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.

2020 Agenda consultation

Date recorded:

Strategic direction and balance of the Board’s activities (Agenda Paper 24A)

Background

This paper presented the staff’s proposed approach to categorising and describing the Board’s activities in the Request for Information (RFI).

Staff analysis

The staff proposed that the Board’s activities should be categories as activities to:

  • a) develop new IFRS and major amendments to IFRS Standards;
  • b) maintain IFRS Standards and support their consistent application;
  • c) maintain and develop the IFRS for SMEs Standard and support its application; and
  • d) maintain and develop IFRS Taxonomy.

The staff further proposed that the Board’s activities should be categorised as cross-cutting activities on understandability and accessibility of the Standards and stakeholder engagement.

Lastly, the staff recommended that the RFI should include summarised information about the activity, an estimate of how much the Board’s current resources the activity consumes and potential additional activities if the Board increased its current level of focus on the activity.

Board discussion

A Board member suggested the focus of the Board’s activities should be on the maintenance and consistent application of IFRS Standards rather than developing new IFRS Standards and amendments to IFRS Standards. Another Board member expressed concerns that external stakeholders may not be able to understand what fostering understandability and accessibility of Standards actually entails without further clarification. A Board member suggested that the staff expand on the description of stakeholder engagement as the objective extends beyond promoting the global acceptance of IFRS Standards as the stakeholder engagements also support the maintenance and consistent application of IFRS Standards and development of new and major amendments of the IFRS Standards.

No decisions were made with regard to this paper.

Criteria for assessing projects to be added to the work plan (Agenda Paper 24B)

Background

This paper presented the staff’s proposed criteria for assessing projects to be added to the work plan to seek feedback on the RFI.

Staff analysis

The staff suggested that the Board considers the following criteria when determining whether a potential project will address the user’s needs:

  • a) the important of the matter to users;
  • b) whether there is a deficiency in the way particular types of transactions or activities are reported in the financial statements;
  • c) the types of entities likely to be affected by any proposals; and
  • d) how pervasive or acute a particular financial reporting issue is likely to be for entities.

The staff further suggested considering additional criteria such as the interaction with other projects already on the work plan, the complexity and feasibility of the project and its solutions and the capacity of the Board and its stakeholders to progress the project on a timely basis.

Board discussion

Board members recommended prioritising the criteria similar to how the Conceptual Framework is set out. For example, the criteria could be largely categorised into the impact of a particular issue and the effort involved in resolving the issue. The staff clarified the criteria described are intended to look at present as well as future issues.

No decisions were made with regard to this paper.

Approach to the Board’s current projects (Agenda Paper 24C)

Background

This paper presenteds the staff’s proposed approach to seeking feedback on the priority of the Board’s current projects in the RFI.

Staff analysis

In previous Board meetings, some Board members suggested that the RFI should ask stakeholders to re-prioritise some current work plan projects. However, the staff recommended not to ask stakeholders to re-prioritise the Board’s current work plan projects but rather to include a general question in the RFI asking stakeholders for comments on the Board’s current work plan as a whole. In the RFI, the staff recommended identifying IAS 29: High Inflation; Pollutant Pricing Mechanisms; Variable and Contingent Consideration; and Post-Implementation Review of IFRS 5 as research pipeline and other projects for stakeholders to comment on and re-prioritise, if necessary.

Board discussion

A Board member recommended giving the stakeholders the option to comment on whether they think a particular project should be prioritised over an existing project on the current work plan, along with reasons for their proposal.

Board decision

All 13 Board members supported the staff’s recommendation.

Financial reporting issues to be included in the Request for Information (Agenda Paper 24D)

Background

This paper summarised the outreach undertaken to develop the list of potential projects to be included in the RFI.

Staff analysis

The staff recommend the list of potential projects in the RFI and the list of projects which are not included in the RFI in an appendix. Furthermore, the staff propose to describe for each project the issues raised and an estimate of indicative size of the potential project.

Board discussion

A Board member suggested that feedback should be sought from stakeholders over what level of priority should be given to projects such as Disclosure Initiative—Targeted Standards-level Review of Disclosures. Furthermore, Board members suggested that feedback should be sought for an explicit list of projects as it will improve comparability of feedback received. A Board member suggested the staff provide reasons and explanation as to why some issues and projects have been included in the Appendix. 

No decisions were made with regard to this paper.

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.