“The GRI G4 Guidelines are already the most widely used framework for sustainability reporting in the world. Our transition to Standards is designed to scale up our reach even further,’ said Eric Hespenheide, Chair of the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB). “The improved structure, format and presentation of GRI Standards, as well as the fact that individual Standards can be used alone, will open up reporting to thousands of organizations that have not yet begun disclosing their broader economic, environmental and social impacts. We are also transitioning from periodic to continual updates of GRI Standards, as market and stakeholder demands evolve.”

Organizations preparing a sustainability report ‘in accordance’ with the GRI Standards will select only the relevant topic-specific Standards, based on their material topics. However, the Standards can also be used and referenced independently, to allow reporting on a specific sustainability subject. This will give reporting organizations more flexibility and make sustainability reporting more accessible for new reporters, including small and medium-sized enterprises.

The second set of exposure drafts comprises 30 topic-specific draft standards each covering a separate sustainability topic such as anti-corruption, emissions, biodiversity, or child labor. They are open for comment until 17 July 2016. Please click to access the exposure drafts and a corresponding press release on the GRI's Web site.

The new revenue recognition standard is causing companies to review compensation arrangements and bonus structures that are based on revenue metrics, said Deloitte & Touche LLP's Eric Knachel, CPA. Knachel said that compensation arrangements are just one example of the broader nonaccounting issues that make it necessary to focus immediately on implementation.

Review the article on the Journal of Accountancy's Web site.

At Compliance Week’s recent annual conference, a session on the massive new revenue recognition standard was perhaps the most sparsely attended. In an onsite poll of those in the room, more than half said they came from companies that hadn’t yet decided how they would adopt the new standard. That’s a troubling sign that those companies probably hadn’t yet completed even a high-level assessment to determine how they will be affected by the new requirements.

Chris Chiriatti, managing director at Deloitte & Touche says: “The results are somewhat—I wouldn’t say surprising—maybe alarming.”

“It’s an indicator that many companies view this as 18 months from now,” said Eric Knachel, senior consultation partner also with Deloitte. They have other more time-sensitive priorities, perhaps, or limited resources to devote to the effort. He adds that “the next three to nine months will be critical.”

Review the article on (Free Registration Required) Compliance Week's Web site.

While the Act as passed is very similar to the earlier version, one of the key changes will be enhanced accountability and public reporting on the cap-and-trade proceeds. For instance, the money raised will go to a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Account to invest in programs that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the minister is now required to make a report available to the public each year on initiatives that are funded from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Account.

Review the Act and the article on the Norton Rose Fulbright's Web site.

What You Need To Know

• Shareholder approval and TSX pre-clearance would still be required for security-based compensation arrangements—no rule changes are contemplated in these areas.
• New disclosure would be required in proxy circulars about the impact of multipliers on the number of securities issuable; burn rates; and default vesting provisions.
• Security-based compensation arrangements would have to be posted on listed companies' websites. This includes inducement grants and other individual awards not granted under a plan. Companies may want to consider amending their arrangements to remove confidential or competitively sensitive information.

Review the Amendments to Toronto Stock Exchange Company Manual (May 26, 2016) on the TSX's website and an article on the Torys LLP's website.

Changes to the work plan include:

Major projects

• No changes made to major projects.

Im­ple­men­ta­tion projects

• Annual Improvements (2014-2016): Updated to indicate that a decision on the direction of the project is now expected within 3 months.
• Transfer of In­vest­ment Property: Updated to indicate that a final standard is expected within 6 months.
• Draft IFRIC In­ter­pre­ta­tion — Foreign Currency Trans­ac­tions and Advance Con­sid­er­a­tion: Updated to indicate that a final interpretation is expected after 6 months.

In addition, the work plan has updated the details of the primary financial statements, income taxes, and share-based payment (where the IASB has decided not to perform any further research on this topic or to publish a formal consultation document) research projects and indicated that a feedback statement on the 2015 agenda consultation is expected within 6 months.

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

While Carrots & Sticks first and foremost provides a summarized quantitative overview of the current landscape of reporting instruments, the Annual Report recognizes that there are unanswered questions. As the Advisory Committee noted, questions can be asked about the impact, context and drivers behind each instrument, and the sector or economy in which it is issued.

For example, how effective are these instruments? How successful is action by governments in achieving their objectives? What is the quality of the reported information that results from these instruments? How valuable is the information in terms of enhancing transparency and accountability? To what extent does the reporting bring us closer to the sustainable world envisioned by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development?

Please click to access the 2016 edition of Carrots & Sticks.

Instead of addressing these changes as part of its technical corrections and improvements project, the FASB issued the proposed ASU separately “to increase stakeholders’ awareness of the proposals and to expedite improvements to Update 2014-09.” The tech­ni­cal cor­rec­tions affect the following narrow aspects of the new revenue standard:

• Preproduction costs related to long-term supply arrangements.
• Contract costs — impairment testing.
• Contract costs — interaction of impairment testing with guidance in other topics.
• Provisions for losses on construction-type and production-type contracts.
• Scope of the new revenue standard.
• Disclosure of remaining performance obligations.
• A contract modification example.
• Fixed-odds wagering contracts in the casino industry.
• Cost capitalization for advisers to private and public funds.

Com­ments on the pro­posed ASU are due by July 2, 2016.

Review the pro­posed ASU on the FASB’s website.

He says that the vast amounts of information collected generate new analytic techniques and opportunities and that today’s leaders have to anticipate change and identify approaches to capitalize on it for the benefit of their constituents.

Review the article on the IFAC's Web site.