May

FASB and OIC hold joint meeting

31 May 2017

On 30 May 2017, representatives of the US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the Italian standard-setter Organismo Italiano di Contabilità (OIC) held a joint meeting in Rome. The meeting was the second bilateral meeting between the two standard-setters.

The FASB and the OIC had an exchange of views on implementation activity regarding the standards on revenue and leases, on future projects and on the IASB’s projects including insurance contracts and the proposed amendments regarding accounting policies and accounting estimates.

For more information about the meeting, see the press release on the FASB website.

Recent sustainability and integrated reporting developments

30 May 2017

A summary of recent developments at the Natural Capital Coalition, A4S, the SASB and ACCA/IIRC.

The Natural Capital Coalition has launched a public consultation on a Finance Sector Supplement to the Natural Capital Protocol. The supplement will focus on banking, investment, and insurance. Please click to access the consultation page on the Natural Capital Coalition website.

The Prince of Wales' Accounting for Sustainability project (A4S) has published a social and human capital accounting guide with practical examples and suggested tools and guidance for how social and human capital can be integrated into decision making. The guide has been developed by finance teams for finance teams, but will also be of interest to anyone seeking to understand the key challenges faced by organisations when undertaking social and human capital accounting. Please click to access the guide on the A4S website.

The Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) has announced commissioning a rigorous, independent analysis of the potential economic implications of widespread corporate adoption of SASB standards by publicly-traded U.S. companies for the disclosure of material sustainability information. The paper is being developed to examine and understand the potential costs and benefits surrounding the implementation of SASB's standards. Please click to access the announcement on the SASB website.

The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) and the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) together with AVIVA and Barclays will be hosts of a roundtable Building a more sustainable economy in Europe: Non-financial information and sustainable finance – what next? on 21 June 2017 in Brussels. More information is available through the press release on the IIRC website.

Second joint meeting of EFRAG and KASB

30 May 2017

Acknowledging the importance of co-operation by members of the international community applying IFRS, the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) and the Korean Accounting Standards Board (KASB) held their second joint meeting on 15 May 2017 in Seoul.

The major topics of the technical discussion were the recently issued standards IFRS 9 and IFRS 15 as well as the discussion paper on principles of disclosure.

EFRAG and the KASB plan to meet again in Brussels in 2018.

Please click to access the joint press release on the meeting on the KASB website.

Responses to the IASB exposure draft regarding prepayment features with negative compensation

29 May 2017

The comment deadline on the IASB's exposure draft ED/2017/3 'Prepayment Features with Negative Compensation (Proposed amendments to IFRS 9)' has ended. The majority of stakeholders' responses are negative, but for different reasons.

The responses to ED/2017/3 seem to fall into three major categories (the links below are to individual submissions on the IASB's website or each submitting organisation's website):

  • Those who believe that there never was an issue with IFRS 9. Among these is the German standard-setter ASCG who states: "Generally speaking, a majority of our Committee members is of the view that IFRS 9 would not have required any changes. These members do not share the view that IFRS 9.B4.1.11(b) excludes financial instruments with symmetric prepayment features comprising potentially “negative” compensation." The South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (SAICA) joins the statement: "[W]e do not believe an exception is required for this but merely a clarification or additional guidance." And the South Korean standard-setter KASB adds: "[C]oncerns have been raised about whether those suggested cases are common and widespread enough to require an amendment."
  • Those who believe that changes to IFRS 9 are needed, but the approach is wrong/might have unintended consequences . The French standard-setter ANC notes: "ANC is still convinced that an alternative solution, i.e. clarification, is worth being contemplated in order to provide a simpler and also immediately applicable solution." The UK standard-setter FRC notes a "not convincing" rationale regarding the exclusion of fiinancial asset where the fair value of the prepayment feature is not insignificant. And the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) states: "We are not, however, supportive of the IASB’s proposed solution, which is overly complex, introduces unwelcome asymmetry and could result in unintended consequences." Deloitte joins the group of sceptical voices and raises "concerns with the way the amendment is structured and drafted".
  • Those who believe that changes to IFRS 9 might be warranted, but the timing is wrong. The Japanese standard-setter ASBJ is "gravely concerned" regarding the comment period of 30 days and believes that with the effective date of IFRS 9 approaching any amendment to IFRSs should be very limited in scope. And the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) notes that it "has serious concerns about [the] purpose and timing" of the proposed amendments and would consequently suggest "that the IASB better articulates why it decided to propose these amendments at this particular point in time, as the mandatory application of IFRS 9 is just a few months away". The Canadian standard-setter AcSB adds: "We are also very concerned that modifying IFRS 9 within a few months before the effective date can negatively affect the implementation efforts of preparers, auditors and users of the financial statements." EFRAG notes that the timing problems can be mitigated to a certain degree by a different effective date: "EFRAG recommends that the IASB change the effective date to 1 January 2019, with early application permitted, rather than the date proposed in the Amendments. This is in order to provide more time for Europe's and other jurisdictions' translation and/or endorsement processes and to address the concerns of SEC-filers."

The IASB is in the process of posting all responses to the exposure draft to its website.

Deloitte comment letter on ESA Consultation

29 May 2017

The European Economic Area member firms of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited have responded to the European Commission’s consultation on “The Operations of the European Supervisory Authorities”.

High-level but strong messages on a few core principles for standard-setting and enforcement activities that we believe are particularly relevant for the EU environment are:

  • Separation of powers
  • Balance of powers
  • Stakeholders’ involvement

With regard to the first point, we agree with the common European position as regards Question 15 of the consultation and stress:

[A] separation of powers between the activities of standard-setting, enforcement and final decisions on sanctions favours independent decision-making and mitigates the risks of conflicts of interests.

Please click to download our full comment letter.

IVSC intends to establish Financial Instruments Board

29 May 2017

The International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC) is looking to put in place a Financial Instruments Board that will sit alongside its Tangible Assets Board and its Business Valuation Board.

More information is available in the call for applications on the IVSC website.

 

New Banking and Finance Newsletter with interview with Jean-Paul Gauzès

29 May 2017

The newest edition of the European Commission's Banking and Finance Newsletter offers an interview with the EFRAG President.

The interview touches on the role of EFRAG and how it contributes to improving European financial reporting and standard setting as well as how EFRAG works together with the IASB. Mr Gauzès also notes his thoughts on what he sees as EFRAG's main priorities for the coming years.

Please click to access the interview on the EC website.

IFRS Foundation Trustees and Japan's FASF strengthen cooperation

25 May 2017

The IFRS Foundation Trustees and Japan’s Financial Accounting Standards Foundation (FASF) have issued a joint statement reaffirming their shared commitment to the objective of a single set of high quality, global accounting standards. The statement also describes how the two organisations will work together to support adoption of IFRS in Japan.

The statement was issued in conjunction with the meeting of the IFRS Foundation’s Trustees in Tokyo, Japan.

In Japan, listed companies have a choice of several sets of accounting standards. The use of IFRS has been permitted since 2010. Since then, 164 listed companies (30% of total market capitalisation) have already adopted or announced plans to adopt IFRS.

For more information, see the press release and joint statement on the IASB's website.

IASB publishes Request for Information on the post-implementation review of IFRS 13

25 May 2017

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has issued a Request for Information (RFI) seeking comments from stakeholders to identify whether IFRS 13 'Fair Value Measurement' provides information that is useful to users of financial statements; whether there are areas of IFRS 13 that are difficult to implement and may prevent the consistent implementation of the standard; and whether unexpected costs have arisen in connection with applying or enforcing the standard.

The post-implementation review process for IFRS 13 was officially added to the IASB's agenda in January 2017. Before that, the IASB had been gathering information to determine the scope of the review and to identify the main questions that need to be answered before the implementation of IFRS 13 can be assessed.

The information gathered so far indicates that many stakeholders believe that IFRS 13 works well and has led to significant improvements. This is in line with the findings of the FASB's post-implementation review (PIR) of the US GAAP Topic 820 Fair Value Measurement - both standards are the result of a joint convergence project.

However, IASB stakeholders contacted so far have identified four broad areas where IFRS 13 to their mind might still benefit from improvements. These four areas are the backbone of the RFI:

  • Disclosures about fair value measurements. Some of the disclosure requirements for Level 3 fair value measurements are perceived as onerous while at the same time their usefulness is questioned.
  • Prioritising Level 1 inputs or the unit of account. IFRS 13 is perceived as not clear on whether entities should prioritise Level 1 inputs or the unit of account when determining the fair value of investments in joint ventures and associates.
  • Application of the concept of the highest and best use. Concerns in this area regard the implications of applying the concept of highest and best use in the measurement of groups of operating assets.
  • Application of judgement in specific areas. Challenges around this have been mentioned to the IASB and the question is whether further support could be helpful.

In addition those areas, the IASB also encourages respondents to raise any issues that they have come across but that have not been covered by the questions in the RFI. Also, the RFI asks respondents whether the IASB should strive to maintain convergence with US GAAP Topic 820 Fair Value Measurement in any changes that might be the result of the PIR.

After the comment period ends, the IASB will consider the comments received along with information gathered through other consultation activities and findings from research on the topic. The final conclusions of the IASB will be presented in a report and a feedback statement which will also set out the steps the IASB believes should be taken as a result of the review.

Comment deadline is 22 September 2017. The request for information and a corresponding press release are available on the IASB website. In addition, the IASB has released a call for research seeking applications to undertake a literature review, bringing together the existing academic literature on the effect of implementation of IFRS 13. Deloitte has released an IFRS in Focus newsletter outlining the contents of the RFI.

The Bruce Column — Sunshine and the ideas behind management commentary

25 May 2017

The concept of management commentary has long been perceived by the IASB like a worrying cloud hovering over financial reporting. But the sun may be about to break through. A speech by Hans Hoogervorst, Chairman of the IASB, looks likely to have confirmed that the weather has changed, reports our regular columnist, Robert Bruce.

The latest IASB thoughts on the subject come under the project of ‘wider corporate reporting’, in the form of a paper published a few weeks ago bearing the title ‘Implications for the Board: options for the work plan’. I looked back through my archive and found a column I had written for the Financial Times well over a decade ago. This weighed up the discussion paper published by the IASB then on the topic of, you have guessed it, management commentary. ‘The danger’, a member of the project team said at the time, ‘is that financial reporting becomes more complicated and difficult to follow’. The IASB then thought of management commentary as a tool to fill the gap, and provide explanations outside the existing reporting.

Fifteen years ago it was felt, eventually, that the concepts of management commentary were not central to the IASB’s task. It was felt that it would be useful to explain the effects of IFRSs but it was not core to the IASB’s purpose. A Practice Statement was produced in 2010 but was seen as having limited effect. Again in 2015, there were echoes of this mindset in the IFRS Foundation’s views that suggested that the Board should not broaden the scope of its work into areas outside the boundaries of traditional reporting.

But the wind seems to have changed course. And what the IASB Chairman said recently, in a speech in New York, has signaled a change in the weather. Across the last decade the argument has sharpened. Reporting on human and intellectual capitals and climate change, for example, has become a mainstream demand. When it was developed, the Management Commentary Practice Statement focused on providing complementary and supplementary information to the financial statements and many of the content elements it recommended are to be found in the Integrated Reporting <IR> framework. But integrated reporting is more than this. And the time may have come for an update to the IASB Practice Statement.

The IASB Chairman made this very clear in his New York speech the other day. ‘Since the publication of our Management Commentary Practice Statement in 2010 the world has moved on’ he said.

Since then the <IR> framework has become widely adopted and the UK’s guidance on the concept of a strategic report is seen as mainstream. In Hans Hoogervorst’s words: ‘They put more emphasis on interconnectivity among elements of an integrated report’. They look at ‘how developments in the external environment have affected a company’s business model and strategy’, he said. It is time for change. And as Hoogervorst put it: ‘We are especially well placed to make sure there is a good fit and connectivity between financial reports and non-financial information which I believe to be essential to the success of integrated reporting’. These are encouraging words. Now more than ever people need integrated reporting-style reporting. This consistent approach with management commentary would be very helpful.

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.