The survey is intended be completed by insurers that prepare accounts using IFRS and that are incorporated in the UK. Insurers that are part of a group headed by UK - incorporated entity are requested to respond to the survey from the perspective of the consolidated group. Stand-alone insurance entities and insurance entities that are part of group headed by an entity incorporated outside the UK should respond to the survey from the perspective of the UK incorporated entity (or UK sub- group where applicable).

The survey is open until 29 October 2020. 

Further information and the survey are available on the FRC website.

Below is an analysis of all changes made to the work plan since our last analysis on 28 August 2020.

Standard-setting projects

• Management Commentary — the issuance of an exposure draft is now expected in the first quarter of 2021 (previously first half of 2021)
• Rate-regulated Activities — the issuance of an exposure draft is now expected in the first quarter of 2021 (previously fourth quarter of 2020)

Maintenance projects

• Deferred Tax Related to Assets and Liabilities Arising From a Single Transaction — a decision on the project directions is now expected in October 2020 (previously fourth quarter of 2020)
• Lease Liability in a Sale and Leaseback — the issuance of an exposure draft is now expected in November 2020 (previously fourth quarter of 2020)

Research projects

• Business Combinations under Common Control — a discussion paper is now expected in November 2020 (previously fourth quarter of 2020)
• Dynamic Risk Management — Core model outreach is now expected in October 2020 (previously fourth quarter of 2020)
• Pension Benefits That Depend on Asset Returns — A review of the research is now expected in November 2020 (previously fourth quarter of 2020)

The above is a faithful comparison of the IASB work plan at 28 August 2020 and 28 September 2020. For access to the current IASB work plan at any time, please click here.

We agree with the proposed amendments and concur with the FRC’s conclusions in the impact assessment. 

The full response is contained within the full comment letter below. The full response is contained within the full comment letter below. The full response is contained within the full comment letter. full response is contained within the full comment letter below. The full response is contained within the full comment letter below. The full response is contained within the full comment letter below. 

We agree that the IFRS Interpretations Committee’s conclusions regarding supply chain financing arrangements reflect the requirements of IFRS Standards and that the outcome of applying these requirements will lead to different presentations in the statement of financial position, within trade payables, other payables or in other financial liabilities depending on the terms of the arrangement and the relative similarity of the nature and function of the liability under the arrangement with more conventional trade payables. However, we are concerned that users are not benefiting from a fuller understanding of these arrangements given the lack of specific disclosures required by IFRS 7. The Board may wish to consider adding to its agenda a project to improve disclosures in this area, potentially through illustrative examples, due to the increasing prevalence of alternative financing models such as these, and the move away from obtaining finance from a broad range of suppliers to a more concentrated approach with a single or small number of financial institutions or other funding vehicles.

Click to view the comment letter and Deloitte's notes from the June 2020 IFRS Interpretations Committee meeting.

We are supportive of the overall approach to reflect the International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB) proposals in ED/2020/1 Interest Rate Benchmark Reform – Phase 2: Proposed amendments to IFRS 9, IAS 39, IFRS 7, IFRS 4 and IFRS 16 (ED) in FRS 102 to the extent relevant in order to ensure the amendments are available to all entities on a timely basis and that no significant deviations occur between the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and UK Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (UK GAAP). As part of finalising the Phase 2 amendments (the final amendments) the IASB made some important changes to the original proposals in the ED that FRED 74 is based on. We believe some of these changes should be reflected in FRS 102 and have included our recommendations in the answer to Question 1 in the Appendix to the comment letter.

We support the key amendments proposed in FRED 74 that ensure that entities that apply hedge accounting will continue to do so as they transition to alternative benchmark rates and entities can apply the practical expedient to account for changes in the basis for determining contractual cash flows of a financial asset or financial liability that are required by the interest rate benchmark reform (IBOR reform) by updating the effective interest rate. We consider these as being the two most important elements of the proposals.

Given the speed at which market participants are choosing, or being required, to switch to new interest rate benchmarks, we encourage the FRC to act swiftly in finalising the amendments arising from this FRED.

Responses to the specific questions raised in FRED 74 are included in the full comment letter.

We are broadly supportive of the proposed amendments although we have some minor comments and drafting suggestions.  We encourage the FRC to finalise these amendments as soon as possible so that businesses can take prompt advantage of the relief provided.

A full response to all questions raised in the invitation to comment are contained within the full comment letter.

We support the Board’s initiative to improve how information is communicated in the financial statements, in particular the information included in the statement of profit or loss. However, we strongly disagree with the proposals on unusual items and on management performance measures (MPMs).

In addition, we support the objective of improving comparability. However, we believe that this objective will be achieved only if the underlying principles for the determination of the operating category proposed for the statement of profit or loss are expressed more clearly.

Lastly, we disagree with two proposals on classification of items in the statement of profit or loss and the proposal to present income and expenses from cash and cash equivalents as part of financing activities.

Click to view the comment letter.

The publication discusses the new environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure framework developed by the Big Four accounting firms. The framework includes a universal set of metrics and recommended disclosures intended to lead to a more comprehensive global corporate reporting system. The framework divides disclosures into four pillars — principles of governance, planet, people, and prosperity — that serve as the foundation for ESG reporting standards.

Please click to access the report and a corresponding press release on the WEF website.

In addition, see Deloitte's Purpose-driven Business Reporting in Focus — Progress towards a comprehensive corporate reporting system.