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.

Notes from IASB fair value roundtable

  • IASB (International Accounting Standards Board) (blue) Image

25 Nov 2009

On 2 November 2009, the IASB held a roundtable at the FASB offices in Norwalk, CT to discuss its Fair Value Measurements exposure draft (ED).

Roundtable participants consisted of a cross-section of representatives including auditors, financial statement preparers, valuation experts and industry. We have posted Notes Taken by Observers at the Roundtable (PDF 34k). Participants in the roundtable were asked to address the following issues and questions relating to fair value measurements:

Issue A – Fair value as an exit price

  • When does a market-based exit price not reflect the present value of the expected future cash inflows and outflows from an asset or a liability?
Issue B – Fair Value of liabilities
  • Can the principles of ASU No 2009-5 be applied in practice in IFRSs? If not, why not?
  • When might the fair value of a liability not be equal to the corresponding asset's fair value?
Issue C – Fair value of non-financial assets and liabilities
  • What specific additional guidance is needed to measure the fair value of non-financial assets and liabilities?
  • Are any of the proposals in the exposure draft inconsistent with measuring the fair value of non-financial assets and liabilities?
Issue D – Fair value in inactive markets
  • Is the proposed guidance sufficient for measuring fair value when markets have become inactive (when they previously were active)? If not, what additional guidance do you think is necessary?
Issue E – Fair value in emerging and transition economies
  • What proposals in the exposure draft are not applicable to emerging and transition economies? Why are they not applicable?
  • What specific additional guidance is needed?
Issue F – Jurisdiction-specific issues
  • Are there measurement considerations specific to your jurisdiction that the exposure draft does not seem to have contemplated? If so, what are they?
Issue G – US GAAP convergence
  • Aside from the reference market and blockage factors, would you expect there to be a numerical difference between a fair value calculated using the proposals in the exposure draft and a fair value calculated using the Topic 820?
  • Have you learned anything from applying Topic 820 that the IASB should consider when finalising an IFRS on fair value measurement guidance?


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.