The guidance published outlines three CCO models tailored to the needs of small businesses, specialized businesses, and firms with multiple lines of business. CSA staff have provided guidance on arrangements where:

• an individual can apply to be the CCO for more than one firm (the shared CCO model);
• a firm can have multiple CCOs, each responsible for a separate business line or category of registration (the multiple CCO model); and
• a non-traditional or specialized firm, such as a fintech firm, can have an individual acting as a CCO, with the individual’s industry-specific experience being used to assess their proficiency to act as CCO (the specialized CCO model).

Firms interested in implementing one of these arrangements must clearly demonstrate the model is appropriate for their business, as well as ensure individuals applying to be a CCO meet registration requirements.

Firms must first apply for registration or exemptive relief for these models, which will be reviewed by CSA staff on a case-by-case basis, to ensure requirements, including investor protection measures, are met. Registrants are encouraged to reach out to their local regulator for any questions they may have around these CCO models, or other relevant CCO models.

Re­view the press re­lease on the CSA's web­site and details of the guidance on the OSC’s website.

The third webinar on July 9, 2020 will explain the Board’s detailed proposals for disaggregation including general guidance, the analysis of operating expenses and unusual income and expenses. The webinar will last approximately 60 minutes and will include a question-and-answer session.

More information is available here.

Noting that the global COVID-19 pandemic continues to significantly impact Canadian reporting issuers and their auditors, the CPAB believes that it is important that the quality of audits is not compromised by these challenges, and that care is taken by auditors to properly assess the accounting and disclosures made by Canadian reporting issuers.

Since audit committees play a critical role in overseeing the external audit, CPAB encourages audit committees to consider the following areas that could impact the quality of public company audits in Canada and discuss with their company management and audit teams: (i) Internal controls; (ii) Fraud; (iii) Complex/new accounting issues; (iv) People; (v) Project management; (vi) Changes to audit and review procedures; and (vii) Foreign jurisdictions audit work.

For further details, refer to the CPAB Exchange Bulletin on the CPAB’s website.

The podcast discusses:

• IBOR reform and the effects on financial reporting — Phase 2;

• Classification of liabilities as current or non-current; 

• Disclosure initiative — Accounting policies; 
• Disclosure initiative — Targeted standards-level review of disclosures; and 
• Maintenance and consistent application.

The podcast also touches on the publication of the amended insurance contracts standard IFRS 17.

The podcast (17 minutes) can be accessed through the press release on the IASB website.

The International Accounting Standards Board (Board) is carrying out a research project to consider filling a gap in IFRS Standards by improving the comparability and transparency of reporting on combinations of businesses under common control. IFRS 3, Business Combinations, covers how to account for mergers and acquisitions between unrelated parties but it does not cover combinations of businesses under common control.

The Board plans to publish a discussion paper to seek public feedback on its views later this year.

For more in­for­ma­tion, see the Update on the IASB’s web­site.

The unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic, which has quickly morphed into a global humanitarian crisis and economic disaster, has dramatically upped the stakes and added a new layer of complexity. And while the quantitative easing programs initiated by governments around the world have propelled the markets to function, these efforts are likely to be of limited efficacy and will not cure what ails many beleaguered companies, particularly private enterprises. As such, private company finance leaders should be preparing for what is likely to be a tougher credit environment and no matter where a company is on the credit spectrum, should be proactively re-evaluating their capital needs to identify potential liquidity mismatches and to seek to bridge the gaps.

In this article, Deloitte Private outlines four areas of opportunity companies can consider to meet their needs.

Below is an analysis of all changes made to the work plan since our last analysis on May 25, 2020.

Stan­dard-set­ting projects

• No changes

Main­te­nance projects

• Accounting Policy Changes (Amend­ments to IAS 8)— this project has been removed from the work plan as the Board decided not to continue with this project.
• Amend­ments to IFRS 17— this project has been removed from the work plan due to the issuance of the amend­ments.
• IFRS 16 and COVID-19— this project has been removed from the work plan due to the issuance of the amend­ments.
• Supply Chain Financing Arrange­ments — Reverse Factoring— the tentative agenda decision expected in the second half of 2020 in respect of this project has been included in the work plan.
• The Board decided not to adda project on the sale of a sub­sidiary to a customer to the work plan (the staff had rec­om­mended a nar­row-scope amendment).

Research projects

• No changes.

Other projects

• IFRS Taxonomy update — Common Practice (IAS 19 Employee Benefits) — this project has been added to the work plan with a proposed IFRS taxonomy update expected in the fourth quarter of 2020.
• IFRS Taxonomy update — Covid-19-re­lated rent con­ces­sions (Amendment to IFRS 16) — feedback on the proposed update is expected in July 2020.
• IFRS Taxonomy update — Interest rate benchmark reform — Phase 2  — this project has been added to the work plan with a proposed IFRS taxonomy update expected in the third quarter of 2020.

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

This conclusion is based on a 25-page legal opinion released on June 25, 2020 by Carol Hansell, one of Canada’s leading experts on corporate governance. In her analysis, Hansell states unequivocally that corporate directors have a duty to assess the degree to which climate change will impact a company over the long-term, not just its short-term profits or business plans. They must also ensure that, where risks and opportunities are material to the firm’s business, management must come up with strategies to address them.

The legal opinion was prepared for the Canadian Climate Law Initiative, It is one of the first such in-depth legal analyses of directors’ duties in a corporate governance context with respect to climate change by a senior Canadian lawyer.

For further information, refer to the article and Hansell’s 25-page opinion.

As companies experience unprecedented economic disruption, many are rethinking their fundamental purpose and strategy. To help steer their organizations toward long-term value creation, it is recommended that Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) and finance functions need to ensure that all relevant information around value creation, performance, opportunities, risks and trade-offs is available to internal decision makers, investors and other capital providers.

To support CFOs and their finance teams in this context the IFAC, IIRC, AICPA and CIMA have issued new guidance on accounting for, and reporting on, what matters, namely “The CFO and Finance Function Role in Value Creation”, and its supplementary report, “Understanding Value”. 

These documents contain actionable insights for CFOs, finance teams and other business leaders to sharpen their perspective on value creation beyond the financials. They also include detailed guidance on developing a corporate scorecard that provides an integrated view of value and performance. This involves capturing information across three value perspectives: societal, business, and balance sheet.

For further details, refer to the press release and the related documents on the IFAC web­site.

In its consultation paper, the CSA is requesting feedback on whether the current SRO framework best serves Canadian investors and the investment industry, in light of the evolution of the financial services industry. The CSA is also asking for comments on the issues and targeted outcomes outlined in the paper, with written submissions due by October 23, 2020.

The current SRO regulatory framework requires investment dealers to be members of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) and mutual fund dealers, except in Québec, to be members of the Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada (MFDA).

Re­view the press re­lease on the CSA's web­site.