June

Charity Commission and OSCR consult on revisions to Charities SORPs as a result of changes to UK Accounting Standards

18 Jun, 2015

The Charity Commission for England and Wales (‘Charity Commission’) and the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) have today published an Exposure Draft on further revisions to the Charities Statement of Recommended Practice (SORPs) as a result of changes to UK Accounting Standards that are planned to come into effect for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2016.

SORPS issued by the Charity Commission and OSCR apply to charities preparing accounts under UK GAAP to present a ‘true and fair view’ and are intended to supplement accounting standards and other legal and regulatory requirements to reflect transactions or circumstances that are unique within the charities sector. 

In June 2014, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) approved two new Charities SORPS for publication; one set out the accounting and reporting requirements of charities in the context of Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 102 The Financial Reporting Standard applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland (“Charities SORP (FRS 102)) and the other was a separate SORP based upon the Financial Reporting Standard for Smaller Entities (FRSSE) (“Charities SORP (FRSSE)).

As a result the UK implementation of the EU Accounting Directive, the FRC, in February 2015, published three financial reporting exposure drafts proposing changes to the existing UK financial reporting framework to take effect for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2016.  As SORPS are required to be updated to comply with changes to accounting Standards, these proposed changes have a direct impact on the Charities SORPS. 

The Charity Commission and the OSCR are consulting on three areas that affect the Charites SORPS:

  • Charities SORP (FRS 102).  The consultation proposes to update the Charities SORP (FRS 102) for changes arising from Financial Reporting Exposure Draft (FRED) 59 - Draft amendments to FRS 102 The Financial Reporting Standard applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland – Small entities and other minor amendments issued by the FRC in February 2015.
  • Revising the definition of a ‘larger’ charity.  The Charities Act 2011 (Accounts and Audit) Order 2015 increased the charity audit income threshold from £500,000 to £1 million in England and Wales.  Larger charities are required to make more disclosures in the Trustees’ Annual Report.  The Charity Commission and the OSCR are proposing to ‘delink’ the definition of larger charities in Appendix 1: Glossary of Terms in the Charities SORP (FRS 102) from the new statutory audit threshold with effect for reporting periods ending on or after 31 March 2015.  This would mean that ‘larger charities’ would be those as defined in Appendix 1: Glossary of Terms in the Charities SORP (FRS 102) (those charities with a gross income of £500,000 (UK) or 500,000 Euros (Republic of Ireland)) rather than as newly defined for statutory audit purposes when preparing the Trustees’ Annual Report.  The consultation explains the reasons why this is proposed including the ability to future proof the SORP for any further changes to statutory audit thresholds and to preserve the current level of accountability that large charities have. 

The Charity Commission and the OSCR are aware that further changes might be required to the Charities SORP (FRS 102) if the FRC makes further changes in finalising FRED 59.  These changes are proposed to be included within an ‘Update Bulletin’ to the Charities SORP (FRS 102) rather than reissuing the Charities SORP (FRS 102).  As a result Charities following the Charities SORP (FRS 102) will have to refer both to the ‘Updated Bulletin’ and the Charities SORP (FRS 102) when preparing their accounts and reports. 

  • Replacement for the Charities SORP (FRSSE).  As a result of proposals in FRED 60 Draft amendments to FRS 100 Application of Financial Reporting Requirements and FRS 101 Reduced Disclosure Framework, the FRSSE will be replaced by a new section within FRS 102 (Section 1A Small Entities – the proposed framework of which is proposed in FRED 59) which will set out the revised presentation and disclosure requirements for financial reporting by small entities.  This means that the Charities SORP (FRSSE) will no longer be applicable for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2016.  The Charity Commission and the OSCR are consulting on possible ways to respond to the withdrawal of the FRSSE from 1 January 2016.  The Charity Commission and OSCR are proposing:
    • That all charities use the Charities SORP (FRS 102) for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2016.  This would effectively disapply the small entities regime option included within Section 1A of FRED 59.  The Charity Commission and the OSCR comment that “dropping the ‘small entity regime option’ would unify the reporting framework and provide to donors and users of the accounts a common presentation of financial information”
    • That only those ‘larger charities’ (i.e. those that meet the SORP definition of large as noted above) are required to prepare a cash flow statement.

Comments on the consultation are invited until 18 September 2015.  The Charity Commission and the OSCR anticipate that the Update Bulletin will be published late February or early March 2016. The Update bulletin will be published on the dedicated micro-site once it has gained the necessary approval from the FRC.

Click for:

IASB proposes amendments to IAS 19 and IFRIC 14 on pension accounting

18 Jun, 2015

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has published an Exposure Draft (ED) of proposed amendments to IAS 19 'Employee Benefits' and IFRIC 14 'IAS 19 – The Limit on a Defined Benefit Asset, Minimum Funding Requirements and their Interaction'. The amendments address two issues submitted to the IFRS Interpretations Committee. Comments are requested by 19 October 2015.

 

Background

Requests were submitted to the IFRS Interpretations Committee to clarify:

  • the calculation of current service cost and net interest when an entity remeasures the net defined benefit liability (asset) when a plan amendment, curtailment or settlement occurs; and
  • whether a trustee's power to augment benefits or to wind up a plan affects the employer's unconditional right to a refund and thus, in accordance with IFRIC 14, restricts recognition of an asset.

As both issues relate to IAS 19 and as the IASB believes that a single package of amendments carried out at the same time would reduce the administrative burden on those responding to both issues, the IASB decided to deal with the two issues in one narrow-scope Exposure Draft.

 

Suggested changes

The amendments proposed in ED/2015/5 Remeasurement on a Plan Amendment, Curtailment or Settlement/Availability of a Refund from a Defined Benefit Plan (Proposed amendments to IAS 19 and IFRIC 14) are:

Remeasurement on a plan amendment, curtailment or settlement

The IASB proposes:

  • When the net defined benefit liability or asset is remeasured on a plan amendment, curtailment or settlement, the current service cost and the net interest for the period after the remeasurement are determined using the assumptions used for the remeasurement.
  • The net interest for the remaining period is determined based on the remeasured net defined benefit liability or asset.
  • The current service cost and the net interest in the current reporting period before a plan amendment, curtailment or settlement are not affected by the past service cost or a gain or loss on settlement.
  • These amendments should be applied retrospectively, but the IASB proposes providing an exemption for adjustments of the carrying amount of assets outside the scope of IAS 19.

Availability of a refund from a defined benefit plan

The IASB proposes:

  • When an entity determines the availability of a refund from a defined benefit plan, amounts that other parties can use for other purposes are not included in the amount of the surplus that an entity recognises as an asset on the basis of a future refund.
  • A gradual settlement should not be assumed if other parties can wind up the plan without the entity's consent.
  • The availability of a refund is not affected by other parties' power to make investment decisions without changing the benefits for plan members.
  • When an entity determines the availability of a refund and a reduction in future contributions, the entity takes into account the statutory requirements that are substantively enacted as well as constructive obligations and terms and conditions that have been contractually agreed.
  • Regarding the interaction between the asset ceiling and the past service cost or a gain or loss on settlement, IAS 19 shall clarify that the past service cost or a gain or loss on settlement is measured and recognised in profit or loss in accordance with the existing requirements in IAS 19 and changes in the effect of the asset ceiling are recognised in other comprehensive income.

 

Effective date and transition requirements

The ED does not contain a proposed effective date. However, the ED proposes that the amendments would be applied retrospectively and that early application should be permitted.

 

Additional information

Please click for:

 

FRC publishes ‘Key Facts and Trends in the Accountancy Profession’

18 Jun, 2015

The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) has published the thirteenth edition of its annual ‘Key Facts and Trends in the Accountancy Profession’ publication (“the publication”).

The publication provides key data on the accountancy profession, its member bodies and practising firms.  The publication illustrates the size and shape of the accountancy profession and shows how it has evolved over recent years.  It brings together information about the major audit firms and seven accountancy bodies including both those who offer audit qualifications and those who register and supervise audit firms.

The publication includes:

  • information related to membership, students, income, costs and staffing of the seven accountancy bodies;
  • information related to the supervision of statutory auditors; and
  • information on 31 of the largest registered audit firms which collectively audit the “vast majority” of UK listed companies and other public interest entities.  This information was provided voluntarily by such firms.

 The FRC press release and full publication are available on the FRC website.

IFRS Foundation publishes teaching material for education initiative

17 Jun, 2015

The IFRS Foundation has published the third part of its comprehensive, framework-based IFRS teaching material for its education initiative. The material is free to download and is designed to enhance educators’ teaching about IFRSs and to help students develop their abilities to make the necessary estimates and judgments when applying IFRSs and the IFRS for SMEs.

The material covers the accounting for liabilities, classification of financial instruments with characteristics of equity, forward contracts, and financial assets and liabilities. In addition, the material is presented in three stages to ac­com­mo­date students at different levels:

  • Stage 1 — A student’s first financial reporting course.
  • Stage 2 — A financial reporting course midway to qual­i­fy­ing as a CA or CPA.
  • Stage 3 — A course im­me­di­ately before qual­i­fy­ing as a CA or CPA.

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

IFRS Foundation publishes proposal related to IFRS Taxonomy 2015

17 Jun, 2015

The IFRS Foundation has published “Proposed Update 1 to the IFRS Taxonomy” for public comment.

The taxonomy updates contain additional taxonomy concepts that reflect new IFRSs and improvements to IFRSs, technical updates, and corrections.

Comments on the proposed update are due by 17 August 2015.

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

IASB completes post-implementation review of IFRS 3

17 Jun, 2015

The IASB has completed its post-implementation review (PIR) of IFRS 3 'Business Combinations'. The review concluded that there is general support for IFRS 3 and its related Standards; however, there are several aspects where additional research is needed.

The PIR report assessed in­for­ma­tion gathered from academic lit­er­a­ture as well as feedback from (1) investors and other financial statement users and (2) preparers, auditors, and reg­u­la­tors. It showed general support for the “usefulness of reported goodwill, other intangible assets and goodwill impairment.” However, views were mixed on certain elements of the standard, including the following:

For investors

  • Subsequent accounting for goodwill.
  • Separate recognition of intangible assets.
  • Measurement of non-controlling interests
  • Subsequent accounting for contingent consideration.

For preparers, auditors, and regulators

  • Definition of a business.
  • Fair value measurement.
  • Impairment test for goodwill.
  • Contingent payments to selling shareholders who become employees.

The area of amortisation of goodwill was recently covered in a research paper by the Accounting Standards Board of Japan (ASBJ) and an earlier discussion paper by a joint-research group which included the ASBJ, EFRAG, and OIC to provide their observations on the topic in order to stimulate a global discussion.

On the basis of the PIR report, the IASB added to its agenda two research projects that will focus on:

  • Effectiveness and complexity of testing goodwill for impairment.
  • Subsequent accounting for goodwill.
  • Challenges related to applying the definition of a business.
  • Identification and fair value measurement of intangible assets such as customer relationships and brand names.

For more information, see the press release and the PIR report on the IASB’s website. In addition, see our project page on the PIR of IFRS 3.

ICAEW comment letter on FRED 61 ‘Draft amendments to FRS 102 – Share-based payment transactions with cash alternatives’

16 Jun, 2015

The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) has published its comment letter on the Financial Reporting Council’s (FRC’s) Financial Reporting Exposure Draft (FRED) 61 ‘Draft amendments to FRS 102 – Share-based payment transactions with cash alternatives’.

FRED 61 proposes a narrow scope amendment to clarify and simplify the accounting for share and share option awards where a cash settlement alternative exists.  It seeks to amend paragraph 26.15 of Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 102 The Financial Reporting Standard applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland to:

align the requirements in FRS 102 with full IFRS and previous UK and Irish GAAP in cases where the entity can choose to settle in cash or equity;

retain the current requirements of FRS 102 to recognise a liability where the recipient can require settlement in cash; and

generalise the requirements to include those cases where the settlement method is dependent on an external event. 

The ICAEW “broadly” supports the proposals commenting that the proposed changes “will ensure greater consistency between the requirements of FRS 102 and those of FRS 20 and IFRS 2”.  However the ICAEW does express some concerns over the proposal to expand the scope of paragraph 26.15 so that it covers all share-based payment transactions with uncertain settlement methods commenting that this “could make FRS 102 more prescriptive than IFRS 2” and may not achieve the “most appropriate accounting treatment” for such arrangements.

Further comments and a full response to all questions raised in the invitation to comment are contained within the full comment letter which is available on the ICAEW website.

EFRAG to hold a Board meeting in June 2015

16 Jun, 2015

The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) will hold a Board meeting on 24 June 2015 in Brussels.

An agenda with supporting papers and details on how to register for the public meeting can be found on the EFRAG website.

EFRAG suggests public review of the forthcoming standard on leases

16 Jun, 2015

European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) has sent a letter to the IASB requesting a public fatal flaw review of the forthcoming leases standard to ensure that constituents understand the requirements and how to apply them.

In September 2014, EFRAG had called for amending the IASB’s consultation process by adding a public fatal flaw review prior to finalisation of a standard or a major amendment to a standard. This time EFRAG is solely suggesting to have this public fatal flaw for the leases standard. The IASB at times uses the tool of fatal flaw reviews, and EFRAG feels such a review is warranted this time as “ the IASB has put significant redrafting effort into the final standard, especially with respect to the definition, since the last public consultation”. As a consequence of the substantial changes to the definition, EFRAG fears that preparers may be confused and not necessarily understand the scope of the new requirements. EFRAG argues:

[U]nless entities are able to properly understand and apply the definition of a lease and the other requirements in the standard, there will be a significant and wasteful use of time debating possible interpretations, which will lead to a real risk of divergent application.

Please click to access the letter on the EFRAG website.

The Bruce Column — Taking corporate reporting to a higher level

16 Jun, 2015

The recent gathering of the UK Integrated Reporting Business Network emphasised how far the reporting system had progressed and how it was promoting stewardship and longer-term value creation in capital markets. Our resident, regular, columnist Robert Bruce provides an update.

Throughout its relatively short life the concept of integrated reporting has been up against the idea that it is somehow a fad, a fashion, potentially short-lived, and somehow its time will pass. But the latest meeting of the UK <IR> Business Network emphatically put this to bed. And strong support came from both the business end, the companies involved, and investors. Behind the anonymity of Chatham House rules they said that integrated reporting is here to stay and that it was an irreversible process. And in his speech to open the meeting of the International Integrated Reporting Council Stephen Haddrill, CEO at the UK’s Financial Reporting Council, reminded his audience that only a few years ago there had been doubt and scepticism and while it had not disappeared entirely, ‘amongst investors and many others the story is changing’.

This is the narrative behind the growth and credibility of integrated reporting. As Haddrill pointed out positive change is being created. Investor stewardship is stronger. Companies are responding with a strong narrative which in turn helps create a strong investor base and companies see the need to look to the future in their reporting. Integrated reporting created an environment, in Haddrill’s words: ‘in which cynicism about reporting could give way to innovation’.

As speaker after speaker made plain integrated reporting helps companies demonstrate the authenticity and agility that investors want. Investors want to feel what is being communicated is authentic so that they can trust management and information included in the annual report. They want to see clear targets and if targets are not met or mistakes are made, then companies can admit them and change, explaining what they have done as a result. Investors want to see the agility that means that the business model can respond to change

Chairing the business network meeting, Veronica Poole, Deloitte’s UK National Head of Accounting and Corporate Reporting, likened the annual report to the facade of a building. The business itself is behind the façade. It is not enough to just tell a nicely connected story. That story needs to represent what happens in that building itself. And what needs to happen there is integrated thinking. That is what differentiates integrated reporting. In a truly integrated world integrated reporting is an output of integrated thinking and behaviour.

And this theme came across strongly from business participants. They talked about how the process of bringing people together from all the different parts and disciplines within a business and enabling them to challenge each other brought about a much greater internal understanding of the realities and possibilities which go into forming a corporate strategy. It allowed questions of how the business creates value to be debated and answered right across their particular business spectrum. And this created a forum in which mistakes could be admitted and change instituted. All this in turn was seen to benefit the organisation through thinking differently, thinking in a connected way: better information, better understanding, and greater coherence of strategy.

Participants talked of how conversations could flow through the organisations. Integrated reporting improved data for management and board decisions. But it worked right across an organisation. If the conversation created by integrated reporting moves from executives to the board and is then transferred into public statements it becomes a powerful tool to communicate. For example, there was better employee understanding of how they contribute to achieving the business strategy. But once again the benefits were not just communication.  There was huge value in having CFOs and CEOs looking at broader non-financial data. Bringing non-financial data and information onto the board’s agenda helps them understand how agile and sustainable their business is in the long-term.

It was later pointed out how important the chairman of the organisation was in this process. With CEOs and CFOs having a life expectancy in post of between three and four years the engagement of the chairman in active support of integrated reporting was seen as vital to the embedding of the process. It was back to the old mantra of tone from the top.

The question of assurance and the credibility of information created under integrated reporting was also raised. There was a natural desire for assurance but companies were holding back. Integrated reporting is still at a point in its development where no one wanted a hard and fast regulatory process to stifle development. The feeling was that for integrated reporting to be successful the process should be market-led, more innovation rather than standardisation.

Participants felt that many challenges remained. There was the question of materiality and how to address the clutter in financial statements, the current lack of rigour around the definition of non-financial KPIs, and the danger of inconsistency of definition year-on-year leading to data becoming meaningless and, of course, the nervousness around forward-looking information.

But overall the message was one of enthusiasm and momentum.

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.