This site uses cookies to provide you with a more responsive and personalised service. By using this site you agree to our use of cookies. Please read our cookie notice for more information on the cookies we use and how to delete or block them.
The full functionality of our site is not supported on your browser version, or you may have 'compatibility mode' selected. Please turn off compatibility mode, upgrade your browser to at least Internet Explorer 9, or try using another browser such as Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox.

Narrow-scope amendment to IFRS 10 and IAS 28: Investment Entities

Date recorded:

The project manager introduced the agenda paper saying that it summarised all due process steps taken in the project. He asked whether the IASB was satisfied that all necessary due process steps were taken. The Board agreed.

He continued asking whether any Board members intended to dissent from the exposure draft. One Board member was unsure whether she would dissent. She said it depended on the issue about investment entity subsidiaries that also provided investment-related services. It was important to her that the exposure draft would not answer a specific question but explain what the basis was. She said, however, that she needed to look at the wording first.

Another Board member said he would probably not dissent but he wanted to mention that he had been uncomfortable throughout the discussions. He thought that the exposure draft was not consistent with the Board’s discussions in September 2012. He said that he would need to look at the entire package before making a decision.

One Board member said that she was not supportive at the beginning of the project but said that on reflection of the decisions that were made before the original amendments she saw that the Board had explicitly discussed that issue and she had not dissented at that time. She said that consistent with her decision back then she would not dissent this time either.

The project manager asked whether the Board agreed with the retrospective application of the proposed amendments and that no exemption is required for entities that adopt IFRSs for the first time. The Board agreed.

The project manager asked whether the IASB agreed with the proposed timetable to start balloting by the end of April and publish the exposure draft by the end of June.

The project manager asked the Board whether they agreed with the proposed comment period of no less than 90 days. The Director of Implementation Activities added that it would probably be more than 90 days with regard to the holiday season of the Northern hemisphere. Nonetheless, the intention was to have a comment period that is as short as possible. The Board agreed.

Correction list for hyphenation

These words serve as exceptions. Once entered, they are only hyphenated at the specified hyphenation points. Each word should be on a separate line.