The CMAC, formerly called the Analyst Representative Group (ARG), consists of a number of professional financial analysts who meet at least three times a year with members of the IASB to provide the views of professional investors on financial reporting issues.

A summary of the agenda for the meeting is set out below:

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

Ms Paul currently serves as the Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of the Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec. Her appointment to the IFRS Advisory Council begins immediately.

For more information, see the press release on the IASB website.

Under the IFRS Foundation Constitution, there are 22 IFRS Trustees, which are required to broadly reflect the world’s capital markets and have a diversity of geographical and professional backgrounds. Trustees are appointed for a three year term (with one possible renewal) and oversee the IFRS Foundation and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). For the 2015 vacancies, the IFRS Foundation is seeking Trustees from Europe, North America and for one "At Large" position.

Those interested in applying for the positions are asked to respond by 16 March 2014. More information for applicants is available through the press release on the IASB website.

Interested listeners have the ability to dial into the conference call.  Please click link for details of the registration on the EFRAG website. 

COSO has two frameworks, the Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) and Enterprise Risk Management – Integrated Framework (2004). These frameworks provide guidance on effective controls and proficient risk management. This paper integrates concepts from the COSO frameworks with a general business model and describes how applying key elements of the COSO frameworks can enhance the governance, strategy setting, and management processes.

For more information, see the press release and Thought Paper, Improving Organizational Performance and Governance: How the COSO Frameworks Can Help, on COSO’s Web site.

The agenda for the meeting (as at 11 February 2014) is summarised below:

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

The draft guidance, published in November 2013, seeks to integrate the FRC current guidance on going concern and risk management and internal control (often referred to as the “Turnbull Guidance”) and also makes some consequential revisions to the UK Corporate Governance Code and auditing standards.  The FRC has taken this approach “to encourage boards, as part of the same on-going process, to consider risk identification and management, including the assessment of solvency and liquidity risks, and to determine whether the company is able to adopt the going concern basis of accounting”.  

The draft guidance also seeks to support the principles underlying the recommendations advocated by Lord Sharman in his report “Going Concern and Liquidity Risks: Lessons For Companies and Auditors” (link to FRC website). 

We comment:

We welcome the principles behind the consultation as:

improving the quality of risk management and internal control of companies applying the UK Corporate Governance Code (“the Code”); and

enhancing the communication between those companies and their shareholders on the company’s approach to risk management, internal control and going concern.

We also believe that “in most cases companies should be seeking to meet these standards as a matter of good business practice rather than as a purely regulatory compliance exercise” and that there may be additional costs for smaller listed companies.

Further comments and full responses to all questions raised in the invitation to comment are contained within the full comment letter (including our responses to the separate Consultation Paper: 'Guidance for Directors of Banks on Solvency and Liquidity Risk Management and the Going Concern Basis of Accounting' and the Exposure Draft: 'Revised Auditing Standards (extracts) ISAs (UK and Ireland) 260, 570, 700') issued concurrently by the FRC.

Topics discussed during the DPOC meeting were:

Update on technical activities

Updates were given on the progress of the major projects as well as implementation and maintenance projects on the IASB's work plan.

• Regarding hedge accounting, the DPOC noted that the project had been completed and final guidance had published in November 2013.
• On the classification and measurement project, the DPOC was informed that joint deliberations by the IASB and the US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) had started in September 2013 but that the FASB, at its December 2013 meeting, had reached decisions that would mean the FASB would at least partially abandon convergence on this project. IASB representatives present at the DPOC meeting acknowledged that the situation was unfortunate and stated that the IASB would consider the position taken by the FASB at its February 2014 meeting.
• Regarding the impairment project, the DPOC was reminded that the prospect of convergence with the US was unlikely as the FASB, at its meeting in December 2013, had elected to proceed with its own expected credit losses model. The DPOC had questions regarding the differences between the IASB and the FASB model and especially what the views of the Financial Stability Board (FSB) were. The DPOC was informed that the FSB now accepted that there would not be convergence on impairment, but wanted to see the impairment proposals in place as soon as possible.
• On macro hedging, the DPOC was told that the IASB would shortly publish a Discussion Paper with an extended comment period as the issue is so complex.
• Regarding leases, the DPOC noted that there remained considerable concern among the constituents about the cost and complexity of the proposals in the second ED. They were informed that boards had started their redeliberations in January 2014 and hoped to reach decisions on major issues in March 2014. On the question of convergence, the IASB representatives noted that the risk of divergence could not be ruled out. They also pointed out that if important decisions could be reached in March 2014, an IFRS could be issued as early as beginning of 2015.
• For revenue recognition, the DPOC was informed that the proposed new Standard was in the process of being balloted and was expected to be issued in the first half of 2014. The suggested membership of the joint IASB/ FASB Implementation Group would be brought to the DPOC for its review before being announced.

Other major projects discussed insurance contracts and the conceptual framework.

The implementation and maintenance projects the DPOC was updated on were the disclosure initiative, bearer plants, proposed amendments to IFRS 11 and IAS 28 and the post-implementation review of IFRS 3. The DPOC also queried the decision by the Interpretations Committee not to add to its agenda a request to clarify IAS 19 regarding the discount rate. The IASB representatives noted that the issue of discount rates was a cross-cutting one and that a broader project on the issue had been added to the research programme.

IFRS 14 'Regulatory Deferral Accounts'

The DPOC received a report on the lifecycle of the due process to date on the project to develop an interim IFRS on the issue of rate-regulated activities. The DPOC challenged the IASB's decision to press ahead with the issue of an interim IFRS and asked whether the interim IFRS would result in less comparability, whether the interim IFRS raised an issue of fairness in being restricted to first-time adopters, after the significant level of resistance that the proposals had received, and the length of time the interim IFRS would remain in force, in particular if the main project on rate-regulated activities took a long time to complete. In discussion, the DPOC acknowledged the IASB's rationale for reaching the decisions it had on the interim IFRS but expressed the hope that such situations would be rare and temporary.

XBRL

The DPOC received an update on the previously approved plan of the IASB to restructure staffing and consultative activities related to electronic reporting. In particular, theses relate to: (1) the proposed changes to the due process for updating the IFRS Taxonomy and (2) proposals to replace the XBRL Advisory Council (XAC) and XBRL Quality Review Team (XQRT) with a single consultative group.

Update on consultative groups

The DPOC received an update on a number of consultative groups following the annual review that had been considered by the Committee at its July 2013 meeting: The Accounting Standards Advisory Forum (ASAF) remains very active, not least given its role as the consultative group on the conceptual framework project; the Capital Markets Advisory Committee (CMAC) will see a revised membership from the beginning of 2014 and efforts continue to broaden its membership in terms of both professional background and geographical representation; of the project-specific consultative groups (financial instruments, leases and insurance) none had held formal meetings for some time but the DPOC agreed with the staff's view to continue the three groups as lists of experts that the IASB could call on to get specific advice; the consultative group on Shariah-compliant Instruments and Transactions noe features an expanded the membership as proposed at the DPOC's October 2013 meeting. The DPOC was also updated on the progress of the IASB's proposal to increase the size of the SMEIG to 30 members as from July 2014 and considered and approved proposals to amend the SMEIG's Terms of Reference and Operating Procedures.

Reporting of Outreach and Fieldwork and review of correspondence

The DPOC received an update on the staffs continuing efforts to improve the transparency of the reporting of feedback from outreach with investors and other users of financial statements and the reporting of the results of fieldwork undertaken on particular projects. The DPOC also noted that no new correspondence cases had been submitted since the October 2013 meeting.

Please click for the full summary of the meeting on the IASB's website.

The comment letter notes that equity accounting remains an area of controversy due to the lack of guidance in IAS 27 Separate Financial Statements on the purpose of separate financial statements or the principles underpinning the measurement of an entity’s investment in its separate financial statements. We suggest that the IASB develop an underlying basis for the preparation of separate financial statements and should evaluate whether in its separate financial statements an entity should be permitted to account for different types of investments on an inconsistent basis.

We do not agree with the suggested amendment to IAS 28 because we do not believe that the principles applied to loss of control over a subsidiary in IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements should be applied in a situation where loss of control does not result in a change in the method of accounting applied because both subsidiaries and associates or joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method.

Click for the full comment letter.

The Conceptual Framework Bulletins are intended to promote discussion and to inform about European views on the IASB's Conceptual Framework project. They are also designed to elicit feedback on these views therefore come with specific questions at the end of each issue.

This bulletin discusses:

• Unavoidable and avoidable issues of complexity in financial statements.
• Possible causes for complexity.
• Suggested guidance to the conceptual framework that may reduce the complexity.

The bulletin on complexity in financial statements can be accessed here.

Constituents wishing to comment on the views in the bulletins are invited to do so by 30 April 2014.

We have also created an archive of all bulletins available. We are grateful to EFRAG and the National Standard Setters for giving us permission to host them on IAS Plus.