This site uses cookies to provide you with a more responsive and personalised service. By using this site you agree to our use of cookies. Please read our cookie notice for more information on the cookies we use and how to delete or block them.
The full functionality of our site is not supported on your browser version, or you may have 'compatibility mode' selected. Please turn off compatibility mode, upgrade your browser to at least Internet Explorer 9, or try using another browser such as Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox.

Consolidation and Derecognition

Date recorded:

The purpose of the session was to discuss the strategic options available to the boards in meeting the MoU commitments relating to consolidation and derecognition. Staff presented the current state of play on these topics at both boards. They noted that the financial crisis lead to significant pressure to get the projects accelerated. Staff highlighted that the ideal would be both boards develop common requirements, but they concluded this was not achievable at present.

The staff presented both boards with two strategic options:

  1. FASB to complete its projects on consolidation and derecognition, then join the IASB in developing common standards. IASB to slow down its projects so the FASB has the opportunity to join the due process.
  2. FASB to complete its projects on consolidation and derecognition, then use the IASB exposure drafts as starting point. IASB to finalise its documents. This approach is similar to the one taken on Fair Value Measurements (where the IASB used SFAS 157 as a starting point).

Board members asked the staff about differences between the current FASB proposals and the direction the IASB is taking in the two areas. They discussed possible approaches that could result in converged guidance in the longer term while allowing for the current pressure on both boards to produce overhauled guidance in the short-term. This could avoid significantly changing the same guidance again within a short time frame. Staff confirmed that both sides are monitoring progress and trying to identify differences between the current thinking of the boards on these issues as early as feasible, but this process takes time and ressources.

The boards finally agreed to pursue an approach where the FASB finalises its current proposals and then exposes the IASB documents, once finalised, as exposure drafts (FASB would already allocate resources during the redeliberation and finalisation phase of the IASB documents). If any issues were identified during the FASB redeliberations, they could be addressed via the two-year post-implementation review that is part of the IASB's due process.

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.