFRS Decisions (PDF 162k) July 2010 Batch #7 of IFRS Decisions (PDF 278k) December 2009 Batch #6 of IFRS Decisions (PDF 247k) August 2009 Batch #5 of IFRS Decisions (PDF 221k) March 2009 Batch #4 of IFRS Decisions (PDF 216k) December 2008 Batch #3 of IFRS Decisions (PDF 173k) May 2008 Batch #2 of IFRS Decisions (PDF 175k) December 2007 Batch #1 of IFRS Decisions (PDF 49k) April 2007

13 July 2010: Emphasis on greater investor participation in the development of IFRSs

In April 2010, the Trustees of the IFRS Foundation and the IASB launched a programme to enhance investors’ participation in the development of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs). New enhancements to the investor outreach programme include: Investor resources section of IASB website. The IASB has created a dedicated section of the website containing a variety of resources for investors. Dedicated plans to seek investor input for each project. The IASB already consults the investor community widely, including through its formal and informal advisory bodies. The IASB will deepen this engagement by further developing activities focused on investors as part of its project communications plans. The user questionnaire for the ED on the fair value option for financial liabilities is an example. Investor alerts. Board members Stephen Cooper, Patrick Finnegan and Patricia McConnell publish timely updates on financial reporting matters, known as Investor Perspectives. So far seven issues have been published. The newest are: 8 July 2010 - Patrick Finnegan: What would Shakespeare say about Financial Statement Presentation? 12 July 2010 - Patricia McConnell: Is our proposal the best fix for the own credit problem under the fair value option? All Investor Perspectives are archived on the IASB's website.

13 July 2010: TEEB study calls for integration of biodiversity information into annual reports

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) study is an international initiative to draw attention to the global economic benefits of biodiversity, to highlight the growing costs of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation, and to draw together expertise from the fields of science, economics and policy to enable practical actions moving forward. TEEB is hosted by the United Nations Environment Programme and supported by the European Commission, the German Federal Environment Ministry, the UK Government’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Department for International Development, Norway’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs; The Netherlands’ Interministerial Program Biodiversity, and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency. TEEB – The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity – Report for Business has been released, calling for more information to be provided in annual reports about biodiversity and ecosystem services (BES) impacts. Chapter 3 of the report describes recent initiatives to enable businesses to measure, value and report their impacts and dependencies on biodiversity and ecosystem services, and outlines further work needed in this area. The report notes the IASB’s existing recognition requirements are ‘disconnected’ from biodiversity reporting. The report also calls for biodiversity information to be more integrated into annual reports. The full report is available at The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity website. An extract: Financial accounting standards and BES Financial accounting and reporting differs from life cycle accounting, environmental performance measurement, and other types of management accounting in that it is primarily intended to serve external audiences rather than internal users. Defining the purpose of financial reporting in terms of the needs of a narrow class of stakeholders – i.e. investors and lenders – influences the extent to which such reporting can address issues such as BES. This is because the criteria developed to ensure relevant and reliable financial reporting for the purposes highlighted above are almost inevitably framed in such a way as to exclude so-called ‘intangible’ issues, such as BES impacts or dependencies. At the heart of this disconnect is the accounting concept of ‘recognition’… The vast majority of ecosystem services and the vast bulk of biodiversity fall outside these recognition criteria and are thus neither accounted for internally by organisations (in the public or private sectors) nor are they (or management’s stewardship of them) reported externally in conventional financial statements. Integrated reporting Increasingly, many stakeholders are exploring how to integrate financial and non-financial information in a single report that provides a balanced and meaningful picture of a company. Alongside the pioneering efforts of individual companies, other networks and standards bodies are also exploring how to promote more integrated reporting. With respect to BES, the challenge is how to manage and track information within a company and how to ensure that the economic values of BES are properly reflected at a level of detail that can influence corporate financial analysis.

12 July 2010: PCAOB Standing Advisory Group to discuss FASB/IASB projects

The Standing Advisory Group ("SAG") of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board will discuss [joint] projects of the FASB and IASB and the potential impact on auditors at a panel presentation on 15 July. The discussion is intended to help inform the PCAOB staff of the SAG's views on auditing challenges and the potential need for new or revised auditing standards or staff guidance in response to the potential upcoming changes to U.S. generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") and International Financial Reporting Standards ("IFRS"). Click here to download the panel presentation (PDF 35k).

12 July 2010: Audit alert on using the work of other auditors

The US Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) has issued a Staff Audit Practice Alert prompted by observations in PCAOB inspections that "...some firms may be issuing audit reports based on the work of another firm, or by using the work of assistants engaged from outside of the firm, without complying with relevant PCAOB standards." Staff Audit Practice Alert No. 6 Auditor Considerations Regarding Using the Work of Other Auditors and Engaging Assistants from Outside the Firm discusses PCAOB findings in two areas: Using the Work of Other Auditors Engaging Assistants from Outside the Firm Click to download PCAOB Staff Audit Practice Alert No. 6 (PDF 106k).

12 July 2010: Deadline reminder – EDs on reporting entitity and fair value option for financial liabilities

We remind you that comments are due on 16 July 2010 on the Exposure Drafts Conceptual Framework - The Reporting Entity and Fair Value Option for Financial Liabilities. The ED on the reporting entity was issued on 11 March 2010 and proposes what a reporting entity is and when an entity controls another entity. The ED on the fair value option for financial liabilities was issued on 11 May 2010 and proposes to amend the way the fair value option in IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement is applied with respect to financial liabilities. Also coming up on the same day is the deadline for analysts and investors to complete the user questionnaire for the ED on the fair value option for financial liabilities.

12 July 2010: Summary of EAP discussions

In November 2009, when it issued an Exposure Draft (ED) on Impairment of Financial Instruments Measured at Amortised Cost, the IASB set up an Expert Advisory Panel (EAP) comprising experts in credit risk management to advise the board because of significant practical challenges in moving to an expected loss model. The EAP held six public meetings during the ED's eight months public consultation period. The IASB staff has now posted a Summary of the discussions by the EAP (PDF 74k). The document summarises the main issues that the IASB team of participating Board members and staff have learnt during these discussions and is structured as follows: Part I - objectives of the panel and acknowledgement of the contribution of EAP members; and Part II - summary of the main issues that the IASB team has heard and learnt from the EAP. During the July 2010 board meeting, the Board will be discussing the feedback from the EAP.

12 July 2010: Comparison between IFRS for SMEs and Luxembourg GAAP

Deloitte Luxembourg has published a comparison between the requirements of the IFRS for Small and Medium-sized Entities (IFRS for SMEs) and Luxembourg Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (LUX GAAP). The publication compares the two accounting frameworks, highlighting the variations commonly possible, with the aim of providing a clear and practical overview of the differences that exist. Today, IFRS for SMEs are neither part of the European Accounting Regulation, nor of the current Luxembourg commercial law. Accordingly it cannot be used for statutory purposes. Nevertheless there could be entities in Luxembourg applying it for group reporting purposes, because IFRS for SMEs has already been adopted in several jurisdictions. Click for: IFRS for SMEs versus LUX GAAP - A comprehensive comparison (PDF 455k) Our Luxembourg page Our IFRS for SMEs page

11 July 2010: Chairman of CESR-FIN talks about link between accounting and prudential regulation

On June 23, 2010 Fernando Restoy, Chairman of the standing committee on corporate reporting of the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR-FIN) and Vice-Chairman of the Spanish stock exchange regulator (Comision Nacional del Mercado de Valores, CNMV), spoke at a conference hosted by the IFRS Foundation in London. In his remarks Mr. Restoy talked about convergence, the governance structure of the IASB, and the link between the objectives of accounting and those of other regulations, notably prudential regulation. The major part of his speech was devoted to the third topic, namely the reporting of changes in fair value. In contrast to the recent debate, Mr. Restoy argued that the issue was less whether or not to report something at fair value, but rather where the changes in fair value should be reported: in profit or loss or in other comprehensive income. In his view, much of the pressure that was exercised on standard setters during the financial crisis was due to regulators not accepting some changes in fair value to be presented in profit or loss. To avoid such pressure in the future he argued in favour of the IASB moving towards a single statement of comprehensive income without prescribing subsections. By doing so the IASB would avoid defining the subsections, mandating which changes in fair value be presented in which section and whether or not recycling was appropriate and why. Here is an excerpt: [A]n idea that should be explored is to gradually move in the direction of eliminating the current sharp dichotomy within total comprehensive income between P&L and OCI. The standards should rather establish a complete breakdown of income sources including realised or unrealised capital gains of financial or non-financial assets sorted by the valuation hierarchy, but without grouping them, as at present, in two arbitrary categories. Consistent with that approach, the responsibility to define the concept of earnings per share should not lie with accounting standard setters. The complete speech can be downloaded here (PDF 84k). The IASB has recently published a proposal according to which an entity would no longer be permitted to present two separate statements of performance, but to combine them into a single statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income. Click here for the related news story and our IFRS in Focus newsletter. You can find more background information on the IASB's project on comprehensive income on our IAS Plus Agenda Page.

9 July 2010: Notes from the July 2010 IFRIC meeting

The IFRS Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) met at the IASB's offices in London on Thursday and Friday, 8-9 July 2010. Presented below are the preliminary and unofficial notes taken by Deloitte observers at the meeting. Notes from the Interpretations Committee Meeting 8-9 July 2010 IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment – Accounting for Stripping Costs in the Production Phase The Committee discussed the final draft of the proposed Interpretation on accounting for stripping costs in the production phase.  Description of a stripping campaign The draft Interpretation describes a stripping campaign as that which "...will typically be planned in advance and form part of the mine plan.  It will have a defined start date and it will end when the entity has completed the waste removal activity necessary to access the ore to which the campaign is associated." The Committee was asked to consider whether the proposed description was sufficient or whether additional wording should be added.  A Committee member expressed his surprise and concern that the description of a stripping campaign is considered at such a late stage of the project, seeing that the Interpretation on how to account for the stripping campaign costs is almost complete.  The Committee had a very long discussion on whether it was necessary to include a description/definition of a stripping campaign in the Interpretation.  Those in favour of including the description noted that it was important to distinguish routine stripping from a stripping campaign as only the stripping campaign is in the scope of the Interpretation.  Those not in favour of a description noted that the requirements relating to a defined start date are impracticable to apply in practice.  In their opinion, a stripping campaign would be clearly identifiable from the life of mine plan and that the industry has no problem in identifying what constitutes a stripping campaign.  It was also noted that the Committee did not yet have a discussion on what routine stripping is. After a rather prolonged discussion on it was generally agreed that a description of a stripping campaign should be included in the proposed Interpretation, but that the word ‘typically’ should be removed from the proposed description to limit the ability of entities to get around applying the Interpretation.  The Chairman instructed the staff to revise the proposed description to take into consideration all the comments made and present the new description for consideration at a later session. The staff presented two alternative descriptions of a stripping campaign following the concerns raised by the Committee at the previous day’s meeting.  Without much deliberation, the Committee agreed on including the following description of a stripping campaign in the draft Interpretation: "A stripping campaign is a systematic process undertaken to gain access to a specific section of the ore base, that is a more aggressive process than routine waste clearing activities. This stripping campaign is planned in advance and forms part of the mine plan. It will have a defined start date and it will end when the entity has completed the waste removal activity necessary to access the ore to which the campaign is associated." It was further agreed to ask a specific question in the draft Interpretation on whether this description is appropriate.  The draft Interpretation will be exposed for a period of 90 days once clearance has been obtained at the July Board meeting. Scope of Interpretation The draft Interpretation limits the scope to waste removal costs that are incurred in surface mining activity during the production phase of the mine; the Committee unanimously agreed to with the proposed scope. A Committee member questioned whether it was the Committee's intention to prohibit analogy to similar situations as was implied in the draft basis for conclusions.  The Chairman responded that although the idea is not to prohibit analogy, the Interpretation addresses a very specific question from the extractive industry and that analogy to other 'similar' situations would not be practical.  It was agreed that the basis for conclusions should explain why the Committee did not consider other similar situations and only focussed on the specific question asked. Disclosure requirements The Committee considered whether to include any specific disclosure requirements in the proposed Interpretation or ask constituents if there is specific information relating to the stripping campaign that would be useful if disclosed. Several Committee members were not comfortable with asking an open question on which disclosures would be useful, as it will end up with a long list of disclosures. Also, should the Committee then consider some of these disclosures useful, it will have to exposure them for public comment to comply with due process. Some Committee members were of the opinion that any relevant disclosures would already be required by IAS 1, IAS 2, IAS 16 and/or IAS 38 and that additional disclosures would overlap with existing disclosures. The Committee agreed to rephrase the question to highlight the disclosures required by IAS 16 and ask whether there is any other information that is required in addition to that. Transition The Committee considered the proposed transitional provisions which require prospective application of the proposed Interpretation from the effective date and that the existing carrying amounts of assets are used as opening balances at that date. A Committee member questioned whether this imply that an entity will retain any costs previously capitalised, even it would not be permitted in accordance with the Interpretation.  A number of other Committee members echoed this concern and also questioned the period over which such an asset, calculated based on the stripping ratio method would be amortised.  Another Committee member also enquired whether an entity would be prohibited from retrospectively applying the Interpretation is all the relevant information is considered available.  The Chairman responded that retrospective application would require the recalculation of amortisation from the beginning of the mine's life and that this will invariably involve the use of hindsight.  The majority of Committee members supported the proposal to require prospective application. Conclusion Subject to the changes required pertaining to the revised description of a stripping campaign and minor editorial amendments, the Committee aims to issue the draft Interpretation before the end of August for public comment. IFRS 2 Share-based Payment – Vesting Conditions The Committee continued the deliberations on the distinction between vesting and non-vesting conditions and the Chairman reminded the Committee that the objective of the discussion will be to determine the next steps in the process and will not be based on decisions taken at previous meetings. Definition of performance condition The staff presented an analysis on the attributes of a performance condition, being: the incentive exists only if the employee is able to influence whether the target will be met; and the performance target is in the interest of the entity. These attributes are broadly consistent with the definitions in US GAAP. In considering the impact of these attributes on the current practices under IFRS 2, the staff applied the attributes to a number of illustrative examples, including save-as-you-earn (SAYE) schemes, IPOs and change in control provisions. Some Committee members noted that although they agree with the reasoning and conclusions of the illustrative examples, they did not agree with the attributes.  A Committee member thought that any share-based payment scheme would be in the interest of the entity, otherwise the entity would not have entered into it.  This member was of the opinion that performance conditions should rather relate to the operations/actions of the entity and its achievement should be influenced by the entity rather than the employee. A few Committee members did not feel that the proposed changes to the definitions would be an improvement on the existing guidance and that more problems are being created by continuing with the proposed direction of the project. A Committee member noted that the same confusion and diversity in practice did not exist in the US and the US GAAP prepares are not experiencing the same difficulties in distinguishing performance conditions from market conditions. The Chairman responded that taking on the definitions in US GAAP would be outside the mandate of the Committee and reluctantly acknowledged that in order to develop guidance that will provide clarification of principles to be applied, any steps to be taken should be within the mandate of the Committee as the Board is not likely to get to the matter before the end of 2011. Several Committee members noted that the definition of a performance condition by reference to the operation or activities of the entity (as described in the questions to the Committee in the agenda paper) is closer to their understanding of a performance condition. They suggested eliminating any reference to the attributes identified by the staff. Other Committee members responded that if the attributes are eliminated, the proposed definition works for IPOs and change in control provisions, but not for SAYE schemes. As the majority of Committee members agreed that the current practice of treating the saving requirement in a SAYE scheme as a non-vesting condition (similar to the payment of an option exercise price) results in the most appropriate treatment if employees decide not to continue saving, as long as the service condition is still met. The Committee agreed to remove SAYE schemes from any future discussions on this matter and focus only on IPOs, change in control provisions and other illustrative examples that represent problem areas. On this basis, the majority of Committee members voted in favour of the proposed definition of a performance condition. The Committee continued to deliberate the illustrative examples provided by the staff, but agreed to allow staff some time to consider any changes to the examples based on the earlier decision in relation to performance conditions. There was general disagreement between the Committee members on whether a performance target with a measurement period that is longer than the required service period is a performance condition or a non-vesting condition. Some members were of the opinion that under US GAAP these performance targets are being treated as performance conditions, whereas other Committee members and the staff were of the opinion that they were non-vesting conditions. The Chairman requested the staff to do more research on the matter and report back at the next meeting. A Committee member noted that the Committee has not yet agreed on whether to proceed with the project as an annual improvement or an interpretation. The Chairman asked the Committee to allow the staff to finalise their analysis based on today’s discussions and requested the staff to consider the criteria for annual improvements and interpretations and present an analysis at the September meeting with a recommendation on how best to proceed. Another Committee member also requested that the staff papers to be presented at the September meeting should highlight the original questions asked by constituents, as the Committee seems to have lost sight of what it was asked to clarify. The staff committed to do more research on the illustrative examples and present the revised examples and analysis at the next meeting. Put Options over Non-controlling Interests The staff proposed that the Committee address initially two broad scoping questions: identifying which components of the accounting for put options written over non-controlling interests (NCI), and which put options written over NCI should be within the scope of the proposed interpretation. For simplicity reasons, the staff suggested to exclude put options issued in a business combination from the analysis. Once the principles of the interpretation have been agreed, the scope of the interpretation will be broaden to include these as well. The Committee were supportive of the approach to be adopted by the staff and requested them to proceed with their analysis. Initial Recognition The Committee held a long and ultimately inconclusive debate on the initial recognition of puts written over non-controlling interests. The Committee was asked to consider whether the credit entry should be to recognise a financial liability that is initially measured at fair value. The Committee unanimously agreed with the proposal, however, one member questioned whether the problem can be resolved by changing the requirements of IAS 32.23 (which requires gross recognition of the financial liability) can be amended as an annual improvement to exclude transactions between owners. The questions on what the debit and credit entries are can be avoided by accounting for the derivative on a net basis. Although this suggestion enticed a few nervous giggles from the Committee members, several members were sympathetic to the suggestion and could see the merit of the suggestion. The Chairman again reminded the Committee that if they want to make progress on the matter, they should focus their efforts on solutions that are achievable within its mandate. More divergent views were expressed when asked to consider where the debit entry should be recognised: against NCI, as the put option provides the parent in substance with a present ownership interest in the shares held by the NCI shareholder (view A); as a reclassification of NCI from equity to a financial liability, with NCI being reduced to zero and any difference recognised as an adjusting entry to the parent’s equity (view B); and as a reclassification of the financial liability to the NCI component of equity, up to the carrying amount of the NCI with any excess over the carrying amount recognised in the parent’s equity. This will result in NCI continuing to be recognised but classified as a financial liability. The Committee considered these alternatives in the context of two scenarios: (1) the parent, in substance, acquires present access to economic benefits associated with ownership, and (2) the parent does not, in substance, acquire present access to economic benefits. With regards to the first scenario, the Committee unanimously agreed that NCI should be reduced to zero and no longer be recognised, with any difference being recognised in controlling interest equity. The Committee was however split as to whether the debit entry in the second scenario should go to NCI or not. A Committee member felt that IAS 27.BC11 leads to the derecognition of the NCI, but could accept the staff recommendation on recognising it in controlling interest equity. Another Committee member that reluctantly supported view C, noted that part of the debit entry relates to the price paid for the put option and that eliminating NCI in total does not seem the right thing to do. Several Committee members were uncomfortable with double accounting as a consequence of the accounting mechanisms of the transactions. There was some support for seeing the matter as a reclassification of NCI from equity to a financial liability. Supporters of this view believe that the nature of NCI has been changed as a result of the put and that parent has an obligation in respect of it. They concluded that the debit entry would always go to NCI. Following a prolonged discussion on the matter, the Committee appeared to be unable to reach an agreement on the matter. The Chairman presented 2 approaches for consideration: exclude the initial recognition of the debit entry from the proposed interpretation; or consider the matter once more at the September meeting in order to give the staff more time to do more research and consider the comments made by the Committee so far. Several Committee members indicated their support for reconsidering the matter at the September meeting. In their opinion, excluding the debit entry from the scope of the interpretation would result in a meaningless and of any use by constituents. The Chairman requested the staff to continue their analysis and bring the matter back to the September meeting for further consideration. Subsequent measurement – NCI put financial liability Acknowledging that they had not concluded on the appropriate initial recognition, the Committee turned its attention to the subsequent measurement of the instrument. It assumed that, on initial recognition, a financial liability would be recognised for the fair value (present value of the redemption amount) of the NCI put and that this financial liability is reclassified from equity. The staff noted that constituents’ views differed on how subsequent changes in the carrying amount of the NCI put financial liability should be recognised in the financial statements, however the staff was firmly of the view that, in common with most financial instruments, all changes in the carrying amount of the NCI put financial liability should be recognised in profit or loss. A minority of the Committee preferred an ‘equity view’ because they considered that it was inappropriate to recognise changes in the carrying amount of the NCI put financial liability in profit or loss when the risks and rewards of ownership of the underlying shares have not transferred to the parent. A majority of the Committee supported recognising all changes in carrying amount in profit and loss. Several of those Committee members supporting this view thought that this conclusion was unavoidable having classified the NCI put as a financial liability. At the conclusion of the debate, the Chairman asked how many of Committee would object to profit and loss treatment: two members were opposed. A Committee member suggested that, in the event that the Committee was unable to conclude on the initial recognition issue, it might be possible to issue an Interpretation on this issue. IFRS 1 – Fixed Date in Derecognition Exception At its May meeting, the Committee decided to delay the finalisation of the request to replace the fixed date of 1 January 2004 in IFRS 1.B2 with a more relevant date, pending the transition requirements specified in the exposure draft on Derecognition to be issued by the Board.  Following the revised work plan issued by the Board and the decision not to issue an exposure draft on derecognition in the near future, the Board referred to matter back to the Committee for reconsideration. Without much discussion on the matter, the Committee agreed with the staff recommendation to replace the fixed date with the phrase “date of transition to IFRSs”.  The Committee also agreed with the proposal to recommend to the Board that the amendment to IFRS 1 not being done as part of the Annual Improvement Process, but rather as a separate amendment to IFRS 1 as this will result in a more expedient solution to those jurisdictions planning to adopt IFRSs in the near future. IFRS 1 – Repeat Application The Committee received a request in March 2010 to clarify whether an entity can apply IFRS 1 more than once.  The staff presented the proposed draft wording of an amendment to IFRS 1 to the Committee for consideration. Following a short discussion on improving the wording the proposed amendment and the accompanying basis for conclusions, it was agreed that it should be clarified in the basis for conclusion that the requirement to apply IFRS 1 each time an entity prepares financial statements that meet the definition of its first IFRS financial statements, only apply when the entity has applied IFRSs in previous periods but not in its most recent financial statements. The Committee unanimously agreed to amendment of the Standard as proposed. IAS 29 – Reporting in Accordance with IAS 29 after a Period of Chronic Hyperinflation Issues related to the preparation of the separate financial statements of an entity with a functional currency that is no longer the currency of a hyperinflationary economy The Committee reached a tentative conclusion at the meeting in May that IAS 29 should be amended to provide guidance on how an entity shall prepare and present an opening statement of financial position at the date when the entity’s functional currency ceases to be a currency that is suffering from chronic hyperinflation. The Committee presented the proposed amendments to IAS 29 presented by the staff. There were broad support in following the IFRS 3 methodology when initially recognising assets and liabilities on the start-up basis, however a couple of Committee members supported using the IFRS 1 methodology instead. Following the short deliberation of the matter, the majority of Committee members agreed to follow an IFRS 3 methodology. Several Committee members noted that although this would be the preferred methodology to follow, it does raise quite a few questions on matters such as intangible assets (including goodwill) and leases. Some Committee members supported recognising these at fair value at the date that the new accounting basis is applied, whereas others were supportive of allowing some practical expedients to fair value accounting for such items. The Committee agreed that since IFRS 3 already includes some exceptions to fair value, any amendment to IAS 29 should refer to these instead of listing every instance where it may not be appropriate to apply full fair value accounting. It was also agreed to create an exception to limit the recognition of goodwill and other intangible assets to those that would have been recognised under IAS 38. No objections were raised on the proposed wording of IAS 29 and the Committee approved the wording of the tentative agenda decision to be issued. Issues related to the preparation and presentation of consolidated financial statements of a parent with an interest in an entity that ceases to have a functional currency that is the currency of a hyperinflationary economy The Committee discussed a number of situations addressing the preparation by the parent of consolidated financial statements that include an interest in an entity with a functional currency that has just ceased to be that of a hyperinflationary economy.  The agenda papers were prepared on the basis of whether the parent could or should apply IFRS 1 to its interest. A majority of the Committee disagreed with the staff assessment, instead preferring an analogy to IAS 27, under which the parent would regard the entity emerging from hyperinflation as a new entity. In essence, the parent would ‘dispose’ of the existing interest in the entity at its carrying amount when it could no longer prepare IFRS-compliant financial statements and ‘acquire’ a new entity at the date IFRS-compliant financial statements could once again be prepared. The Committee developed this approach, noting that it was similar to that for an acquisition under IFRS 3, except that the parent would be determining the fair value of the assets and liabilities in the entity rather than the fair value of the business. The Committee agreed that any gain or loss arising as a result of this exercise would be recognised in profit or loss. IAS 21 – Repayment of Investment / Cumulative Translation Account The Committee discussed an issue arising in IAS 21 The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates related to when the separate foreign currency equity reserve related to the retranslation of the net assets of an investor’s net investment in a subsidiary (often referred to as ‘CTA’) should be recycled.  The staff presented two alternatives, the ‘proportionate reduction’ approach and the ‘absolute reduction’ approach. Under the ‘proportionate reduction’ approach, amounts recognised in CTA related to a foreign operation would be recycled only when there is a reduction in the entity’s proportionate ownership interest in the foreign operation.  Under the ‘absolute reduction’ approach, amounts recognised in CTA related to a foreign operation would be recycled any time there is a reduction in the entity’s absolute ownership interest in the foreign operation. The staff favoured the ‘absolute reduction’ approach and recommended that IAS 21 be clarified by an amendment included in the Annual Improvements Project in the next cycle. Many Committee members did not support the staff recommendations.  Some thought the recommendations were inconsistent with the 2008 amendments to IAS 21 (IAS 21 paragraphs 48A-48C refer).  Other Committee members thought that more application guidance would be required to make the proposals operational.  Other Committee members did not want to see any recycling at all. As it became apparent that the staff recommendation did not have sufficient support among Committee members, the Chairman proposed that the Committee discontinue activity on the issue and remove it from the Committee’s Agenda on the grounds that it was not probable that the Committee would be able to reach a consensus on the issue on a timely basis (Interpretations Committee Due Process Handbook, paragraph 24(e) refers). A report will be made to the IASB on this issue. Annual Improvments — IAS 40 – Transfers from Investment Property At the request of the IASB, the Committee discussed a number of issues related to the amendment to IAS 40 paragraphs 57-60, proposed in Exposure Draft ED/2009/11 Improvements to IFRS. The proposed amendments were (in summary): (a)  Removing the requirement to transfer investment properties to IAS 2 Inventories at the commencement of development with a view to sale; (b)  That investment properties held for sale should be displayed as a separate category in the statement of financial position; and (c)  That investment properties held for sale should be subject to the same disclosures as non-financial assets held for sale in accordance with IFRS 5. In March 2010, the comment letter analysis of respondents to the proposed changes highlighted the confusing array of interactions between IAS 40 and other IFRSs and the Committee recommended that the proposed amendment was not finalised. The staff noted that the IASB had asked the Committee to revisit the issue, noting that developments in IFRS since the Exposure Draft had clarified many of the conflicting interactions noted by constituents. Recognition With little discussion after the staff introduction, the Committee agreed that the transfer to inventories required by IAS 40 is retained and that recognition of investment properties in accordance with different IFRSs, depending on intended use and stage of development, should continue as at present. Measurement of investment properties As a result of changes to the proposals in the IASB’s Fair Value Measurement Guidance project, investment properties would be measured at fair value less costs to sell, consistent with other IFRS 5 assets. There was no issue for the Committee to address. The Committee agreed. Investment properties held for sale displayed as a separate asset category The Committee agreed that investment properties held for sale that do not satisfy the criteria of IFRS 5 should not be displayed as a separate asset category (this is contrary to the proposal in ED/2009/11). Next steps The Committee agreed that no further activities were necessary because the IASB’s actions in other standard-setting projects had addressed other concerns raised by constituents. The Committee would recommend that the Board not do anything further. New Items for Initial Consideration Annual Improvements—Re-grouping and consistency of contingent consideration guidance The Committee reviewed a staff analysis that highlighted inconsistencies and potential conflicts between IFRS 3’ requirements on accounting for contingent consideration and other applicable IFRSs, and recommended that these inconsistencies be removed by deleting references to other IFRSs from the guidance on accounting for contingent consideration within IFRS 3. Many Committee members supported the staff conclusions that it was desirable to remove inconsistencies and conflicts around contingent consideration and that IFRS 3 was the most logical place in which to house all the requirements. Those supporting the proposals thought that they were consistent with the intention of the IASB when it revised IFRS 3. However, some were concerned that the proposed changes could be more significant than would be within the scope of an ‘Improvement’. A Committee member was concerned that the transition requirement was potentially troublesome as drafted and asked the staff to clarify what ‘prospective’ meant in this circumstance (i.e. business combination transactions involving contingent consideration or contingent consideration re-measurements). Accepting the need for this clarification, the Chairman asked whether there was consensus that an Improvement to IFRS 3 should be proposed removing references to other IFRSs in IFRS 3 paragraph 58 and improving clarity in paragraph 40. The staff would map the changes against the Improvements Project criteria and report their findings to the Committee and the Board. The Committee agreed to this approach (one member opposed). Annual Improvements — IAS 28: Purchases in stages—fair value as deemed cost The Committee debated the issue of how to account for changes from available for sale (AFS) category to equity method for an associate purchased by stages. A question had been raised about how to account for an investment in an associate when the investment was purchased in more than one step. IAS 28 is silent on the accounting for an investment in an associate purchased in stages. The Committee agreed that at the time the investment changes its nature from AFS to Associate should trigger a disposal of the AFS investment, with gains or losses reclassified from other comprehensive income to profit or loss and that the fair value of the total holding establishes the initial carrying amount for equity accounting purposes. This was thought to be consistent with the step acquisition principles in IFRS 3. However, a significant proportion of the Committee was concerned that such an amendment would represent a significant change in principle to IAS 28, one that was beyond the scope of the Improvements Project. The Committee agreed to refer this issue to the IASB together with its recommendations. New items carried over to the next meeting The Committee did not address the following issues: IAS 19 Employee Benefits: Accounting for statutory employee profit sharing arrangements IAS 36 Impairment of Assets: Accounting for goodwill impairment testing when non-controlling interests are recognised All IFRSs: Encouraged versus required disclosures Review of Tentative Agenda Decisions Published in May 2010 IFRIC Update The Committee re-deliberated its tentative agenda decisions published in the May 2010 IFRIC Update. IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements – Going concern disclosure The Agenda Decision was confirmed. The staff did not recommend any changes to the wording exposed in the May 2010 IFRIC Update. IAS 12 Income Taxes – Recognition of deferred tax assets for unrealised losses on available-for-sale debt securities The Committee had a longer debate on this Agenda Decision. A number of comment letters had been received, many of them opposing the Tentative Agenda Decision or, at best, suggesting modifications. The Committee noted that a similar issue was under consideration, and a similar conclusion reached, in the FASB's recent Financial Instruments exposure draft. The FASB's position in the ED reflected the 'informal' position of the US Securities and Exchange Commission staff. Assuming that the Committee's Agenda Decision and the FASB's position as exposed in its ED were confirmed, there would be convergence on this issue. While some Committee members would have preferred to address this via Annual Improvements, the Committee confirmed the Agenda Decision (two opposed), subject to amending the reasons along the lines suggested by one respondent as follows: The Committee noted that the objectives of IAS 12 and the deferred tax recognition principle relating to deductible temporary differences are based on recovering or settling the carrying amount of the asset or liability at the reporting date. The Committee also noted that preventing losses from being realised is not the same as or similar to creating or increasing taxable income. Based on the requirement to recognise deferred tax assets only when it is probable that they will be realised, paragraph 30 of IAS 12 limits tax planning opportunities to actions of the entity that create or increase taxable income. Consequently, applying paragraph 29 of IAS 12 by analogy in the context of the fact pattern in the request, i.e. the entity's actions to hold the AFS debt securities until the unrealised losses reverse, to maturity, is unwarranted. In addition, the approach in paragraphs 24-31 of IAS 12 requires an entity to assess the probability of realising deferred tax assets on a combined basis that is consistent with the rules established by the taxation authorities. Following from the previous day’s discussion of the comments and objections received, the Committee decided not to finalise the tentative agenda decision at this meeting and to explain in the IFRIC Update that although the outcome of the Committee’s deliberations has not changed, there seems to be alternative views to consider. The final decision will be published at a later date. IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement – Impairment of financial assets reclassified from available-for sale to loans and receivables The Agenda Decision was confirmed. The Committee spent some time considering the most appropriate reference in IAS 39 to use: whether IAS 39.50C or .50F (or another) should be highlighted. The Committee unanimously agreed to include reference to both paragraphs 50F and 54 in the tentative agenda decision. IFRIC Work in Progress The Committee received a report from the Interpretations Committee staff of issues received by the staff but not yet presented to the Committee. There was no discussion. This closed the public session of the IFRIC meeting. This summary is based on notes taken by observers at the IFRIC meeting and should not be regarded as an official or final summary.

9 July 2010: Accounting in the Telecommunications industry

Deloitte's IFRS Global Office has published Accounting in the Telecommunications industry: A new view of revenue emerges (PDF 260k). This publication highlights many of the key proposals in the recently issued Exposure Draft from the IASB and FASB on Revenue Recognition and considers 10 key areas which may result in changing accounting practice within the Telecommunications industry.

9 July 2010: Heads Up on staff draft of proposed financial statement presentation standard

On 1 July 2010, the IASB and the US FASB posted to their websites a staff draft of a proposed standard on their joint project to develop a standard on financial statement presentation. Deloitte (United States) has issued a Heads Up Newsletter (PDF 106k) that provides an analysis of the key effects this joint proposal would have on financial statement presentation in the United States.

9 July 2010: Deloitte IFRS newsletter in Japanese

Deloitte's IFRS Centre of Excellence in Japan has published a Japanese translation of the following IFRS in Focus newsletter: IASB issues Exposure Draft on Fair Value Measurement Disclosures (PDF 297k). Here is the English Version (PDF 60k) We have put permanent links to all Japanese translations of the IFRS in Focus newsletters on our Japan Page. The Japan Center of Excellence IFRS web pages are Here.

8 July 2010: Agenda for July 2010 IASB meeting

The IASB will hold its monthly meeting for July 2010 at its offices in London from 19 to 23 July 2010. Portions of the meeting are joint meetings with FASB. The meeting will be open to public observation and will be webcast. Presented below is the agenda for the meeting. All meeting times are British Summer Time (BST). IASB Board Meeting Agenda 19-23 July 2010, London Monday 19 July 2010 IASB-FASB Joint Meeting (13:00-19:00) Leases Insurance Contracts Tuesday 20 July 2010 IASB Meeting (10:45-16:45) Derecognition Rate-regulated Activities Income Taxes Wednesday 21 July 2010 IASB Meeting (09:15-16:45) IFRS Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) Update IFRS 1, IAS 29, and Annual Improvements Conceptual Framework - Measurement Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity Hedge Accounting Thursday 22 July 2010 IASB Meeting (10:00-11:30) Impairment IASB-FASB Joint Meeting (12:00-17:15) Leases Insurance Contracts Consolidation Friday 23 July 2010 IASB Meeting (09:00-13:15) Hedge Accounting Fair Value Option

8 July 2010: PCAOB to Consider Proposing Audit Standard on Confirmation

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has scheduled an Open Meeting for Tuesday, July 13, at 9:30 a.m., to consider a proposed audit standard on confirmation, which would supersede the current PCAOB standard, AU sec. 330, The Confirmation Process.

8 July 2010: EFRAG-IASB outreach event on 28 September 2010

In addition to its ongoing consultation process, the IASB is engaging in outreach activities in various places around the world. The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) has offered to host one of these IASB outreach events in order to assist European stakeholders to better understand the IASB’s proposals and have the opportunity to ask questions and provide comments to an IASB delegation of Board members and staff. This reprensents an important opportunity for European constituents to influence IFRS being developed by the IASB. The meeting is scheduled to take place in Brussels on Tuesday 28 September 2010, 12:00 noon to 17:00. In order to ensure that the agenda reflects, to the extent possible, European constituents' particular areas of interest, EFRAG invites the participants to rank the projects listed below in their registration form: Revenue recognition Leases Consolidation Off balance sheet disclosures Financial instruments Classification and measurement Impairment Hedge accounting Derecognition Financial Statements Presentation Insurance contracts Liabilities Click for: EFRAG press release and registration form (link to EFRAG website) IAS Plus overview of IASB Projects and Timetable

8 July 2010: Australia and New Zealand to harmonise Standards, more closely align with IFRSs

The Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) and New Zealand Financial Reporting Standards Board (FRSB) have issued joint exposure drafts of proposals to harmonise Australian and New Zealand Standards in relation to entities applying IFRSs as adopted in Australia and New Zealand. The exposure drafts propose to eliminate many of the IFRS-related differences between the two countries for for-profit entities and represent the first phase of a longer-term project to harmonise accounting requirements in Australia and New Zealand. For-profit entities applying Australian Accounting Standards or NZ IFRSs in full already make an explicit and unreserved statement of compliance with IFRSs, and the proposals would not impact this ability. Deloitte (Australia) has issued an Accounting alert explaining the proposals. The exposure drafts make the following observations: Both Australia and New Zealand have adopted financial reporting standards based on IFRSs. However, on transition to IFRSs each jurisdiction independently modified the source IFRSs for reasons relevant to that jurisdiction. Certain aspects of IFRSs as adopted in Australia are not the same as IFRSs as adopted in New Zealand. Partly as a result of direct initiatives of the AASB and the FRSB and partly as a result of the Joint Prime Ministerial Statement of Intent and the Single Economic Market Outcome Proposals issued in August 2009, the Boards initiated this project aimed at achieving converged standards in respect of for-profit entities applying full Australian or New Zealand standards. Click for: Deloitte (Australia) Accounting alert New Zealand Financial Reporting Standards Board (FRSB) announcement (link to FRSB website) Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) announcement (link to AASB website) Our New Zealand country page Our Australian country page Our summary of use of IFRS by jurisdiction

7 July 2010: Newsletter on fair value measurement disclosure proposals

Deloitte's IFRS Global Office has published an IFRS in Focus Newsletter – IASB issues Exposure Draft on Fair Value Measurement Disclosures (PDF 60k). On 29th June 2010, the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) published ED/2010/7 Measurement Uncertainty Analysis Disclosure for Fair Value Measurements. This limited scope Exposure Draft forms part of the wider joint project to provide guidance on measuring fair value when required or permitted by IFRSs. Click for: IFRS in Focus Newsletter – IASB issues Exposure Draft on Fair Value Measurement Disclosures (PDF 60k) Past editions of IFRS in Focus Our Fair Value Measurement project page

7 July 2010: Downloadable podcasts on hedge accounting and leasing models

IASB staff have posted several short podcasts on the leasing project and the hedging phase of the project to replace IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement. These podcasts are the first in a series about the models being developed by the IASB. The first hedge accounting podcasts provide an overview of the approach to phase III of the IAS 39 replacement project, the eligibility of derivatives as hedged items and background information on net positions in a hedging relationship. The first two lease podcasts provide an overview of the proposed approach to accounting for leases, and additional detail on the proposed lessee accounting. These short podcasts can be downloaded free of charge in MP3 format via the IASB Website or through iTunes (subscribe to the IASB financial reporting channel). IAS Plus Resources: Hedge Accounting Project Page, Leases Project Page.

7 July 2010: Deloitte IFRS newsletters in Japanese

Deloitte's IFRS Centre of Excellence in Japan has published Japanese translations of the following IFRS in Focus newsletters: IASB and FASB modify convergence strategy (PDF 609k) Here is the English Version (PDF 78k) IASB issues revenue recognition exposure draft (PDF 479k) Here is the English Version (PDF 97k) We have put permanent links to all Japanese translations of the IFRS in Focus newsletters on our Japan Page. The Japan Center of Excellence IFRS web pages are Here.

7 July 2010: Accounting Roundup – second quarter 2010 review

We have posted Accounting Roundup: Second Quarter in Review–2010 (PDF 1,582k, 46 pages), prepared by the Accounting Standards and Communications Group of Deloitte LLP (USA). This newsletter provides brief descriptions of pronouncements affecting accounting, financial reporting, and corporate governance issued during 2Q-2010 by standard setters and regulators including FASB, EITF, AICPA, SEC, FASAB, PCAOB, GASB, IASB, IFRIC, and IAASB. This quarterly review consists of articles, adapted as necessary, from issues of Accounting Roundup published in April and May 2010, as well as new articles for the month of June. You will find past issues Here. International and IFRS-related developments covered in this edition of Accounting Roundup include: An Update on the FASB's and IASB's Joint Project on Financial Instruments With Characteristics of Equity IASB Issues Exposure Draft on Fair Value Option for Financial Liabilities IASB Issues Exposure Draft on Improvements to Defined Benefit Accounting IASB Publishes Discussion Paper on Extractive Activities FASB and IASB Revise Convergence Work Plan IVSC Publishes Exposure Draft on New International Valuation Standards IASC Foundation Publishes 2009 Annual Report IASB Issues Annual Improvements to IFRSs IASC Foundation Announces Appointments to IFRS Interpretations Committee IASC Foundation Releases IFRS Taxonomy 2010 Paul Pacter Appointed to the IASB

6 July 2010: Deloitte comment letter on financial instruments

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu has submitted to the IASB our Letter of Comment (47k) on Exposure Draft 2009/12 Financial Instruments: Amortised Cost and Impairment. The ED, issued on 5 November 2009, proposes requirements for how to include credit loss expectations in the amortised cost measurement of financial assets. We express concerns about the model proposed in the ED: We agree with the Board’s objective in this phase of the IASB project to replace IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement (IAS 39) to address weaknesses of the incurred loss model in IAS 39 that were highlighted during the global financial crisis. An impairment loss model that focuses on an assessment of recoverable cash flows reflecting all current information about the borrower’s ability to repay would be an improvement on the current approach in IAS 39 which relies on identification of trigger events and often leads to a delay in loss recognition. However, we have concerns about the specific requirements proposed by the IASB, in particular those to determine, and allocate, the initial estimate of expected credit losses on a financial asset and to use a probability-weighted outcome approach. We believe that this approach will in many cases be unnecessarily complex. Further, the incorporation of potential future economic environments in estimating recoverable cash flows would be extremely complex, costly and burdensome to apply by preparers. The requirement in the ED to forecast future economic environments and events without providing sufficient guidance with respect to the level of objectivity, verifiability, or support for the underpinnings of these inputs presents significant challenges to internal auditors, external auditors, and regulators. Overall, we believe that the measurement principle would not be operational if the Board were to adopt the ED in its current form. All of our past letters of comment to IASB, IFRIC, IASCF, IASC, and SIC are Here. Click here to go to our Financial Instruments – Comprehensive Project – Issues Relating to Impairment and Provisioning Project Page.

6 July 2010: Updated comparisons of IFRSs and Canadian GAAP

The Accounting Standards Board (AcSB) of Canada has adopted a strategy to replace Canadian standards with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) for publicly accountable enterprises by 1 January 2011. Other enterprises may also elect to adopt IFRSs. To assist those affected by this strategy in becoming familiar with differences between Canadian standards and IFRSs, the AcSB staff has prepared an unofficial comparison between the more significant aspects of IFRSs and Canadian standards as of 31 December 2009. The comparison also identifies the currently active standard-setting projects of the IASB, FASB, and AcSB and comments on the extent to which the work in process is expected to eliminate existing differences: English: Detailed (Narrative) Comparison of IFRSs and Canadian GAAP (PDF 840k, 130 pages) French: Detailed (Narrative) Comparison of IFRSs and Canadian GAAP (PDF 1,099k, 137 pages) More information about Transition to IFRSs in Canada

6 July 2010: Q&A report from recent Deloitte global financial reporting Dbriefs webcast

On 17 June 2010, we hosted a Deloitte Dbriefs webcast on global financial reporting, entitled IFRSs: How might developments at the IASB impact you? A 'Q&A Report' has been published containing a summary of audience questions submitted during the live webcast and our suggested answers. Topics covered include the IASB's proposals on termination benefits, financial liabilities and comprehensive income, and the impact of changes on investor behaviour. The next global financial reporting Dbriefs webcast is scheduled for the next quarter. Click for: Q&A Report (PDF 80kb) Archive recording of the webcast (registration required). Dbriefs program information

6 July 2010: Deloitte Canada IFRS transition newsletters

Deloitte Canada has published the June 2010 issue of their Countdown IFRS transition newsletter, to discuss practical issues Canadian companies are facing in IFRS transition as well as to provide an update on recent IFRS events. Articles in this issue include: Controls Over Development and Reporting of IFRS Financial Information The Real Deal – the focus this month is on Revenue Recognition An update on International standard setting activities Progress report identifying and explaining changes to the FASB and IASB’ joint projects Updated IASB workplan (including IASB-only projects) Exposure draft on Revenue from contracts with customers. Click for: June 2010 Edition Countdown Newsletter – English (PDF 1,213k) June 2010 Edition Countdown Newsletter – French (Compte à Rebours) (PDF 1,632k) Related items: You will find more information about financial reporting in Canada on our Canada Page. We have a special page on First-time Adoption of IFRSs

5 July 2010: Insurance accounting newsletter in German

Deloitte (United Kingdom) is publishing a series of Insurance Accounting Newsletters. We post these regularly on our IAS Plus Insurance Project Page. Deloitte (Germany) is translating some of these newsletters into German. The latest is: Versicherungsbilanzierung 10: Fast da ... (PDF 395k) Translation of UK Issue 15: Almost there ... (PDF 113k) All of the earlier insurance newsletters available in German are on our Germany Country Page.

5 July 2010: Amended IASB work plan

The IASB has posted on its website its Amended Work Plan and Project Timetable as of 2 July 2010. The only change is that the ED on the consolidation of investment companies has been delayed to the fourth quarter 2010. A final IFRS on the consolidation of investment companies is still expected in the first quarter 2011. A staff draft of the IFRS intended to replace IAS 27 is expected to be posted on the IASB's website in the third quarter 2010; final standards regarding the replacement of IAS 27 and disclosures about unconsolidated SPEs are expected in the fourth quarter 2010. We have updated the IAS Plus Agenda Projects Page accordingly.

5 July 2010: Indian IFRS convergence update

We've updated our Indian jurisdiction page to include recent updates on the convergence process of Indian Accounting Standards with IFRS. The Indian Ministry of Corporate Affairs has adopted dates for the convergence of Indian Accounting Standards with IFRS for insurance companies, banks and non-bank financial institutions and clarified a number of matters. Highlights: Insurance companies would prepare an opening balance sheet as at 1 April 2012 Banking companies will have a phased introduction commencing with an opening balance sheet for some banks at 1 April 2013, some urban co-operative banks (depending on net worth) and regional rural banks would be exempt Non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) will have a phased introduction commencing 1 April 2013, some unlisted NBFCs would be exempt (depending on net worth) Other companies will have a phased introduction commencing 1 April 2011, with some unlisted companies (depending on net worth) and small and medium companies exempt Exempt companies will not be required to apply Indian Accounting Standards converged with IFRS at all, but may opt to do so Full compliance with IFRS 1 would not be required, but companies may elect to provide additional columns with restated information Specific dates have been clarified as the date to test net worth used in the calculations. Entities complying with Indian Accounting Standards converged with IFRS may not be able to make an explicit and unreserved statement of compliance with IFRS. Click for our Indian jurisdication page.

3 July 2010: Chilean regulator delays IFRS implementation for insurers

Chile's Superintendency of Securities and Insurance (Superintendencia de Valores y Seguros or SVS) has delayed the implementation of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) for both general and life insurance companies until 2012, following the significant impact and burden that the earthquake of 27 February 2010 has had on this sector. Originally insurance companies were scheduled to adopt IFRS with effect from 1 January 2010. The SVS had already postponed IFRS adoption once until 2011. SVS has announced that it will publish a revised timetable for implementation of IFRSs for the insurance sector during 2010. Please click for SVS Press Release (Spanish) (PDF 51k).

3 July 2010: IASB and FASB to hold webcast on revenue proposals

On 8 July 2010 the IASB and the FASB will hold two joint webcasts to introduce the exposure draft Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which was published on 24 June 2010. The exposure draft is open for public comment until 22 October 2010. The webcasts will be followed by a question and answer session. There is no charge to participate in the webcast, but registration is required. Webcast Topic: Exposure draft 'Revenue from Contracts with Customers' Date and Time: Thursday, 8 July 2010, 9.30am and again at 5:00pm (London time) More Information and Registration: Click Here IAS Plus Resources: IFRS in Focus Newsletter (97kb), Revenue Project Page

2 July 2010: Comprehensive summary of the IASB's project on fair value measurement

A comprehensive project summary, prepared by the IASB staff, has been posted to the fair value measurement project page of the IASB's site. The project summary (PDF 951k) provides the background to the IASB's fair value measurement project and explains how the IASB plans to finalise an IFRS on fair value measurement. The summary also includes a comparison of the tentative decisions reached so far in the project with the proposals in the IASB’s May 2009 exposure draft Fair Value Measurement and the proposals in the US Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (FASB) exposure draft of a proposed Accounting Standards Update (ASU) Amendments for Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs (link to FASB website).

2 July 2010: iGAAP newsletter June 2010

Deloitte (United Kingdom) has published the June 2010 edition of their quarterly iGAAP Newsletter. This newsletter covers the activities of the IASB and the UK Accounting Standards Board (ASB). Each issue includes updates on the activities of the IASB and the ASB, project timetables for both boards, links to new Deloitte publications, an interview of someone involved with IFRSs, and a table showing IFRSs issued but not yet effective or endorsed by the European Union. The interviewee for the June 2010 issue is Ken Wild, Deloitte's recently retired Global IFRS Leader. Click to download iGAAP Newsletter June 2010 (PDF 157k). Links to all past issues are on our United Kingdom Country Page.

2 July 2010: Updated EFRAG 'endorsement status report'

The European Commission has endorsed the IASB's 29 Januar 2010 Amendments to IFRS 1: Limited Exemption from Comparative IFRS 7 Disclosures for First-time Adopters. Consequently, the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) has updated its report showing the status of endorsement, under the EU Accounting Regulation, of each IFRS, including standards, interpretations, and amendments. Click to download the Endorsement Status Report as of 1 July 2010 (PDF 127k). Currently, the following five IASB pronouncements await endorsement action: IFRS 9 Financial Instruments Amendment to IFRIC 14 Prepayments of a Minimum Funding Requirement IFRIC 19 Extinguishing Financial Liabilities with Equity Instruments Revised IAS 24 Related Party Disclosures Improvements to IFRSs You can always find the endorsement status report Here.

2 July 2010: Australia overlooks IFRS for SMEs in favour of 'Reduced Disclosure Requirements'

The Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) has issued amendments to Australian Accounting Standards to implement a 'Tier 2' reporting framework based on 'Reduced Disclosure Requirements' (RDR) instead of implementing the IFRS for SMEs. The RDR permits for-profit entities without 'public accountability' to elect to comply with the recognition and measurement requirements of Australian Accounting Standards (which are equivalent to IFRS for for-profit entities), but to avoid many of the disclosures required by those standards in general purpose financial statements. Not-for-profit and certain public sector entities are also eligible to apply the RDR. Entities applying the RDR will not be able to make an explicit and unreserved statement of compliance with IFRSs, however this will still apply to for-profit entities applying standards in full ('Tier 1'). The Tier 2/RDR will apply to annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 July 2013, but may be early adopted for annual financial reporting periods beginning on or after 1 July 2009. A second stage of the AASB's project will consider whether the 'Tier 2' requirements should be extended to the 'non-reporting entities' under Australia's existing differential reporting regime (these entities produce limited financial statements and do not claim compliance with IFRS). Deloitte (Australia) has produced a series of Accounting Alerts tracking the progress of the AASB's project. Extracts from the Basis for Conclusions on the AASB amendments: The Board concluded that the IFRS for SMEs is not presently a suitable set of requirements for Tier 2 in Australia. However, the Board decided it will continue to monitor and contribute to further changes in the IFRS for SMEs and that it is open to the possibility of adopting the IFRS for SMEs in future should the changes in that Standard make it practicable in an integrated for-profit/NFP sector reporting environment. The Board decided that Tier 2 requirements should be maintained on a continuous basis, rather than waiting for the IASB to update its IFRS for SMEs, which the IASB plans to undertake only every few years, by which time there would be an accumulation of possible changes. The AASB intends that each future Exposure Draft or Invitation to Comment involving changes to Tier 1 that includes disclosure proposals would seek comment about which disclosures should be included in Tier 2, and may include the AASB’s proposed reduced disclosures. Click for: Deloitte (Australia) Accounting alert series: www.deloitte.com/au/accountingalerts Australian Accounting Standards Board press release (link to AASB website) Our Australian country page Our summary of the IFRS for SMEs

2 July 2010: New Zealand debates income tax accounting under IFRS

A recent tax law change in New Zealand has resulted in an intense debate in the country about how (the New Zealand equivalent) of IAS 12 Income Taxes should be applied, and impacts on reported profits. The New Zealand government recently changed the tax law to deny tax deductions for certain buildings. New Zealand also does not have a capital gains tax, meaning affected buildings are outside the scope of the tax law altogether. The effect of the tax law change is resulting in many New Zealand companies recognising a deferred tax liability in respect of existing buildings, significantly impacting profits. The Accounting Standards Review Board (ASRB) and Financial Reporting Standards Board (FRSB) have jointly issued a communique discussing the changes and Deloitte (New Zealand) has published an alert discussing the changes and their accounting implications. The IASB is currently undertaking a limited scope project on IAS 12 and has tentatively decided to consider a related issue of the treatment of revalued buildings. Click for: Deloitte (New Zealand) Special Accounting and Tax Alert (PDF 131kb). Past alerts are available Here Accounting Standards Review Board (ASRB) and Financial Reporting Standards Board (FRSB) Communique (PDF 58kb) Our New Zealand country page Summary of the IASB's IAS 12 project

2 July 2010: PCAOB to discuss impact of IASB-FASB projects on audits

The United States Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) has announced a meeting of its Standing Advisory Group (SAG) will be held on Thursday, 15 July 2010. The meeting will include a presentation on projects of the FASB and IASB relating to potentially significant accounting changes affecting US GAAP and IFRS. The SAG discussion will focus on the potential impact of these changes upon auditors of public companies. Click for: Meeting Agenda (link to PCAOB website) Our PCAOB Page

1 July 2010: Webcast on convergence and FASB financial instruments proposals

On 16 July 2010, Deloitte (United States) will host a live webcast discussing IASB-FASB convergence and the FASB's proposals for accounting for financial instruments. Discussion topics will include: projects included in the memorandum of understanding between the FASB and the IASB proposed changes to the accounting for loans, debt and equity securities, and other financial assets and financial liabilities FASB's various exposure drafts. The IASB is asking constituents to submit comment letters on the FASB financial instruments proposals and will use that feedback when it considers how to reconcile any differences between IFRS requirements and US GAAP. There is no charge to participate in the webcast, but registration is required. Webcast Topic: FASB/IASB: A Convergence Update and Deeper Dive Into the FASB's Financial Instruments Proposals Date and Time: Friday, 16 July 2010, 2:00-3:30pm US Eastern time More Information and Registration: Click Here IAS Plus Resources: IASB Agenda and Timetable, Financial Instruments

1 July 2010: iGAAP 2010 Financial Instruments: IAS 32, IAS 39, IFRS 7 and IFRS 9 Explained

Deloitte (United Kingdom) has developed iGAAP 2010 Financial Instruments: IAS 32, IAS 39, IFRS 7 and IFRS 9 Explained (Sixth Edition), which has been published by LexisNexis. This publication is the authoritative guide for financial instruments accounting under IFRSs. The 2010 edition continues to include many practical examples, comparisons with US GAAP, an IFRS 7 disclosure checklist and model disclosures. The new edition also includes guidance on the IASB's new standard on financial assets, IFRS 9 Financial Instruments, as well as Interpretations and relevant IASB activities up to and including 31 March 2010. iGAAP 2010 Financial Instruments: IAS 32, IAS 39, IFRS 7 and IFRS 9 Explained (Sixth Edition) (1,139 pages, June 2010) can be purchased through www.lexisnexis.co.uk/deloitte. You will find a permanent link to this and many other Deloitte IFRS publications on our IFRS Publications Page.

1 July 2010: IASB and FASB post staff draft of proposed financial statement presentation standard

The IASB and the US FASB posted to their websites a staff draft of a proposed standard on their joint project to develop a standard on financial statement presentation. The draft reflects the cumulative, tentative decisions made by the boards concluding with their joint meeting in April 2010. However, work on the project is continuing, and the proposals are subject to change before the boards decide to publish an exposure draft for public comment. Before finalising and publishing the exposure draft, the boards will engage in further outreach and analysis. These activities will focus primarily on two issues: (1) the perceived benefits and costs of the proposals, and (2) the implications of the proposals for financial reporting by financial institutions. The boards are not formally inviting comments on the this staff draft; however, they welcome input from interested parties. The boards expect to publish an exposure draft for public comment in early 2011. Link to IAS Plus Project Page.

1 July 2010: EU formally adopts amendments to IFRS 1 and IFRS 7

The European Union has published the Commission Regulation (EC) No 574/2010 (Amendment to IFRS 1 Limited Exemption from Comparative IFRS 7 Disclosure for First-time Adopters and Amendment to IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures) endorsing the amendments adopted by the IASB on 29 Januar 2010. Last week the European Union published the Commission Regulation (EC) No 550/2010 (Amendments to IFRS 1 Additional Exemptions for First-time Adopters) endorsing the amendments adopted by the IASB on 23 July 2009. Thus currently only five IASB pronouncements await endorsement action.

1 July 2010: New name and web address for the IASC Foundation

The IASC Foundation has formally changed its name to the IFRS Foundation with effect from 1 July 2010. The change represents the next step in a process to simplify the names in use across the organisation announced following the conclusion of the Constitutional Review in 2010. The International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) and the Standards Advisory Council (SAC) have already been renamed as the IFRS Interpretations Committee and the IFRS Advisory Council, respectively. The name of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) will remain unchanged. The IASB's website has been changed to coincide with the name change and is now www.ifrs.org. In addition, IFRS Foundation and IASB email addresses will end in '@ifrs.org'. We have updated the links on our pages to reflect the new addresses. (The old iasb.org webpages and email addresses will be rerouted to ifrs.org from 1 July 2010 and so will continue to work.) Click for IASC announcement. See also our IFRS Foundation page.