The move comes amid the rollout of country-by-country reporting requirements by the Internal Revenue Service that the U.S. is carrying out in conjunction with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s plan for combating base erosion and profit shifting, known as OECD BEPS.

Review the article, the House Democrats' letter to the FASB and the SEC's Investor Advisory Committee's letter to the FASB.

Ms. Shah, who will take office in October 2017, is currently Deputy Chief Ac­coun­tant of the Division of Cor­po­ra­tion Finance of the US Se­cu­ri­ties and Exchange Com­mis­sion (SEC). In that capacity she has supported the SEC staff’s dis­cus­sions on IFRSs within the International Or­ga­ni­za­tion of Se­cu­ri­ties Com­mis­sion’s (IOSCO) accounting technical committee.

For more in­for­ma­tion, see the press release on the IASB website.

The webinar is part of an International Accounting Standards Board series supporting the implementation of IFRS 17.

The two part we­b­cast can be ac­cessed via the IFRS 17 im­ple­men­ta­tion page.

As well as a discussion on IFRS 16 requirements, the webcast contains insights from Stephen Cooper, including his views on: (i) the Board’s rationale for the disclosure requirements in IFRS 16; (ii) the information needs of users of financial statements; and (iii) key considerations for a lessee in determining what information is most relevant to users of financial statements.

The webcast can be accessed via the IFRS 16 implementation page.

The webinar was tailored to investors and covered the following questions:

• Why IFRS 17 was developed?
• How does IFRS 17 work?
• What are the benefits of IFRS 17?

There is also a section with answers to questions submitted by investors during the webinar.

Listen to the webinar through the press release on the IASB website.

For more information, see the press release on the IASB's website.

The study builds on close to 130 interviews of which over 100 were conducted with external parties (accountants/auditors, preparers, users, standard-setters, regulators as well as members of the different IFRS Foundation advisory groups).

Overall, the IFRS Foundation is rated highly for its transparency and independence. Its consultations are perceived as professional, open, and effective with good quality documentation. The vast majority of respondents also agree that the Foundation meets its public interest mission and the Foundation’s not-for-profit, privately organised status is not seen to have a detrimental effect on the public interest mission.

However, several weaknesses were also identified by the study. The main one is the perception that the Foundation is not timely and does not respond quickly enough to a changing world. Especially long development and consultation phases are seen as a weakness, which are attributed to a lack of proper balance right between quantity of due process and speed and to a tendency to be too technical or conceptual. Respondents would also like to see more opportunities to engage outside the consultation process through informal dialogue, training, and events. Stakeholders also feel that both smaller companies and developing markets are at risk of being sidelined, and call for greater consideration of difficulties they may experience implementing standards.

The report offers six recommendations for the Foundation: continue the good work; improve outreach and consult more widely; develop events, training and education; improve timeliness; respond to the need for simple, practical, and workable standards; and harness advocates to act as ambassadors

The full report and a corresponding press release are available on the IASB website.

The illustrative tagging shows how selected information from the Illustrative Examples accompanying IFRS 17 could be tagged using the IFRS Taxonomy Update that was proposed together with the issuance of IFRS 17 on May 18, 2017 and is currently expected to be published in the fourth quarter of 2017.

The illustrative tagging is available through the IASB's supporting material section of the Taxonomy Update project page.

The Global Public Policy Committee (GPPC)¹ paper, The auditor’s response to the risks of material mis­state­ment posed by estimates of expected credit losses under IFRS 9, is addressed primarily to the audit com­mit­tees of sys­tem­i­cally-im­por­tant banks, although much of its content will be relevant to other banks and financial in­sti­tu­tions, and aims to promote the im­ple­men­ta­tion of accounting for expected credit losses to a high standard.

The paper notes that in­tro­duc­tion of new re­quire­ments for the accounting of expected credit losses in IFRS 9, Financial In­stru­ments, will be a sig­nif­i­cant change to the financial reporting of banks when required in 2018. Banks are expected to design and implement high-qual­ity policies, pro­ce­dures, internal controls, systems and models in ac­cor­dance with the accounting standard to enable bank man­age­ment to exercise ap­pro­pri­ate judge­ments when es­ti­mat­ing expected credit losses (ECL).

However, the paper also notes that there are risks of material mis­state­ment related to the es­ti­ma­tion of ECL under IFRS 9, are as a result of: the com­plex­ity of es­ti­mat­ing expected losses; a higher number of inputs and as­sump­tions, which are subject to judgement; an increased es­ti­ma­tion un­cer­tainty; and the potential magnitude of the ECL estimate for sys­tem­i­cally-im­por­tant banks.

The GPPC hopes the paper will help those charged with gov­er­nance to ef­fec­tively evaluate the quality of the auditor’s response to the risks of material mis­state­ment posed by estimates of expected credit losses.

For further details refer to the press release on the GPPC’s website.

____________________

¹ The Global Public Policy Committee (GPPC) of the six largest international accounting networks comprises rep­re­sen­ta­tives of BDO, Deloitte, EY, Grant Thornton, KPMG and PwC, and focuses on public policy issues for the pro­fes­sion.

General remarks

Below is an analysis of all changes made to the work plan since our last analysis on June 26, 2017.

Stan­dard-set­ting projects

• No changes

Main­te­nance projects

• Narrow-scope amendments to IAS 19 and IFRIC 14 — Remeasurement on a plan amendment, curtailment or settlement / Availability of a refund of a surplus from a defined benefit plan [ED] — final amend­ments are now expected in the first half of 2018 (was: fourth quarter of 2017)
• A new project "Accounting policy changes (Amend­ments to IAS 8)" has been added to the work plan. This goes back to the Board's June 2017 dis­cus­sions when the Board ten­ta­tively decided to amend IAS 8 to lower the im­prac­ti­ca­bil­ity threshold regarding ret­ro­spec­tive ap­pli­ca­tion of voluntary changes in accounting policies that result from agenda decisions. An exposure draft is currently expected in the first half of 2018.
• Long-term Interests in Associates and Joint Ventures (Proposed Amendments to IAS 28) [ED] (split out from the annual im­prove­ment process 2015-2017) is now expected to see final amend­ments in October 2017 (was: September 2017)
• The two remaining issues of the annual im­prove­ment process 2015-2017 were set to see final amend­ments in July 2017. This has been changed to the fourth quarter of 2017.
• Prepayment Features with Negative Compensation (Proposed amendments to IFRS 9) [ED] — dis­cus­sions this week have clarified that final amend­ments are expected in October 2017

Research projects

• Discount Rates [Research] — a research report is now expected in the first half of 2018 (was: September 2017)
• Share-based payments, potential amendments to IFRS 2 [Completed] — a research report is now expected in the first half of 2018 (was: September 2017)

Other projects

• No changes

The above is a com­par­i­son of the IASB work plan at June 26, 2017 and at July 21, 2017. For access to the current IASB work plan at any time, please click here.