The webinar will cover:

• an overview of the Integrated Reporting Framework;
• integrated Reporting within a UK context; and
• practical tips when preparing integrated information.

Further details are available on the ICAEW website.

The purpose of the fitness check exercise will be to assess whether the public reporting obligations including financial and non-financial reporting requirements for EU companies are meeting their objectives (effectiveness, relevance and EU added value). It will cover various reporting requirements including the Accounting Directive including the Non-Financial Reporting Directive, the Regulation on International Accounting Standards (IAS Regulation), the Transparency Directive (TD), the Banks Accounts Directive, and the Insurance Accounts Directive.

The Commission aims to assess whether the EU financial reporting framework is still fit for purpose. Aspects in this context are cross border businesses in a more integrated Single Market and well-functioning capital markets, the emergence of new business models, the increasing importance of intangibles in the digital economy, and the role of IFRSs and their interaction with the broader EU accounting framework. The Commission also notes the increased demand for public reporting on a broader range of topics as for example reporting on sustainability issues and long term value creation. Interaction and integration of the different sets of public reporting by companies (financial, non-financial and other reports) will also be looked at. And finally, the Commission will look at digitalisation and its long-term challenges and opportunities.

The first step in this fitness check will be an open public consultation that is expected to be launched in 1st quarter of 2018 and will last for a period of at least 12 weeks. In particular, participants will be asked for their views on the following:

1. Whether the current financial reporting framework meets its objectives and will continue to do so in the digital economy, whether the level of harmonisation and simplification meets the needs of respectively the large cross border groups and the SMEs, the role of IFRS for non-listed and listed companies including governance aspects to ensure these are not detrimental to long term and sustainable investments, and the coherence of sectoral accounting legislation for banks and insurance companies with other EU reporting and prudential legislations;
2. Whether the financial and non-financial disclosures in the area of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) reporting by companies are fit for purpose, including as regards sustainability disclosures;
3. Whether to encourage experimentation with integrated reporting as a way to make the EU reporting framework more effective and efficient and if yes how;
4. Whether public corporate reporting does take enough consideration of – and at least is not a hindrance to – technological progress and how to make the best use of these new tools to do more with less.

Please click to access the full fitness check roadmap on the EC website. Note that roadmaps can also be commented on - feedback on this roadmap is requested by 8 March 2018.

The High-Level Expert Group (HLEG) on Sustainable Finance, established by the EC, has also suggested in its final report setting out strategic recommendations for a financial system that supports sustainable investments that changes to the IAS Regulation might be warranted.

A summary of the agenda is set out below:

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

The Board will discuss the following:

• Disclosure initiative: Principles of disclosures
  • Summary of feedback received
• Primary financial statements
  • Clarifying requirements for management performance measures (MPMs)
  • Management-defined adjusted earnings per share (EPS)
  • Presentation of the cash flows of 'integral' and 'non-integral' associates and joint ventures
• Dynamic risk management
  • Role of asset profile
• Business combinations under common control
• Research Programme
• Insurance contracts
  • Update on TRG meeting and activities for investors and analysts
• Discussion papers and exposure drafts
• Rate-regulated activities
  • Unit of account and asset/liability definitions

The full agenda for the meeting can be found here. We will post any updates to the agenda, our com­pre­hen­sive pre-meet­ing summaries as well as observer notes from the meeting on this page as they become available.

The think tank Center for ESG Research has released the Integrated Ratio Guideline, which aims to be a practical formula collection for companies, investors and analysts, to help them calculate a number of non-financial and integrated ratios, and notably what investors and analysts can use these ratios for to evaluate companies’ performance and risk profiles. You can find the Center for ESG Research's Integrated Ratio Guideline here.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) has released a new report, compiling data that offers a closer look into the reporting landscape of the United States and Canada. This first report in a series of case studies across different countries that looks at significant developments in ESG reporting seeks to address the challenges, opportunities and next steps for corporate reporting and disclosure. Please click to access the report here.

The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the WBCSD have launched the 'Materiality Roundtable Series', a platform for companies and investors that helps organisations to identify and integrate sustainability information into their corporate reporting. Please click for more information on the GRI website.

GRI also announces that the GRI Standards now available in Simplified Chinese. Please click for access to the press release and the download centre on the GRI website.

Mr Anderson’s response provided his views related to the important role analysis reports play when making investment decisions as well as arguments to Professor Lev’s comments regarding the (1) growth of intangibles, (2) impact of financial reporting, and (3) role of standard-setters. In addition, he commented on two proposed accounting changes Professor Lev believed will ‘restore the income statement matching.’ These proposals were to capitalize selected intangibles and the treatment of ‘one-off’ costs.

For more information, see Mr Anderson’s response on the IASB’s website.

The topics covered during the meeting were the following (numbers in brackets are references to the corresponding paragraphs of the summary):

• Primary financial statements (1–15): ASAF members discussed (1) introducing additional defined subtotals in the statement(s) of financial performance ('profit before investing, financing and income tax’ and ‘profit before financing and income tax’), (2) an ‘income and expenses from investments’ category presented between these two subtotals and a ‘finance income and expenses’ category presented below the ‘profit before financing and income tax’ subtotal, and (3) better ways to communicate other comprehensive income (OCI). Most ASAF members were generally supportive of introducing additional defined subtotals in the statement(s) of financial performance. As regards OCI, ASAF members noted that relabelling OCI without clarifying the distinction between profit or loss and OCI, and without clarifying the principles for recycling, would only cause confusion.
• Disclosure initiative — Definition of material (16–22): ASAF members commented on the September 2017 Exposure Draft. Most of them expressed concerns with the reference to ‘obscuring’ information in the proposed definition of material. Some members also made additional suggestions to improve the application of the definition of material.
• Disclosure initiative — Principles of disclosure (23–35): ASAF members discussed the feedback received on the Priciples of Disclosure Discussion Paper and provided feedback on: (1) technology and digital reporting considerations, (2) development of disclosure principles, (3) standards-level review of disclosures, and (4) project direction and focus.
• Post-implementation Review of IFRS 13 (36–41): ASAF members received an overview of the feedback received in response to the request for information, which they generally agreed with (especially the fact that IFRS 13 is perceived to be working well). ASAF members provided advice on how the Board could respond to that feedback.
• Wider Corporate Reporting (42–47): ASAF members commented on the Wider Corporate Reporting project the Board has added to its agenda. Most ASAF members supported the Board’s decision to revise and update the Practice Statement Management Commentary and also provided suggestions for the Board to consider in moving the project forward.Several ASAF members commented on the current nonmandatory status of the statement.
• Academic liaison (48–50): ASAF members explained about their experience in liaising with academics, and offered their views on whether the activities they engaged in with academics would work in the broader international context of the Board.
• Information deficiencies and consolidated financial statements (51–53): Andreas Barckow, German ASAF member, presented on the perceived information deficiencies of consolidated financial statements, in particular, the loss of information about subsidiary entities through the elimination procedures in preparing consolidated financial statements (see our earlier announcement of his paper in November 2017).
• Proposed improvements to IFRS 8 (54–70): The IASB staff summarised the feedback on the March 2017 Exposure draft, which had been mixed. Therefore, the staff sought ASAF members’ views on some ideas on how the proposals in the Exposure Draft could be improved.
• Business Combinations Under Common Control (71–91): ASAF members received an update on the Board’s discussions in this research project and commented on: (1) clarifications of the scope of the project and (2) methods of accounting for transactions in the scope of the project. ASAF members supported the clarification of the scope of the project made by the Board in October 2017.
• Project updates and agenda planning (92–93): ASAF members were updated on the IASB technical projects and how the IASB used the ASAF advice from previous meetings.

A full summary of the meeting is available on the IASB's website.

The amendments affect the following standards:

The European Union effective date is the same as the IASB in case of all amendments.

The Commission Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1126/2008 adopting certain international accounting standards in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 8 February 2018.

As a result of the EU's adoption, the EFRAG has updated its endorsement status report.

Most respondents commented that they largely agreed with the prioritisation of the topics discussed in the consultation document and the suggested categorisation of critical, medium term, or long term, even though some respondents expressed priority for different topics.

The following points were also raised:

• It was considered to be at least a challenging schedule to address all the items categorised as "critical" by the IVSC in the prescribed 0-2 years for critical items.
• It was also suggested that the IVSC should also supply implementation guidance.
• It was noted that the IVSC is suggesting to also address valuation issues that relate to recently issued IFRSs or to projects that are currently on the IASB work plan — for these it was suggested that the IVSC contribution may be more effective if it was made within the context of the IASB work streams.

Please click to access the full report on the IVSC website. The individual responses can be accessed here.

The purpose of the TRG is to seek feed­back on po­ten­tial issues related to im­ple­men­ta­tion of IFRS 17 Insurance Contracts. During the meeting, the TRG discussed the following:

• Separation of insurance components of a single contract.
• Boundary of contracts with annual repricing mechanisms.
• Boundary of reinsurance contracts held.
• Insurance acquisition cash flows paid on an initially written contract.
• Determining quantity of benefits for identifying coverage units.
• Insurance acquisition cash flows when using fair value transition.
• Reporting on other questions submitted.

Audio recordings of each session is available on the TRG meeting page on the IASB’s website.

For more information, see the press release on the IASB’s website.  Our related Need to know publication is available here.