July

Chairman of the FRC highlights the role of stewardship as a lever for cultural change

14 Jul, 2016

The Chairman of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), Sir Win Bischoff, has highlighted, at a recent forum for the financial services industry, the role of stewardship as an aspect of, and a lever for, cultural change.

Speaking at the forum, Sir Win Bischoff introduced the role of the FRC in promoting high quality corporate governance and reporting. In particular he stressed the intention of the FRC “to work with our stakeholders to encourage improvement rather than to introduce new requirements that add to the regulatory burden.” In terms of the FRC Culture Coalition (a collaboration between various industry bodies) this has involved conducting surveys and interviews with chairmen, CEOs and company secretaries to gain insight into the role of company culture.

This research has highlighted how there is “no one-size-fits-all and that the cultural indicators selected should be tailored to each company’s individual circumstances.” Sir Win Bischoff commented:

"In order to establish an appropriate culture, a board must define the purposes of the company and what type of behaviours it wishes to promote in order to deliver its business strategy. It involves establishing your own culture, asking questions and making choices."

The Culture Coalition’s findings have revealed that a company’s CEO is the one single person who has the biggest influence on that company’s culture although they stress that Boards and Investors also have a role to play. The Stewardship Code, launched in 2010, encourages a “spirit of trust, openness and constructiveness” to drive relations between investors and companies. The research carried out to date has revealed that a number of signatories of the Code are not fully demonstrating their commitment to the underlying Code principles.

Concluding, Sir Win Bischoff commented:

"The values, attitudes and behaviours which make up corporate culture are central to the way an organisation achieves its objectives. By weaving a healthy corporate culture into the business model, you are not just contributing to the overall success of your own business but creating an environment on which investors can rely. Stewardship leverages this by enhancing reputation and accountability. In that way, importantly, you and we create sustained growth in the economy."

Click here to access the full text of the speech on the FRC’s website.

EFRAG Board meeting July 2016

14 Jul, 2016

The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) will hold a Board meeting on 19 July 2016 in Brussels.

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

New Chair of the IFRS Foundation Monitoring Board

14 Jul, 2016

The IFRS Foundation Monitoring Board, responsible for the oversight of the IFRS Foundation, has announced that Masamichi Kono has stepped down as Chair of the Monitoring Board.

Ryozo Himino, Vice Minister for International Affairs of the Japan Financial  Services Agency (FSA), was appointed by the Monitoring Board to serve as Chair for the remainder of Mr. Kono’s term until February 2017.

Please click for the press release announcing this change on the IOSCO website. 

July 2016 IFRS Interpretations Committee meeting notes posted

13 Jul, 2016

The IFRS Interpretations Committee met in London on 12 July 2016. We've posted Deloitte observer notes for the technical issues discussed during this meeting.

Pre-meeting summaries for the July IASB meeting

13 Jul, 2016

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) will meet at its offices in London on 18 and 19 July 2016. We have posted our pre-meeting summaries for the meeting that allow you to follow the IASB’s decision making more closely. For each topic to be discussed we summarise the agenda papers made available by the IASB staff and point out the main issues to be discussed by the IASB and the staff recommendations.

On Monday 18 July the IASB is expected to finalise a narrow scope amendment that was developed for it by the IFRS Interpretations Committee on reclassifying property into, or out of, investment properties.  They are also expected to finalise the 2014-2016 annual improvements cycle and approve the expose draft for the 2015-2017 cycle. 

This will be followed by sessions at which the IASB will continue its consideration of comments on the Conceptual Framework exposure draft, focusing this month on the asset definition, recognition and measurement. 

On Tuesday 19 July the IASB will focus on its research project on financial instruments with the characteristics of equity, completing its discussions on the agenda consultation and, relatedly, an update on the research programme.

The IASB will not meet again in public until September.

Our pre-meet­ing summaries are available on our meeting note page and will sup­ple­ment them with our popular meeting notes after the meeting.

Hoogervorst, Watchman, Nooteboom heard in European Parliament on IFRS 9

13 Jul, 2016

The monthly slot for scrutiny of delegated acts and implementing measures of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) of the European Parliament today focused on IFRS 9. Experts heard were IASB Chairman Hans Hoogervorst, EFRAG TEG Chairman Andrew Watchman, and Erik Nooteboom, Acting Director Investment and Company reporting, DG FISMA, European Commission.

Each of the experts made an opening statement.

Mr Hoogervorst noted the expected loss model as the key aspect of the new financial instruments standard. He stated that it allowed for a more timely and more continuous recognition of losses and thus avoided major disruptions at a later point of time. He voiced the belief that IFRS 9 will contribute to economic growth. Mr Hoogervorst also commented on the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the new standard on insurance contracts. He notes that pure insurance companies can defer the application of IFRS 9 while conglomerates have the option of making adjustments to profit and loss. He stated that the IASB wanted to avoid having two standards applied in the same company as this would be too confusing to investors.

Mr Watchman confirmed the EFRAG endorsement advice regarding IFRS 9 noting that meeting the condition for endorsement was always a threshhold and would not necessarily mean that EFRAG agreed with all aspects of the standard. He also pointed at the fact that the endorsement advice included a qualitative impact assessment; for a quantitative impact assessment there were not enough data yet. Mr Watchman noted that the EFRAG endorsement advice was subject to the IASB solving the issue of the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the new standard on insurance contracts but noted that the IASB was working on a solution that would include most (although not all) of the suggestions EFRAG made.

Mr Nooteboom stressed the major improvements that IFRS 9 would bring compared to IAS 39 and noted the positive ARC vote on 27 June. He also commented on the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the new standard on insurance contracts and noted that the EU Commission is currently collecting data on the claim that bank insurers would be at a competitive disadvantage as a result of the deferral option not being available below group level. The Commission would come to a conclusion on this and if it found that the claims were true would act at EU level with a complimentary EU solution.

Questions from the ECON members were to a large part measured and solution focused. They especially asked after the claim that IFRS 9 would introduce more fair value measurement that for some is connected with a fear of stronger procyclicality, the effects on long-term investment, better impact assessments, and questions around the complexity of IFRS 9.

The experts replied that although the somewhat different classification in IFRS 9 in comparison to IAS 39 might lead to more assets measured at fair value it was not really a game changer and depended on the business model - some early adopters had actually reported less assets measured at fair value. On the aspect of long-term investment two points were noted: (1) even long-term investors might want to see real time truth and not just effects smoothed over and (2) IFRS 9 would not bring more volatility, rather, it would spread the volatility over time and avoid peaks of volatility as during the financial crisis. All parties agreed that quantitative impact analysis before an accounting standard has been implemented is impossible. However, they also stated that they all would watch the impacts of IFRS 9 adoption closely and (re)act if necessary. Finally, on complexity, the experts stated (1) complexity in the standard had actually reduced in some areas and the area where it was increased was very much worth it (impairment) and (2) complexity stemmed from the transactions dealt with and the economic reality, not from standard-setting itself. Mr Watchman cited Albert Einstein: "Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler."

A recording of the session is already available here on the European Parliament website (scrutiny slot begins at 11:29:00).

Two non-papers on European public good and true and fair view

13 Jul, 2016

For the meeting of the European Commission's Accounting Regulatory Committee (ARC) on 27 June 2016, the Commission services prepared two non-papers that address the meaning of the European public good criterion and its relevance to the endorsement process the meaning of the true and fair view criterion and its relevance to the endorsement process.

The non-paper on the European public good criterion notes that neither the European legislation nor the case law of the Court of Justice provide a definition of this criterion in the context of the IAS Regulation. It therefore offers some flexibility in practice. The non-paper therefore concludes that assessing whether a standard meets the criterion of public good should in general take into account financial stability, EU economic development, competitiveness of European undertakings, and added value for the EU. However, the non-papers states that the above mentioned should not be considered, in any case, as exhaustive. In the context of the endorsement procedure of international accounting standards it should be decided on a case by case basis which of these particular elements EFRAG should focus on in its analysis when assessing the public good criterion and whether any other factors (e.g. long-term investment) should be considered.

The non-paper on the true and fair view criterion notes that European legislation does not provide a distinct definition of the principle of true and fair, but the Court of Justice has reviewed the principle in its case-law over the years. The Court refers to true and fair as “fundamental principle” and “primary objective” of the Accounting Directives. Therefore, the non-paper concludes that it is reasonable to assume that the true and fair view principle is the overarching principle. The supremacy of the principle means that in exceptional cases other general principles must be departed from in order to give the true and fair view of the assets and liabilities.

Please click to access the two papers on the European Commission website:

IASB issues 'Investor Update' newsletter

13 Jul, 2016

The IASB has issued the tenth edition of its newsletter 'Investor Update', which provides investors with quick access to information about current accounting and financial reporting topics.

This issue features:

  • Views from Barbara Cohen, Head of European Credit Research at BNP Paribas Investment Partners,
  • Essentials and ‘Non-IFRS’ information,
  • Current projects that need input from the investment community, and
  • Information on investor materials and current events.

The Investor Update newsletter is available on the IASB’s website.

FRC publish reminders for half-yearly and annual financial reports following the EU referendum

12 Jul, 2016

The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) has published some high-level guidance for directors to consider when preparing their forthcoming half-yearly and annual financial reports.

The guidance highlights some key considerations for those preparing financial reports in light of the recent UK vote to leave the EU:

  • Business model: disclosure of the company’s business model should include detail of the main markets in which the company operates and enable the reader to assess the company’s exposure to the outcome of the referendum.
  • Principal risks and uncertainties: consideration should be given to the nature and extent of risks and uncertainties arising from the referendum result and the impact of these on the future performance and position of the business. There should be a focus on making any disclosures company-specific and on avoiding the use of boilerplate language which is less useful to users of the report. Directors should also consider whether the referendum result gives rise to any solvency, liquidity or other risks that may threaten the long-term viability of the business, including the impact of these on their viability statement.
  • Market volatility: balance sheet values as at 30 June 2016 and subsequent reporting dates may be impacted by volatility in the markets following the referendum result. Particular consideration should be given to financial instruments measured at fair value and discount rates that may be affected by changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates and market prices. Directors are also encouraged to consider whether assets may be impaired or whether any subsequent event disclosure is required.
  • Going concern basis of accounting: consideration should be given as to whether the going concern basis of accounting is appropriate.
  • True and fair view: in light of the EU referendum result, directors should consider the need for any additional disclosures to ensure that the accounts give a true and fair view.
  • Half-yearly financial reports: in their interim reports listed companies must include disclosure of important events that occurred during the first six months of the financial year in addition to an indication of the impact of those events on the interim financial statements.

Click here to access the full guidance on the FRC website.

Click here to access the Deloitte website dedicated to the EU referendum.

FEE proposal for public country-by-country reporting on disclosing tax information

12 Jul, 2016

Since currently there are many European and international initiatives that propose public country-by-country reporting of tax relevant information for multinational companies, the Federation of European Accountants (Fédération des Experts-comptables Européens, FEE) has created a template that outlines the basic information for such companies to disclose when issuing a public country-by-country report.

The proposed template aims for companies to provide useful information required by stakeholders whilst minimising the costs of preparation and the risk of disclosing economically sensitive information.

Please click to access Public Country-by-Country Reporting: A template for disclosing corporate tax information on the FEE website.

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.