In its comment letter, ESMA supports the IASB's initiative and agrees with most proposals in the EDs. However, ESMA "regrets that the ED does not provide guidance on some essential issues in financial reporting which leaves the Conceptual Framework incomplete". The two point ESMA particularly stresses are:

• According to ESMA, the ED does not include sufficient guidance on distinguishing between liability and equity. ESMA agrees with the view that the definition of a liability should be used to distinguish between liability and equity, but is concerned that the IASB has not sufficiently considered the issue yet. ESMA is also worried that dealing with this matter in a separate project might lead to subsequent changes to the definition of a liability.
• ESMA is concerned that the ED does not attempt to define performance. ESMA concludes that as a result the Conceptual Framework will include neither a clear basis for distinguishing between items that should be recognised in profit or loss and items that should be recognised in other comprehensive income (DCI), nor a principle establishing whether and when recycling is appropriate.

Please click to access the full comment letter on the ESMA website.

The alternative had been introduced by Jim Schnurr, Chief Accountant of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), at a financial reporting conference in early December 2014. At the annual American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Conference on Current SEC and PCAOB Developments a week later, Mr Schnurr and Julie Erhardt, Deputy Chief Accountant of the SEC, further discussed this possible option. Since then, little has been heard of the proposal or any other proposal or the progress regarding the rule-making process.

In his speech, Commissioner Piwowar has now pointed out an another benefit the proposal might have in addition not taking away anything from investors who currently use and like U.S. GAAP and lowering the cost of providing IFRS financial reporting for companies want to provide IFRS information:

It is difficult to gauge investor demand for financial reporting under IFRS by U.S. domestic issuers. How does one predict investor demand for IFRS reporting when it is largely not available in the domestic context? For instance, twenty years ago, it was difficult to predict the demand for “smart phones” when the product was not available to the general public. […] Our chief accountant has raised an interesting and incremental approach that should provide further insight as to whether there is investor demand for IFRS reporting. His idea – to allow, but not mandate, IFRS financial reporting as a supplement without reconciliation to GAAP – is worthy of serious consideration. […] It would provide useful data on investor demand for us to analyze. Of course, the specific details would still need to be worked out, but I think – eleven months after the idea was first broached – that the Commission should take this additional step forward.

Please click to access the full text of the speech on the SEC website.

The event is broken into three main themes: (1) employability and the economy, (2) corporate perspectives, and (3) practice and the public sector. Participation to the virtual event is free, but registration is required.

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

In its draft comment letter, EFRAG agrees the guidance proposed in the draft in­ter­pre­ta­tion will help reduce the inconsistencies in the accounting for uncertain income tax treatments when determining taxable profits, tax bases, unused tax losses, and tax rates. However, the EFRAG believes that the proposal may create an inconsistency between uncertainties in income tax treatments and those related to other types of tax or similar positions.

Comments are requested by 13 January 2016. For more information, see the press release and the draft comment letter on the EFRAG website.

This remuneration guidance sets out its members’ views on the role of shareholders and directors in relation to remuneration and the manner in which remuneration should be determined and structured.  The Principles have not been significantly amended and include only one change in relation to long-term incentives.

Additionally the IA has issued a letter to Remuneration Committee chairmen highlighting key aspects of the Principles that its members have asked to be re-emphasised to companies.  These include:

• Salary increases – Investors continue to be concerned by the level and frequency of salary increases.  The letter indicates that salary increases will continue to be an area of scrutiny for members and they will expect to see salary increases being supported with “clear and explicit” rationale; especially those above inflation or in excess of increases provided to the general workforce.
• Bonus disclosure - Shareholders require the retrospective disclosure of bonus targets so that they can ensure that there is an appropriate link between pay and performance.
• Pensions – There is a concern with the size of pension increases and the complex pension arrangements for Executive Directors.  It is expected that pension arrangements should be aligned with those in the rest of the company. 

The revised Principles of Remuneration and letter to Remuneration Committee chairmen are available from the IVIS website.

*Update 05/07/2016 - a revised Principles of Remuneration was published in July 2016.  This is available on the IVIS website*

The consultation includes draft amending regulations which make changes to the Occupational Pension Schemes (Requirement to obtain Audited Accounts and a Statement from the Auditor) Regulations 1996 (the “AA regulations”).

The changes propose to:

• delete most of the detailed investment disclosure information set out in the AA regulations and require the auditor to provide a statement that the accounts have been prepared in accordance with Financial Reporting Standard 102 (FRS 102) and the pensions Statement of Recommended Practice (SORP), noting any material departures from them; and
• exempt multi-employer schemes with at least 20 participating employers from the requirement to obtain a statement from the scheme auditors on whether, in their opinion, contributions have been paid in accordance with the scheme’s schedule.

The consultation also seeks views on amendments to the governance requirements for occupational pension schemes providing money purchase benefits.  New governance requirements were introduced in April 2015 by way of the Occupational Pension Schemes (Charges and Governance) Regulations 2015 (“the governance regulations”).  These regulations inserted provisions into the Occupational Pension Schemes (Scheme Administration) Regulations 1996 and the Occupational Pension Schemes (Investment) Regulations 2005.  The governance regulations also introduced additional governance requirements for relevant multi-employer schemes.  However, since the regulations have come into force the DWP has received representations from industry representatives and legal firms on how the governance provisions for multi-employer schemes work in practice and the implications for schemes. 

The consultation seeks views on a set of draft regulations which will address these concerns, and also include some tidying-up provisions to ensure that these governance requirements work as intended.

Additionally views are sought on:

• How information about investments in pension schemes is, and can be, made available to beneficiaries.
• How to reduce regulatory burdens on occupational pension schemes.

Comments are requested until 9 December 2015.

The press release and full consultation are available on the DWP website.

Sir Winfried highlighted:

Society wants company behaviour to improve, and culture to change.  It expects a company’s culture to instil confidence among its investors and other stakeholders and to deliver the company’s objectives in a way that enhances long term value. 

He indicated that culture was “very high” on the FRC agenda and that “addressing cultural issues and embarking on cultural change in a company is not an easy task”.  Sir Winfried Bischoff indicated that good corporate governance was essential to a strong company culture and that poor governance and cultural weaknesses were prevalent among recent corporate failings.  He highlighted the FRC project on corporate culture and behaviour which aims to gather practical insight into corporate culture and the role of boards; to understand how boards can shape, embed and assess culture; and to identify and promote best practice.

Sir Winfried Bischoff commented that a positive culture “can improve a company’s prospects and staff morale” and highlighted the important role that audit can play in enhancing and supporting the development of company culture. 

The full text of the speech can be obtained from the FRC's website.

In his speech, Mr Hoogervorst commented on what he views as the main lessons learned from IFRS in Europe in the past decade. These three lesson are:

1. The use of IFRS has improved financial reporting and increased transparency throughout the European Union.
2. The co-operative relationship the IASB has develop with Europe has increased level of outreach and stakeholder participation by national standard-setters and others.
3. The decade-long work with Europe shows other jurisdictions that adopting a single set of high quality standards can be achieved globally.

Full transcript of his speech is available on the IASB’s website.