Agenda papers for this meeting are available on the IFRS Foundation's website.

The IASB will meet in London on 22-25 April 2024. The following topics are on the agenda:

Post-implementation review (PIR) of IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers: The IASB will analyse the feedback related to the interaction of IFRS 15 with other IFRS standards. The IASB will also further discuss the feedback on “determining the transaction price”.

Work plan: The IASB will discuss a proposed prioritisation framework to help it consistently prioritise technical projects on its work plan. This is intended to balance capacity demand with supply and enable effective execution of the IASB’s mission.

Rate-regulated activities: The IASB will continue to redeliberate the proposals in the exposure draft Regulatory Assets and Regulatory Liabilities on the discount rate, the scope of the new standard in relation to IFRS 17 and consequential amendments to IFRS 3 and IFRS 5.

Maintenance and consistent application: IASB members will be asked whether they object to two agenda decisions finalised by the IFRS Interpretations Committee and the staff will present the latest IFRIC Update.

Climate-related and other uncertainties in the financial statements: The staff will ask the IASB whether it agrees that IFRS Accounting Standards should provide illustrative examples of reporting climate-related and other uncertainties on the financial statements and whether it gives permission to begin balloting the exposure draft for those examples.

Intangible assets: The IASB will be asked to make the intangible assets project active. It will also discuss the initial work the staff will undertake.

Provisions—targeted improvements: The IASB will be asked to decide whether and how to amend certain definitions in IAS 37. It will also decide whether to add requirements and application guidance to IAS 37.

PIR of IFRS 9—impairment: The IASB will deliberate the feedback received in response to its request for information Post-implementation Review—IFRS 9 Financial Instruments—Impairment with regard to loan commitments and financial guarantee contracts, purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets, and interaction of the impairment requirements with other requirements.

Second comprehensive review of the IFRS for SMEs Accounting Standard: The IASB will continue the redeliberations of its proposals in the exposure draft Third edition of the IFRS for SMEs Accounting Standard. In particular, the IASB will make decisions on disclosure requirements on revenue, whether to use plainer language in the new fair value section and whether to include intragroup issued financial guarantee contracts in the scope of the section on provisions and contingencies.

Updating the Subsidiaries without Public Accountability: Disclosures Standard: The IASB will be asked to agree on the effective date and transition requirements for the catch-up exposure draft (ED), which proposes amendments to the forthcoming IFRS 19 Subsidiaries without Public Accountability: Disclosures. The staff will also ask for permission to ballot the catch-up ED.

Cover paper (Agenda Paper 30)

In September 2022, the IASB published exposure draft Third edition of the IFRS for SMEs Accounting Standard (ED). The ED was open for comment for 180 days, until 7 March 2023.

At the April 2024 IASB meeting, the IASB will continue its redeliberations of the proposals in the ED.

Proposed revised Section 23 Revenue from Contracts with Customers—Disclosure requirements (Agenda Paper 30A)

The purpose of this paper is for the IASB to consider feedback received in the ED with regards to revenue disclosure requirements and differences between the proposed requirements and the disclosure requirements for revenue in the forthcoming IFRS 19 to decide whether to change the proposed requirements.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB should:

• remove the requirement for an SME to disclose revenue disaggregated into categories and instead require showing separately, revenue arising from the sale of goods, the rendering of services, royalties, commissions and any other significant types of revenue from contracts with customers;
• withdraw the requirement for an SME to disclose revenue recognised in the reporting period from promises satisfied or partially satisfied in previous periods;
• withdraw the requirement for an SME to disclose the amount of amortisation and impairment losses recognised for assets recognised from the costs incurred to fulfil a contract in the reporting period;
• withdraw the requirement for an SME to provide a quantitative or qualitative explanation of the significance of unsatisfied promises and when they are expected to be satisfied;
• require an SME to disclose a description of the nature of the goods or services that it has promised to transfer, highlighting any promises to arrange for another party to transfer goods or services;
• require an SME to explain the judgements that have a significant effect on the amounts recognised in its financial statements used in determining the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to the promises identified in the contract; and
• remove the requirement for an SME to separately disclose receivables arising from accrued income not yet billed.

Proposed new Section 12 Fair Value Measurement—use of plainer language (Agenda Paper 30B)

The purpose of this paper is to ask the IASB to consider how itmight use plainer language to express the requirements in the new and revised sections of the standard using Section 12 Fair Value Measurement as an illustration.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB should:

• consider whether plainer language can be used to express requirements in new and revised sections during drafting of the third edition of the standard; and
• include the IFRS 13 definition of ‘highest and best use’ in the new Section 12.

Intragroup issued financial guarantee contracts (Agenda Paper 30C)

The purpose of this paper is to ask the IASB to consider feedback received in response to the ED and decide whether to make any changes to the proposed requirements for intragroup issued financial guarantee contracts.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that intragroup financial guarantee contracts that are issued at a zero-premium are included in the scope of Section 21 Provisions and Contingencies.

Cover paper (Agenda Paper 14)

In this paper, the staff sets out the objective of the session, which is to explore targeted actions to improve the reporting of climate-related and other uncertainties in the financial statements.

Project direction (Agenda Paper 14A)

In this paper, the staff summarises the main comments from the IASB and members of the Accounting Standards Advisory Forum (ASAF) on the previous actions to:

• explore the development of illustrative examples of reporting the effects of climate-related and other uncertainties in the financial statements; and
• explore standard-setting to clarify or enhance existing requirements in IFRS Accounting Standards.

The staff recommends that the IASB provides illustrative examples accompanying IFRS Accounting Standards. The IASB will be asked if they agree with the staff recommendation to:

• provide examples illustrating how to apply requirements in IFRS Accounting Standards to report the effects of climate-related and other uncertainties in the financial statements;
• include the examples as illustrative examples accompanying IFRS Accounting Standards; and
• consult on these proposals through an exposure draft (ED).

Due process and permission to begin the balloting process (Agenda Paper 14B)

In this paper, the staff sets out their analysis regarding the transition and effective date for the illustrative examples proposed in Agenda Paper 14A. The staff concludes that illustrative examples do not have an effective date or transition requirements in accordance with the Due Process Handbook.

The staff also outlines the due process steps for the publication of an ED and will ask the IASB:

• whether it agrees with the recommendation to allow a comment period of 120 days for the ED;
• whether any IASB member intends to dissent from the proposals in the ED; and
• whether it is satisfied that it has complied with the applicable due process steps and that the staff should begin the process for balloting the ED?

Development of examples (Agenda Paper 14C)

This paper was presented as Agenda Paper 14A in the March 2024 meeting. The purpose of this paper is to explain the approach the staff have taken to develop examples illustrating how to apply requirements in IFRS Accounting Standards to report the effects of climate-related and other uncertainties in financial statements. This paper also explains the staff’s view on the best vehicle for these examples (that is, the best manner in which to communicate the examples to stakeholders).

Staff draft examples (Agenda Paper 14D)

This paper was presented as Agenda Paper 14B in the March 2024 meeting. This paper contains the staff's draft examples to illustrate how to apply IFRS Accounting Standards to report the effects of climate-related and other uncertainties in the financial statements. Agenda Paper 14C explains the approach the staff took to develop the examples.

Cover paper (Agenda Paper 21)

The purpose of this session was to ask the IASB to make active the intangible assets project and discuss the initial work the staff will undertake. The IASB was not asked to make any decisions in this meeting. This project will move from the research project pipeline to the research work plan.

Summary of national standard-setter research (Agenda Paper 17A)

This paper summarised the recent search performed by national standard-setters (NSS) on the topic of intangible assets.

The NSS research highlighted a range of stakeholder concerns about accounting for intangible items applying IAS 38. In particular, a concern that the financial statements do not provide sufficient information about unrecognised internally generated intangible assets and hence do not reflect key value drivers of the business. The staff identified mixed views on how to remediate this concern and whether the focus should be on recognition of more internally generated intangible assets or improving the requirements to disclose information about unrecognised internally generated intangible assets. Many stakeholders also highlighted the inconsistency between accounting requirements for acquired and internally generated intangible assets and the effect this inconsistency on comparability. Lastly, the search performed indicated there are requests for consistent terminology to be used.

The staff asked whether the IASB members have any comments or questions on the summary of NSS research.

IASB discussion

IASB members expressed gratitude to the NSS. Many IASB members believe that the starting point of the project should focus on what the problems are that the IASB is trying to solve. One IASB member asked for more information on why intangible assets are one of the most frequent key audit matters and to isolate whether the challenge is in respect of the requirements of the standard or the difficulties in the application of the standard. Some IASB members said the focus should be on ensuring the comparability and reliability of financial statements as they progress through this project. Most of the IASB members said that a common theme from the research is the importance of disclosure and asked whether the IASB can take on a short-term project on disclosures of intangible assets. Other IASB members expressed concerns with this approach as they believed this can result in a duplication of effort if disclosure requirements are developed before recognition and measurement requirements. One IASB member asked whether the staff could consider different phases for the different types of intangibles items. The staff had considered this but expressed concerns regarding the practicality of this approach. IASB members agreed that the research highlighted a contrast in information that is important to users versus preparers. Some IASB members suggested that the staff perform further research to identify best practice disclosures in relation to intangible items available in the market to inform the direction of this project.

Academic literature review (Agenda Paper 17B)

This paper summarised evidence from academic papers on topics the IASB might explore in its project on intangible assets. This review does not include academic papers on the topic of goodwill because these have been covered in the business combinations—disclosures, goodwill and impairment project and the IASB has not decided to what extent, if any, goodwill will be part of a project on intangible assets.

Some academic papers showed that financial statements may not capture the full value of internally generated intangible assets, suggesting a need for modification of accounting standards. While other academic papers showed that changes to current accounting standards may not be necessary because the income statement provides information about unrecognised internally generated intangible assets. There is consensus about improving information disclosed, either by amending disclosure requirements or providing guidance about the disclosure of voluntary information.

The staff asked whether IASB members have any comments or questions on the academic research presented. 

IASB discussion

One IASB member observed that the academic research showed that current disclosures around intangible items do not have all the information that stakeholders would require. Another IASB member echoed this observation and considered that users of the financial statements are interested in information from the intangible assets recognised (i.e. amortisation and impairment) rather than which intangible items are included in goodwill. One IASB member observed that research showed that stakeholders did not believe that not having physical substance is an important characteristic of intangible item. One IASB member highlighted considerations around remeasurement of certain types of intangible assets such as cryptocurrency and whether those remeasurement gains or losses should be recognised in other comprehensive income.

Project commencement (Agenda Paper 17C)

This purpose of this paper was to provide the IASB with an overview of the initial work the staff plan to undertake in the intangible assets project.  

Based on the research conducted, the staff have identified topics that the IASB might explore in the project. These include:

• Scope
• Definition of intangible assets
• Recognition
• Measurement
• Disclosure

The staff considered three project approaches, “all-in-one”, “early evaluation” or “phased” approach. The “all-in-one” approach would consider all topics identified by stakeholders,  While the “early evaluation” approach would require the IASB to assign priorities to the topics identified by the stakeholders and the staff would only explore topics that meet a specified threshold. Lastly, the ‘phased’ approach would require the IASB to focus on one topic at a time and other topics are explored and consulted upon separately.

The staff asked whether the IASB members have any comments or questions on the staff’s plan for initial research on the scope of the project and how best to stage the work.

IASB discussion

Most IASB members agreed that they should consider what the issues are that the IASB is trying to solve before deciding on the scope of the project. Thereafter, the IASB can consider the approaches to address the problems. One IASB member highlighted that throughout this project, the IASB should also be cognisant of the impact on interim financial statements. Another IASB member said that if the project will address recognition and measurement concerns, the starting point should be the Conceptual Framework.

Cover note (Agenda Paper 9)

In this session, the IASB will continue to redeliberate the proposals in the Exposure Draft Regulatory Assets and Regulatory Liabilities (ED).

Discounting of future cash flows—Minimum interest rate (Agenda Paper 9A)

This paper sets out the staff analysis and recommendations on the proposals in the ED dealing with the minimum interest rate.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the final standard:

• retains the proposals in paragraphs 50-52 of the ED that requires an entity to assess whether there is any indication that the regulatory interest rate for a regulatory asset may be insufficient and to use the minimum interest rate as the discount rate if it is higher than that regulatory interest rate (Recommendation 1);
• clarifies in the application guidance that an entity performing the assessment in Recommendation 1 need not calculate the minimum interest rate for that regulatory asset or undertake an exhaustive search for indications (Recommendation 2);
• retains the proposal in paragraph 53 of the ED that requires an entity to use the regulatory interest rate as the discount rate for a regulatory liability in all circumstances (Recommendation 3);
• provides guidance on the estimation of the minimum interest rate that incorporates the principles used in other IFRS standards (Recommendation 4);
• exempts an entity from applying the proposed requirements on minimum interest rate to a regulatory asset that arises from variances between estimated and actual costs or volume—the entity would apply the proposals once the regulator determines the final variance balance to be included in future regulated rates (Recommendation 5); and
• requires an entity that elects to apply the exemption in Recommendation 5 to disclose this fact and the carrying amount of regulatory assets at the end of the reporting period to which the entity has applied this exemption (Recommendation 6).

Scope—Interaction with IFRS 17 (Agenda Paper 9B)

This paper sets out the staff’s analysis and recommendations on whether the scope of the final standard should exclude regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities that might arise when premiums charged in insurance contracts within the scope of IFRS 17 are regulated.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the final standard excludes regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities that might arise when premiums charged in insurance contracts within the scope of IFRS 17 are regulated.

Amendments to IFRS 3 and IFRS 5 (Agenda Paper 9C)

This paper includes the staff’s analysis and recommendations in relation to the amendments to IFRS 3 and IFRS 5 proposed in the ED.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the final standard retains the proposal to:

• create an exception to the recognition and measurement principles in IFRS 3 for regulatory assets acquired and regulatory liabilities assumed; and
• exclude regulatory assets from the scope of IFRS 5.

Cover note (Agenda Paper 27)

In this meeting, the IASB will deliberate the feedback received in response to its request for information (RFI) Post-implementation Review—IFRS 9 Financial Instruments—Impairment. The deliberation will be focused on three topics: loan commitments and financial guarantee contracts (FGCs), purchased or originated credit-impaired (POCI) financial assets, and interaction of impairment requirements in IFRS 9 with other requirements.

Loan commitments and financial guarantee contracts (Agenda Paper 27A)

This paper summarises the staff analysis on the feedback received in response to the RFI on application questions about loan commitments and FGCs.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB does not take any action on the matters raised by respondents about loan commitments whereas classify as low priority the matters raised by respondents about FGCs and consider these matters in next agenda consultation.

Purchased or originated credit-impairment financial assets (Agenda Paper 27B)

This paper summarises the staff analysis on the feedback received in response to the RFI on the application of the impairment requirements in IFRS 9 to POCI financial assets.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB does not take any further action on the matters raised by respondents.

Interaction of impairment requirements with other requirements (Agenda Paper 27C)

This paper summarises the staff analysis on the feedback received in response to the RFI on the interaction between the impairment requirements under IFRS 9 and the other requirements, specifically, relating to modifications, derecognition (including forgiveness), and write-off of financial assets under IFRS 9 and the requirements in other IFRS standards.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB does not take any further action on the matters identified regarding the interaction between the impairment requirements and the other requirements in IFRS 9 or the requirements in other IFRS standards.

Cover paper (Agenda Paper 6)

The comment period for the request for information Post-implementation Review—IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers (IFRS 15 RFI) ended on 27 October 2023.

This paper introduces the papers for this meeting and provides a reminder of the IASB’s framework for deciding whether and when to take further action in response to specific application matters.

Applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 9 (Agenda Paper 6A)

This paper summarises the feedback, staff analysis and staff recommendations on matters related to the interaction of IFRS 15 with IFRS 9 raised by respondents on Question 9 of IFRS 15 RFI and Question 7 of the IASB’s request for information Post-implementation Review—IFRS 9 Financial Instruments—Impairment (IFRS 9 RFI).

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB take no further action on application matters related to:

• accounting for price reductions;
• accounting for liabilities arising from IFRS 15; and
• other aspects of applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 9 described in Appendix A of the paper.

Applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 3 (Agenda Paper 6B)

This paper summarises the feedback, staff analysis and staff recommendations on matters related to applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 3 that were raised by respondents in response to Question 9 of the IFRS 15 RFI.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB take no further action on application matters related to:

• measurement of contract assets and contract liabilities acquired as part of a business combination; and
• other aspects of applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 3 described in Appendix A of the paper.

Applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 10 and IFRS 11 (Agenda Paper 6C)

In March 2023, the IASB tentatively decided to assess demand for resolving matters related to the interaction between IFRS 15 and IFRS 10 and IFRS 11 in the next agenda consultation. The issue is that when an entity holds a single asset (i.e. a corporate wrapper), should the sale of that entity (subsidiary) follow the requirements in IFRS 10 or IFRS 15? This paper provides a summary of respondents’ feedback related to the application of IFRS 15 with IFRS 10 and IFRS 11, a reminder of the March 2023 IASB discussion, and asks whether IASB wishes to reconsider March 2023 tentative decision to consider the priority of the matters related to applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 10 and IFRS 11 in the next agenda consultation rather than as part of this PIR.

Applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 16 (Agenda Paper 6D)

This paper summarises the feedback, staff analysis and staff recommendations on matters related to applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 16 that were raised by respondents in response to Question 9 of the IFRS 15 RFI.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB:

• take no further action on application matters raised by respondents in relation to:
  • accounting for contracts that contain lease and non-lease components; and
  • other aspects of applying IFRS 15 with IFRS 16 described in Appendix A of the paper; and
• gather further evidence in the forthcoming PIR of IFRS 16 on the application matters related to assessing whether the transfer of an asset is a sale in sale and leaseback transactions.

Applying IFRS 15 with other IFRS Accounting Standards (Agenda Paper 6E)

This paper summarises the feedback, staff analysis and staff recommendations on matters related to applying IFRS 15 with IFRIC 12 and other IFRS standards except for those covered in the previous agenda papers that were raised by respondents in response to Question 9 of the IFRS 15 RFI.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB:

• classify as low priority the matter related to applying IFRIC 12 requirements on contractual obligations to maintain or restore service concession infrastructure; and
• take no further action on the matters related to applying IFRS 15 with IFRIC 12 and other IFRS standards included in Appendix A of the paper.

Determining the transaction price—consideration payable to a customer and significant financing component (Agenda Paper 6F)

In its March 2024 meeting, the IASB made decisions on application matters raised in relation to variable consideration, sales-based taxes and non-cash consideration, and discussed the staff’s preliminary analysis of the feedback related to consideration payable to a customer. This paper provides a summary of the feedback, staff analysis and staff recommendations on application matters related to considerations payable to a customer updated for comments made by IASB and the Accounting Standards Advisory Forum (ASAF) at their March 2024 meetings and for significant financing components in response to Question 3 ‘determining the transaction price’ in the IFRS 15 RFI.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB:

• classify as low priority the matters related to consideration payable to a customer; and
• take no further action on application matters raised by respondents in relation to:
  • the discount rate for contracts with a significant financing component; and
  • other aspects of requirements on significant financing components included in Appendix A of the paper.

Cover note (Agenda Paper 22)

The IASB is developing proposals for targeted amendments to IAS 37.

The purpose of this meeting is to ask the IASB to decide whether and how to propose:

• to amend the definition of a liability and requirements supporting the recognition criterion that applies that definition;
• to add requirements that would apply to costs payable if a measure of the entity's activity in a period exceeds a specified threshold;
• to add application guidance to support the discount rate requirements; and
• to add requirements to disclose information about discount rates used.

Present obligation recognition criterion (Agenda Paper 22A)

The purpose of this meeting is to ask the IASB to decide whether to propose amendments to:

• the definition of a liability applied in IAS 37;
• the wording of the recognition criterion applying that definition (the present obligation recognition criterion); and
• requirements and illustrative examples supporting that recognition criterion.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB proposes:

• to update the liability definition applied in IAS 37, and the wording of the present obligation recognition criterion, aligning them with the definition in the Conceptual Framework;
• to clarify the requirements supporting the present obligation recognition criterion by:
  • disentangling three distinct conditions within that criterion—strength, nature and timing conditions—by identifying and explaining each one separately; and
  • expanding the decision tree in the implementation guidance accompanying IAS 37 to demonstrate the process an entity could follow in determining whether to recognise a provision, disclose a contingent liability or do neither;
• to replace the existing requirements supporting the present obligation recognition criterion with new requirements based on concepts in the Conceptual Framework, and withdraw IFRIC 21;
• to improve the explanations of the application requirements for restructuring provisions, without changing those requirements;
• to add new examples to the illustrative examples accompanying IAS 37 and update the explanation of the conclusions for some of the existing examples (without changing those conclusions); and
• to not add to IAS 37 requirements relating specifically to net zero transition commitments.

Threshold-triggered costs (Agenda Paper 22B)

The purpose of this meeting is to ask the IASB to decide:

• whether to propose to add application requirements for costs payable if a measure of the entity’s activity in a period exceeds a specified threshold (threshold-triggered costs)—to clarify when an obligation for such costs becomes a present obligation; and
• if so, what requirements to propose.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB proposes:

• to add to IAS 37 application requirements for threshold-triggered costs—to clarify when an obligation for such costs becomes a present obligation;
• that a present obligation for a threshold-triggered cost arises as the entity performs the activity that contributes to the total amount on which the cost is measured; and
• at any date within the measurement period, the amount of the present obligation is a portion of the total estimated cost for the measurement period, the portion being the amount attributable to the activity performed to date.

Discount rates—application guidance (Agenda Paper 22C)

The purpose of this meeting is to ask the IASB to decide whether to propose application guidance to support this requirement, and if so what guidance to propose.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB proposes to clarify that the time value of money reflected in the discount rate for a provision is represented by a risk-free rate but proposes no further application guidance on estimating the time value of money.

Discount rates—disclosure requirements (Agenda Paper 22D)

The purpose of this meeting is to ask the IASB to decide:

• whether to propose requirements for an entity to disclose information about the discount rate or rates it has used in measuring a provision; and
• if so, what requirements to propose.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommends that the IASB proposes to require an entity to disclose, for each class of provision, the discount rate or rates used in measuring the provision and the approach used to determine those rates.

Indicative drafting—IAS 37 (Agenda Paper 22E)

This paper contains no questions for the IASB as it only contains indicative drafting for amendments to IAS 37.

Indicative drafting—decision tree (Agenda Paper 22F)

This paper contains no questions for the IASB as it only contains indicative drafting for a decision tree to accompany IAS 37.

Cover paper (Agenda Paper 12)

This paper only listed the agenda papers for this session and was therefore not discussed.

Climate-related Commitments (IAS 37)—Finalisation of agenda decision (Agenda Paper 12A)

At its March 2024 meeting, the IFRS Interpretations Committee (IFRS IC) decided not to add a standard-setting project to the work plan in response to a submission asking it to clarify how IAS 37 applies to commitments an entity makes to reduce or offset its future greenhouse gas emissions (net zero transition commitments). The IFRS IC instead decided to finalise an agenda decision.

The purpose of this paper was to ask IASB members whether they object to the agenda decision.

There was no significant discussion on this paper. No IASB member objected to the agenda decision.

Note: The Due Process Oversight Committee (DPOC) received a complaint in relation to how the IFRS Interpretations Committee finalised this agenda decision. The DPOC decided at its meeting on 21 March 2024 that no breach of due process had occurred. For more information, please see Agenda Paper 2 of the March 2024 DPOC meeting on the IFRS Foundation website.

Payments Contingent on Continued Employment during Handover Periods (IFRS 3)—Finalisation of agenda decision (Agenda Paper 12B)

At its March 2024 meeting, the IFRS IC decided not to add a standard-setting project to the work plan in response to a submission about how, applying IFRS 3, an entity accounts for payments to the sellers of a business it has acquired if those payments are contingent on the sellers’ continued employment during a post-acquisition handover period. The IFRS IC instead decided to finalise an agenda decision.

The purpose of this meeting was to ask IASB members whether they object to the agenda decision.

There was no discussion on this paper. No IASB member objected to the agenda decision.

IFRIC Update March 2024 (Agenda Paper 12C)

This agenda paper reproduces the March 2024 IFRIC Update. IASB members will be invited to ask questions or give comments on the document.

There was no discussion on this paper as IASB members did not have any comments or questions on the IFRIC Update.

Effective date and transition (Agenda Paper 32A)

When the IASB developed IFRS 19, it considered issued IFRS standards as at 28 February 2021. When IFRS 19 is issued, it will not contain reduced versions of any disclosure requirements added or amended after that date. New and amended disclosure requirements introduced after 28 February 2021 will be addressed through a catch-up exposure draft (catch-up ED), applying the principles for reducing disclosures. IFRS 19 will be effective from 1 January 2027, with early application permitted. Proposed amendments to IFRS 19, which will be included in the catch-up ED, could have the same effective date as IFRS 19 (1 January 2027). The IASB may allow eligible subsidiaries to early apply the proposed amendments to IFRS 19 when they are finalised, providing simplified financial statement preparation. Until the proposed amendments to IFRS 19 are finalised, new and amended disclosure requirements would apply in full without reductions.

Staff recommendation

The staff recommended that:

• the proposed amendments to IFRS 19 have the same effective date as IFRS 19 (that is, 1 January 2027); and
• early adoption of the proposed amendments to IFRS 19 is permitted

IASB discussion

One IASB member sought clarification regarding whether an entity that chooses to early adopt IFRS 19 would be required to adopt the requirements proposed in the catch-up ED once they are finalised. The staff clarified that when an entity chooses to early adopt IFRS 19, they would still need to provide full IFRS disclosures for the topics included in the catch-up ED. However, once the requirements are finalised, early adopters will be required to apply them. Some IASB members pointed out that it should be clear that an entity cannot early adopt the amendments to IFRS 19 without early adopting IFRS 19.

IASB decision

All IASB members voted in favour of the staff recommendation.

Due process (Agenda Paper 32B)

Questions for the IASB

• Comment period—does the IASB agree with the staff recommendation to allow a comment period of 120 days for the catch-up ED?
• Dissent—does any IASB member intend to dissent from the publication of the catch-up ED?
• Permission to begin the balloting process—Is the IASB satisfied that it has complied with the applicable due process steps and that it should begin the balloting process for the catch-up ED?

IASB decision

All IASB members agreed with the staff recommendation.

Proposed IASB Prioritisation Framework (Agenda Paper 8)

The purpose of this paper is to set out a proposed prioritisation framework to help the IASB consistently prioritise technical projects on its work plan to balance capacity demand with supply and enable effective execution of the IASB’s mission.

The proposed framework consists of a base framework, with variations based on the nature of the prioritisation decision to be made and the type of project.

The proposed base framework has the following structure:

• Technical considerations:
  • Pervasiveness
  • Effects (cost-benefit analysis)
  • Feasibility of standard-setting
  • Strategic priority
• Operational considerations:
  • Time sensitivity
  • Synergies with other projects
  • Capacity (internal and external)
  • For paused projects: effort to restart

The application of the base framework will depend on the nature of the prioritisation decision and the type of project.

As a next step, the IASB will consult on the proposed framework, and subsequently finalise and implement the framework. The staff may recommend changes to the Due Process Handbook based on the framework.