The new rule significantly expands upon the exemptions available when an Alberta issuer seeks to distribute securities to investors outside of Canada. It also provides a prospectus exemption for distributions made under the offering memorandum exemption within Canada. The exemptions are conditional on material compliance with the disclosure requirements of the purchaser’s jurisdiction. The rule also contains prospectus exemptions for the resale of securities outside of Canada if the issuer is not a reporting issuer in any jurisdiction within Canada.

Review the press release and new rule on the ASC's website.

This webcast explains Section 5 of the Discussion Paper Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity on compound instruments and redemption.

It covers the Board’s preferred approach to classification of compound instruments, such as convertible bonds, and obligations to redeem own equity instruments, for example a written put option on own shares.

Future webcasts in the series will cover:

• presentation of equity instruments; and
• presentation of financial liabilities

For more information, see the press release on the Board’s website and the webcast on the IFRS Foundation’s YouTube channel.

This we­b­casts dis­cusses how the Board’s preferred approach would classify own equity derivatives (except for those that include an obligation for a company to take back its own shares, which will be explained in a future FICE webcast).

Fu­ture we­b­casts in the se­ries will cover:

• Clas­si­fi­ca­tion of com­pound in­stru­ments and re­demp­tion oblig­a­tion arrange­ments.
• Pre­sen­ta­tion of eq­uity in­stru­ments.
• Pre­sen­ta­tion of fi­nan­cial li­a­bil­i­ties.

For more in­for­ma­tion, see the press re­lease on the IASB’s web­site and the we­b­cast on the IFRS Foun­da­tion’s YouTube chan­nel.

The letter disagrees with the proposals to amend IAS 8 to lower the impracticability threshold for retrospective application of voluntary changes in accounting policy resulting from agenda decisions published by the IFRS^® Interpretations Committee (agenda decisions).

The AcSB expresses concerns that amending IAS 8 as proposed would essentially elevate the authority of agenda decisions without the extent of due process expected for such an outcome.

The AcSB also notes that the proposals could lead to unintended consequences in jurisdictions, including Canada, where entities are expected to apply accounting policies in line with explanatory material in agenda decisions and, therefore, such changes in accounting policy are not voluntary in practice.

The AcSB strongly encourages the IASB to consider another mechanism, such as a change in the process around agenda decisions, to achieve its objectives for this project.

Review the AcSB letter posted on the IASB's website.

According to the CSA, the exemption has been used 60 times in the past two years, raising $535.5 million across the country.

The CSA report also identified a number of compliance and disclosure issues with the use of the streamlined exemption and provided suggestions for improvements, namely in regards to: stand-by commitments, use of available funds and closing news release.

Review the Staff Notice on the OSC's website and a summary on Stikeman Elliot's website.

Considering the realities of the Canadian market and the comments received, the CSA have concluded that it is appropriate to maintain its current approach to determining director and audit committee member independence. It recognizes that its current approach has benefits and limitations. Upon review, it is satisfied that it strikes an appropriate balance between affording sufficient discretion to the board of directors to determine whether an individual could reasonably be expected to exercise independent judgement, and providing prescriptive elements that preclude an individual from being considered independent in certain circumstances.

The CSA’s current approach has been in place since 2004 and it notes that stakeholders understand and have adapted accordingly. Making changes to the current approach or replacing it with an alternative approach could result in additional costs for issuers and efforts for investors to adapt to such changes. The CSA is of the view that, in this case, any potential benefits of a change to the approach are outweighed by the potential negative impact of implementing such a change.

Re­view the press re­lease on the CSA's web­site and the Staff Notice on the CSA mem­bers’ web­sites.

The proposed amendments to Rules 3-10 and 3-16 of Regulation S-X would focus disclosures on information that is material to investors given the specific facts and circumstances, make the disclosures easier to understand, and reduce the costs and burdens for registrants. By reducing compliance burdens, the proposed amendments should further encourage issuers to register debt offerings, and thus provide investors with additional protections that are not present in unregistered offerings.

Review the press release and fact sheet on the SEC's website.

Below is an analysis of all changes made to the work plan since our last analysis on June 22, 2018.

Research projects

• Business Com­bi­na­tions Under Common Control — The expected date of the decision paper is pushed into the second half of 2019.
• Dis­clo­sure Ini­tia­tive — Prin­ci­ples of Dis­clo­sure — This project is now in the summary stage.
• Discount Rates — This project is now in the summary stage which is expected to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2019.
• Financial In­stru­ments with Char­ac­ter­is­tics of Equity — This project is now in the feedback stage which is expected to be completed in the first half of 2019.
• Post-Im­ple­men­ta­tion Review of IFRS 13 Fair Value Mea­sure­ment — A feedback statement is now expected in the fourth quarter of 2018.
• Share-Based Payment — This project is now in the summary stage which is expected to be completed in September 2018.

Main­te­nance projects

• Accounting Policies and Accounting Estimates (Amend­ments to IAS 8) — A decision on the project is expected in October 2018.
• Accounting Policy Changes (Amend­ments to IAS 8) — The expected date of the exposure draft is narrowed to the fourth quarter of 2018.
• Clas­si­fi­ca­tion of Li­a­bil­i­ties (Amend­ments to IAS 1) — A decision on the direction of the project is now expected in September 2018.
• Costs Con­sid­ered in Assessing Whether a Contract Is Onerous (Amend­ments to IAS 37) — This is a new project. An exposure draft is expected to be issued in the fourth quarter of 2018.
• De­f­i­n­i­tion of a Business (Amend­ments to IFRS 3) — The expected issuance of the IFRS amend­ments is now September 2018.
• Dis­clo­sure Ini­tia­tive — Targeted Stan­dards-Level Review of Dis­clo­sures — This project is now in the exposure draft stage.
• Im­prove­ments to IFRS 8 Operating Segments (Amend­ments to IFRS 8 and IAS 34) — A feedback statement is now expected in the fourth quarter of 2018.

Stan­dard-set­ting projects

• Man­age­ment Com­men­tary — An exposure draft is now expected in the first half of 2020.
• Rate-Reg­u­lated Ac­tiv­i­ties — The issuance of a dis­cus­sion paper or exposure draft is now expected in the second half of 2019.

Other projects

• IFRS Taxonomy Update — Common Practice (IFRS 13) — A proposed update is now expected in September 2018.

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

In the response to the consultation, Deloitte also notes that if reducing local GAAP differences were to be considered a priority in the EU and if feasibility studies show that obstacles can be overcome, it would favor initiatives that would gradually allow closer or fuller convergence with IFRS. This could take place through amendments to the Directives or the IAS Regulation allowing companies to voluntarily adopt IFRS in individual or consolidated financial statements, rather than leaving this to the discretion of Member States to decide whether or not this option is granted to the companies in their jurisdiction.

Please click to download the full comment letter here (cover letter with main messages first, followed by completed questionnaire).

The AcSB's new survey captures your feedback on the AcSB’s Draft Framework for Reporting Performance Measures and requests this information by September 17, 2018.

The AcSB’s target audience includes preparers, directors, users, practitioners, regulators, academics and standard setters.”

Here is a link to the survey on the AcSB's web­site.