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.

Post-implementation reviews

Date recorded:

Michael Stewart introduced post-implementation reviews in general.  He handed over to April Pitman for the discussion of the post-implementation review of IFRS 8 Operating Segments.

The IFRS 8 review was mapped on to the IASB's expected benefits as expressed in the IFRS 8 Basis for Conclusions and some of the concerns expressed during the development of IFRS 8, such as the lack of comparability between companies, loss of trend data after a business combination or disposition, and the lack of geographical information. The post-implementation review has been completed and a report is being prepared.

Lessons learned from this review included:

  • all agreed with broader scope of the post-implementation review process
  • the public consultation was widely supported
  • constituents valued the transparency of the post-implementation review process

Any issues for amendment/interpretation of IFRS 8 will be co-ordinated with the FASB, as this is a converged standard.

A Council member asked whether such reviews should be conducted on a 'post-implementation' or a 'post-adoption' basis.  He had asked his question in the context of Canadian insurance companies and implementing IFRS financial instruments standards.

An IOSCO observer noted that securities regulators in EU have concerns about the identification of Chief Operating Decision Maker, and raised IFRS 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations as a candidate for a post-implementation review.

The IASB staff reviewed a comparison of the IASB and FASB post-implementation review processes.  The IASB views the post-implementation review as a component of its due process and conducts it entirely in public with a high degree of transparency.  The FAF conducts the post-implementation review for FASB standards and the process is largely confidential.  The findings, process for tackling issues, etc are discussed in public.

With respect to the review of the ASC on Segment Reporting, the FASB is committed to "attempting to maintain a converged approach to segment reporting.  [The FASB] will weigh the desire to remain converged with the FASB's other priorities and the demands on [FASB] resources."

The IASB staff noted that it was difficult to participate in the FAF's review, as it was a closed process.  The IASB had tended to keep away from the US in the IFRS 8 post-implementation review, but this will change in future, given that many companies and analysts in the US use IFRSs (directly or indirectly), the IASB will do more outreach in the US.

The EFRAG chairman noted her hope that converged standards from the convergence project should be based on a similar body of evidence and time period.

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.