At its meeting on January 24, 2018, the IASB discussed: (i) introducing management performance measures in the financial statements; and (ii) presenting the share of the profit or loss of ‘integral’ associates and joint ventures in the statement(s) of financial performance.The Board will continue its discussions on topics within the scope of the project at future meetings.

Review the IASB Update and podcast on the IASB's Web site.

At its meeting on January 24, 2018, the IASB discussed an issue raised on the pre-ballot draft of the FICE Discussion Paper. The Board discussed whether such an instrument could be analysed as an equity host and an embedded derivative asset if the issuer held the option to settle the claim. In cases where the entity does not have the option to limit the amount of a claim to the entity’s available economic resources, the instrument would be analysed as a liability host and an embedded derivative. This position is consistent with the Board’s preliminary view on contingent events.

The Board tentatively decided: (i) before proposing any particular accounting requirements, to raise the issue in the Discussion Paper and seek feedback on whether separating embedded derivatives may be a potential solution; and (ii) to raise a question in the Discussion Paper about whether and how the attribution requirements may help provide information about complex payoffs if the embedded derivative is not separated from the equity host contract.

Review the IASB Update and podcast on the IASB's Web site.

At its meeting on January 25, 2018, the IASB discussed the IFRIC’s recommendation to propose an amendment to IAS 41, Agriculture, as part of the Board’s next Annual Improvements Cycle. The amendment would remove the requirement for entities to exclude cash flows for taxation when measuring the fair value of biological assets using a present value technique. All Board members agreed with the proposal.

Review the IASB Update and podcast on the IASB's Web site.

At its meeting on January 25, 2018, the IASB discussed whether it can simplify the value in use calculation without making the impairment test in IAS 36, Impairment of Assets less robust. The Board tentatively decided to consider removing the requirement for an entity to exclude from the value in use calculation cash flows resulting from a future restructuring or a future enhancement.

The Board also tentatively decided to consider removing the explicit requirement to use pre-tax inputs to calculate value in use and to disclose the pre-tax discount rates used.  Instead, an entity would be required: (i) to use internally consistent assumptions about cash flows and discount rates; and (ii) to disclose the discount rate(s) actually used.

At future meetings, the Board will: (i) discuss whether to consider subsuming some intangible assets within goodwill acquired in a business combination; and (ii) decide whether the next stage in the project should be a discussion paper or an exposure draft.

Review the IASB Update and podcast on the IASB's Web site.

At its meeting on January 25, 2018, the IASB discussed feedback from phase 2 of the Post-implementation Review (PIR) of IFRS 13, Fair Value Measurement (IFRS 13), including feedback from: (i) the Request for Information on IFRS 13, published in May 2017 and closed for comment in September 2017; (ii) the external academic literature review, conducted from June to November 2017; and (iii) research by staff, completed during phase 2 of the PIR. 

The work in phase 2 of the PIR focused on: (i) disclosures about fair value measurements to gain a deeper understanding of both users’ and preparers’ perspectives on the usefulness of fair value measurement disclosures; (ii) whether to prioritise Level 1 inputs or the unit of account (the ‘p x q’ issue). The staff assessed the extent and effect of the issue as well as examining current practice; (iii) application of the concept of the ‘highest and best use’ when measuring the fair value of non-financial assets to better understand the challenges when applying this concept and whether further support could be helpful; (iv) application of judgement in some  areas to assess the challenges and whether further support could be helpful; and (v) whether there is a need for further material, such as education material, on measuring the fair value of biological assets and unquoted equity instruments.

The Board was not asked to make any decisions. The Board will discuss at a future meeting whether to take any steps as a result of this feedback.

Review the IASB Update and podcast on the IASB's Web site.