Summary of the October 2013 DPOC meeting

  • IFRS Foundation (blue) Image

30 Oct 2013

The IASB has published a summary of the 16 October 2013 Due Process Oversight Committee (DPOC) meeting that was held in Frankfurt during the Trustees’ meeting.

Topics discussed during the DPOC meeting were:

Update on technical activities

Updates were given on the progress of the major projects on the IASB’s work plan.

Regarding hedge accounting, the DPOC noted that it had finished a lifecycle review at its April 2013 meeting and that the IASB is in the process of balloting the hedge accounting chapter into IFRS 9 Financial Instruments. In addition, DPOC members were informed of two changes: (1) removal of the mandatory effective date of IFRS 9 and (2) an amendment related to presentation of changes in the value of own credit risk on financial liabilities.

For the classification and measurement project, the DPOC was updated on the IASB and the FASB convergence efforts, but acknowledged that the Boards are at different stages of development. The DPOC’s next step is to conduct a lifecycle review of the project in the first half of 2014.

For the impairment project, DPOC members were informed that a converged standard between the IASB and FASB is unlikely because of differences in their expect credit losses models. The DPOC asked the IASB to continue to discuss with the FASB ways to bring their respective models closer.

Other major projects discussed were macro hedging (permission to ballot the discussion paper/timetable set for late 2013, early 2014), leases (feedback on the exposure draft), revenue recognition (fatal flaw process revealed three issues on collectibility, constraint and licences), insurance contracts (fieldwork showed increase complexity, including volatility and accounting mismatches), conceptual framework and rate-regulated activities.

In addition, the DPOC received updates on implementation and maintenance projects on the IASB’s work plan  in particular, the disclosure initiative (IAS 1), going concern (IAS 1) and the post-implementation review of IFRS 3.

Educational material

The DPOC reviewed a report on the development of educational material by the IASB. The main concern of members is that supportive educational material may be viewed as authoritative.

Effects analysis consultative group (EACG)

The DPOC was presented with a progress report on the EACG. The EACG advises the IASB on methods for field testing and effects analyses. The DPOC discussed the EACG work in (1) reviewing confidentiality while improving transparency and (2) communications aspects of effect analyses.

Review on consultative groups

The DPOC reviewed and were satisfied that the following consultative groups were operating effectively and should be retained:

  • Accounting Standards Advisory Forum (ASAF);
  • Capital Markets Advisory Committee (CMAC);
  • Education and Advisory Group (EAG);
  • Shariah-compliant Instruments and Transactions


The DPOC examined a report on the IASB’s plan to restructure staffing and consultative activities related to electronic reporting. In particular, they discussed three issues: (1) proposed update to the IFRS taxonomy, (2) review of the due process for XBRL and (3) proposals to replace the XBRL Advisory Council and XBRL Quality Review Team.

Review of correspondence

The DPOC discussed a complaint from Business Europe concerning the accuracy of staff reporting on comment letters on the proposed amendments to IAS 40 Investment Property as part of the 2011–2013 Annual Improvements cycle. The DPOC was satisfied with the IASB technical staff reply for the complaint and approved the response letter to Business Europe.


The DPOC is responsible for approving due process and overseeing the IASB’s compliance with due process, and reviewing the Trustees’ fulfilment of their oversight function in accordance with the Constitution of the IFRS Foundation.

A summary of the meeting is available on the IASB website.

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.