General remarks

On moving to the new website, the IASB made several changes to the presentation of the work plan:

• The new format has gone back to indicating exact timing - by indicating the half year, quarter or even month a development is expected to occur. This is much to be lauded, since it makes tracking developments (and progress and delay) much easier for users.
• The new work plan has slightly changed categories: standard-setting projects, maintenance projects, research projects, and other projects. Taxonomy projects have become "other"; post-implementation reviews are now "research".
• The IASB has split up the annual improvement process into individual "projects". Although the idea is still to treat certain improvements through the annual improvements process, it can no longer be traced on the face of the work plan whether a project is part of the annual improvement process and which cycle it belongs to. The expectation is that the IASB wants to allow itself more flexibility in deciding which improvement goes into which cycle.
• The IASB has stopped dating its work plan and there is no longer a PDF version of the work plan available. For IAS Plus, we have experimented with various tracking tools to detect changes. We found a) that there a many minorest changes between Board meetings (down to spelling) and b) that to report on every little change would distract from the big picture. We have therefore decided to continue to analyse changes on a monthly basis for you - after each meeting.

Below is an analysis of all changes made to the work plan since the last update in May 2017. For this analysis, we have ignored changes where the "within three months" to "after six months" classification translated smoothly into the new format of fixed dates.

Standard-setting projects

• Disclosure initiative — Materiality — both, the exposure draft on the definition of materiality and the practice statement on materiality, are now expected in September 2017 (was: June 2017)
• Changes in accounting policies and estimates — an exposure draft is now expected in September 2017 (was: June 2017)

Maintenance projects

• Definition of a business — this project was to see a decision on the project direction within 3 months and will now see final amendments in H1 2018
• Clarifications arising from the post-implementation review of IFRS 8 — this project was to see a decision on the project direction after 6 months, however, as the next project step a feedback statement on the exposure draft in Q4 2017 has been inserted
• IFRS 9 — Prepayment features with negative compensation — this project was to see a decision on the project direction within 3 months and will now see final amendments in Q4 2017
• IAS 16 — Proceeds before intended use — a feedback statement on the exposure draft is expected in Q4 2017

Research projects

• Goodwill and impairment — this project was to see a decision on the project direction after 6 months and will now see a discussion paper in H1 2018
• Post-implementation review — IFRS 13 — this project is now considered a research project
• Post-implementation review — IFRS 10-12 — this project is no longer appears in the IASB work plan (was supposed to be initiated after 6 months)
• Disclosure initiative — Principles of disclosure — this project was to see a decision on the project direction after 6 months and will now see a feedback statement on the discussion paper in H1 2018

Other projects

• proposed taxonomy update regarding common practice in connection with IFRS 13 — expected in H1 2018
• proposed taxonomy update on IFRS 17 — this project was to see a final update is expected within six months, however, as the next project step a feedback statement on the proposed update in Q4 2017 has been inserted

The above is a faithful comparison of the IASB work plan at 18 May 2017 and at 28 June 2017. For access to the current IASB work plan at any time, please click here.

The updated agenda for the meeting is sum­marised below:

Agenda papers for the meeting are available on the IASB's website.

As had become obvious from publicly available reponses, the stakeholders did not believe that the current arrangements need to be changed. The feedback statement states:

The vast majority of respondents are of the view that there is no reason to change the current endorsement process or the role of EFRAG. EFRAG has been operating successfully under the new governance structure since November 2014 following the implementation of the Maystadt recommendations. These stakeholders believe that strengthening the role of ESMA could be counterproductive as ESMA would consider the standards only from the perspective of investors. A clear separation of powers between standard setting and enforcement should be maintained to avoid conflict of interest.

Please click to access the full feedback statement on the Eunropean Commission's website.

This issue features:

• An overview of the Discussion Paper on principles of disclosure
• An interview with Geoff Robinson, Executive Director, UBS Investment Bank
• A call for views on the post-implementation review of IFRS 13 and the Principles of Disclosure discussion paper
• Information on investor materials and current events.

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

The exposure draft E-IG 4 Equity-settled share-based payments with net settlement features: Accounting for cash compensation is not intended to be an interpretation. Instead it reproduces deliberations by the IASB, the IFRS IC, and their staff on this issue that has not been incorporated into IFRS 2.

The guidance is intended to answert the following questions:

• At what point is it necessary to present the cash compensation separately as a cash-settled share-based payment?
• How is it accounted for?

The exposure draft can be accessed through the press release on the ASCG website. Comments are requested by 11 August 2017.

The guidelines propose that any company should disclose relevant information on the actual and potential impacts of its operations on the environment, and on how current and foreseeable environmental matters may affect the company. Greater and more relevant transparency is expected to lead towards a major reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient growth and jobs.

The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) is currently updating its guidance on the strategic report to reflect changes arising from the UK implementation of the NFR Directive. A draft is expected in the next month or so.

The following documents are available on the EC website:

• Press release
• Frequently asked questions
• Guidelines on non-financial reporting (provisional version)
• Our previous UK Accounting Plus news item on the UK implementation of the Directive.

The ICAEW indicates that the guide, is relevant to firms of all sizes but will be of particular help “to smaller firms, including sole practitioners and those firms with a few audit engagement partners”.  It is also intended to be relevant to all jurisdictions where ISAs are applied but, as it does not address any specific local requirements that jurisdictions might have in place, where these exist the ICAEW notes that the guide should be read in conjunction with those local requirements. 

The guidance covers:

• what is materiality and why is it important?;
• determining materiality;
• applying materiality to the evaluation of identified misstatements;
• materiality in group audits;
• communications with management and those charged with governance; and
• documentation. 

The ICAEW comments that “it is clear that addressing the materiality requirements in ISAs presents real practical challenges for audit firms of all sizes and is an area where improvement can be made”.  

The guidance is available on the ICAEW website.

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

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

Currently guidance is provided in Practice Note 12: Money Laundering: Guidance for Auditors on UK Legislation.  However Practice Note 12 requires updating to reflect revisions to the UK legislative and regulatory framework as required by the 4^th EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive which was transposed into UK law by the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (SI 692/2017). 

It is proposed that the new guidance is contained as an appendix to ISA (UK) 250 Section A rather than as a stand-alone Practice Note. 

Comments are requested by 8 September 2017.

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