On better communication Mr. Hoogervorst offered no new insights, but confirmed that the IASB feels that it now has a good set of standards that covers the vast majority of transactions and would therefore prioritize better presentation and formatting of the information in the financial statements in the coming years, rather than developing new, big standards with focus on recognition and measurement. Similarly, on support of implementation and application, he mainly stressed the importance of the work of the IFRS Interpretations Committee, but offered no detailed insights.

Turning then to wider corporate reporting, Mr. Hoogervorst stated that the IASB is often asked questions about its role in this space and that some constituents would like the IASB to play a more central role in trying to create more uniformity in the multitude of sustainability standards. He admitted:

[T]he IASB knows that financial reporting in the narrow sense has its limitations. There are many elements of value creation which are important to the investor but which are not adequately captured in the financial statements. Investors need to understand a company’s business model and its strategy for long-term value creation. They need to understand the intangibles that are vital to their business model. And, yes, sustainability issues can also be important for long-term value creation in certain industries, just think of mining and car manufacturing.

And yet he also stated:

Let me be clear; we do not plan to get into environmental and sustainability reporting. That is not our area of expertise. There are many other players. Our remit is, and will remain, financial reporting—with focus on the participants in the capital markets. That is investors and potential creditors.

In conclusion, Mr. Hoogervorst offered that there has been a lot of development in this area since 2010 when the IASB published its Management Commentary Practice Statement and therefore, the IASB "is considering" whether to update the practice statement to capture the developments. This topic has been included on the IASB's agenda for its next meeting.

Review the full speech on the IASB's website.

The new revenue standard is effective for all public entities for annual periods beginning January 1, 2018 for calendar year-end public entities. The SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance selectively reviewed filings to monitor and enhance compliance with applicable disclosure and accounting requirements of the new standard. FEI reviewed revenue-related comment letter correspondence between the SEC and filers, and found the following trends:

• Early adopters have been asked to clarify considerations made for operationalizing different aspects of the standard
• The SEC began requesting more robust SAB 74 disclosures for periods ending December 31, 2016
• Several companies have disclosed incorrect effective dates for ASC 606 in their SAB 74 disclosures

Review the press release and the update on FEI's website.

The 2018 SEC Reporting Taxonomy (SRT) moves a range of elements from the GAAP Financial Reporting Taxonomy into a new taxonomy that can be used for companies reporting under both IFRS and US GAAP. 

The broad categories addressed in the SRT include:

• The oil and gas industry
• Financial schedules
• Condensed consolidating financial information for guarantors
• Country code elements
• Common axis/domain used while reporting financials in US-GAAP.

The introduction of the SRT taxonomy eliminates the need for foreign private issuers (FPIs) using the IFRS taxonomy to import the US-GAAP Financial Reporting Taxonomy. This simplifies what would otherwise be a complex process.

Review the announcement on the SEC's website and the taxonomy on the FASB's website.

Review the article on Accounting Today's website.

The new webcast is part of a series on the implementation of IFRS 17 and can be accessed on the IASB website. Earlier webcasts and webinars on IFRS 17 are available through an archive on the IASB's website.

The broker-dealer working draft addresses underwriting revenues, while the telecommunications working draft covers the determination of transaction prices.

Below is an analysis of all changes made to the work plan since our last analysis on September 22, 2017.

Main­te­nance projects

• Accounting policy changes (changes in accounting policies that result from agenda decisions published by the IFRS Interpretations Committee) — exposure draft is now expected in first quarter of 2018.
• Classification of Liabilities — final amendments are now expected in the second half of 2018.
• Long-term interests in associates and joint ventures — the work plan reflects that the final amendments have been published.
• Improvements to IFRS 8 — Feedback statement on exposure draft is now expected in November 2017.
• Plan amendment, curtailment or settlement — final amendments are now expected in January 2018.
• Prepayment features with negative compensation — the work plan reflects that the final amendments have been published.

Research projects

• Financial in­stru­ments with char­ac­ter­is­tics of equity — a dis­cus­sion paper is now expected in the first half of 2018.
• Principles of disclosure — feedback statement on the discussion paper is now expected in the first quarter of 2018.

Other projects

• IFRS Taxonomy update for prepayment features with negative compensation — New entry added to work plan. Feedback statement on the proposed update is expected in the first quarter of 2018.

The revised IASB work plan is available on the IASB's website.

About two months remain until the beginning of 2018 when all public companies reporting on a US GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) basis adopt the revised revenue recognition requirements. The paper examines reporting patterns that have begun to crystallise in the transition to full adoption although it notes:

Notably, many companies seem to be crawling to the starting line. Very few companies have been early adopters. At the same time, insightful numerical information on anticipated impacts from those that are yet to adopt is limited.

The paper also reviews selected critical judgments that could affect reported revenue.

Review the full paper on the CFA Institute's website.

The AcSB would like input from Canadian respondents on the following additional question regarding the proposed amendments:

The IASB has developed the proposed amendments in accordance with its due process for application around the world. Assuming the Exposure Draft proposals are finalized and approved by the IASB in accordance with its due process, do you think that the proposals are appropriate for application in Canada? If not, please specify which aspects of the proposals, and what circumstances, make the accounting requirements proposed in the Exposure Draft inappropriate.

Review the Exposure Draft on the AcSB's website.

Some standard-setters are strictly against including any non-IFRS information in financial statements. Canada's AcSB argues that non-IFRS information "could undermine other information in the financial statements that conforms with IFRS Standards" and could "further reduce the relevance of financial statements". Mexico's CINIF ("we do not believe there are situations where 'non-IFRS information' is warranted").

Some standard-setters argue in favour of allowing information that is not IFRS information in financial statements. The UK FRC notes that it "does not support a principle which prohibits information".

Many standard-setters draw a line between non-IFRS information and information that is not consistent with IFRSs (with some of them again pointing out that it would be difficult to distinguish between the two types of information).

Other standard-setters again simply acknowledge that prohibiting non-IFRS information is impractical.

The middle ground is held by standard-setters who see pros and cons and weigh them carefully but who also stress two points: (i) in some jurisdictions there are legal requirements to include certain non-IFRS information in financial statements and (ii) IAS 1 already requires "to provide additional disclosures when compliance with the specific requirements in IFRSs is insufficient to enable users to understand the impact of particular transactions, other events and conditions on the entity’s financial position and financial performance".

All comment letters cited or referred to are available on the IASB's website. The questions regarding non-IFRS information and information that is inconsistent with or contradicts IFRS information are questions 6 and 7.

Review the full article on our Global IAS Plus website.