News

eulic39.gif Image

FEE warns that EU standards "second best" without IAS 39

05 Jun 2004

A report published by FEE, the Federation of European Accountants, warns that Europe's accounting standards would be regarded globally as inferior if some IFRSs (particularly IAS 39) are not endorsed for use in Europe.

"We emphasise the need for 'endorsed IFRS' to be the same as 'IFRS'", said FEE President David Devlin. "The endorsement process should not be used as a means to create European standards. Only global standards will meet the wider objectives of financial stability, efficiency and transparency and provide the benefits of increasing confidence in financial markets, reducing the cost of capital and facilitating global investments." The report identifies the following "serious implications" of not endorsing all IFRSs:

  • Extra disclosures to explain differences from IFRS, for reasons of transparency.
  • Companies would no longer be able to claim that their financial statements were prepared under IFRS, with related consequences for the audit report.
  • Related audit implications.
  • The risk of setting a precedent.
  • System changes implications of any unique European standards in any area, such as IAS 39.
  • The risk that some financial institutions, banks or insurance undertakings that apply or want to apply IAS 39 will be seriously disadvantaged.
  • Access to capital markets could be restricted or made more expensive.
  • Loss of opportunity to converge IFRS and US GAAP and possible impact on other elements of transatlantic dialogue.
Click for (PDF 256k) and (PDF 93k).
IFRIC (International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee) (blue) Image

Report from the first day of the IFRIC meeting

04 Jun 2004

The International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) is holding a two-day meeting in London on Thursday and Friday 3-4 June 2004. Presented below are the preliminary and unofficial notes taken by the Deloitte observers at the first day of the meeting.Notes from the IFRIC Meeting3 June 2004 The Chairman noted that this was Clement Kwok's last meeting and thanked him for his participation.

The Chairman noted that three of the IFRIC members were attending the IASCF Constitution Public Hearings in New York and consequently there would be quorum problems when they were unavailable by phone.

IFRIC D3: Determining Whether an Arrangement Contains a Lease (Rights of Use)

The staff is organising discussions with preparers and will be circulating a series of proposed questions to be discussed at these meetings.

The staff proposed, based on comments received in the exposure process and subsequent comments from IFRIC members, to converge with EITF 01-8. IFRIC members confirmed their support for this general direction, but a number of members expressed concern as to the rule based nature of EITF 01-8.

The staff made the following recommendations relating to comments received:

  • That a requirement to reassess whether an arrangement contains a lease be included in line with the EITF 01-8 requirement to reassess in certain circumstances. In response to a query it was noted that the change in circumstances was event driven, and consequently a lease comes into existence or ceases to exist and therefore there is no retrospective effect. IFRIC members supported that proposal.
  • That the retrospective transition requirements be retained. Several IFRIC members expressed concern as to this requirement.
  • The effective date would be 1 January 2006. It was noted that this could be affected by the decision on transitional arrangements.
  • That the interpretation clarify that it does not address when a component of an asset is itself an asset for the purpose of applying IAS 17. The IFRIC members concurred.
  • That the proposals not be re-exposed. IFRIC agreed.

A vote to confirm these decisions was delayed until the second day of the meeting because a quorum was not present.

IFRIC D4: Interests in Decommissioning and Environmental Rehabilitation Funds

The staff asked the IFRIC to consider four models:

  • 1. Account for all assets arising from decommissioning funds in accordance with IAS 39.
  • 2. Account for all assets arising from decommissioning funds in accordance with IAS 37.
  • 3. Account for rights to reimbursement in services in accordance with IAS 37 and rights to reimbursement in cash in accordance with IAS 39 as an available-for-sale financial asset. This alternative has two sub-alternatives, namely that changes in the fair value of the IAS 37 asset could be recognised either in profit or loss or in equity.
  • 4. Account for rights to reimbursement in services in accordance with IAS 37 but recognise an additional asset for any rights to benefits in addition to reimbursement.

The staff recommended the third alternative with changes in fair value of the IAS 37 asset being recognised in equity. It was noted that any asset recognised in accordance with IAS 39 would not be subject to an asset cap, whereas the asset recognised under IAS 37 would be subject to an asset cap.

After discussion the IFRIC requested the staff to pursue an approach that retained the basic D4 model but accounted for the amount subject to the IAS 37 asset cap as a financial asset or an intangible asset.

The IFRIC requested the staff to obtain more information as to the nature and workings of these funds prior to proceeding. This they believed would assist them in determining the nature of the asset.

IAS 27 Consolidation: Control by a Fiduciary

The IFRIC noted a summary of the discussion and decisions of this topic at the May Board meeting. Any further IFRIC involvement in this project would only be determined after the June Board meeting.

Employee Benefit Plans with a Promised Return on Contributions or Notional Contributions (Money Purchase Plans with a Minimum Guarantee)

The IFRIC considered and commented on a proposed draft interpretation.

The IFRIC debated how the proposed interpretation would account for a plan that promised a return based on the S&P 500 plus 2% on a notional amount. It was agreed that the obligation would be measured based on the amount of the return at the balance sheet date.

A vote to approve the draft interpretation, which would be D7, for issue was delayed until the second day of the meeting because a quorum was not present.

Combining and Segmenting Construction Contracts

The IFRIC considered a summary of the tentative decisions to date. The staff noted that there is an interaction between this project and the project on Service Concessions.

Obligating Event in the Light of the EU Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment

The IFRIC discussed the German Accounting Interpretation Committee's (AIC) draft proposals on accounting for the impacts of the EU directive and in particular when an obligating event arises. It was noted that the AIC would proceed to develop its draft interpretation based on the outcome of the discussions.

The Directive requires that the costs relating to disposing of the relevant equipment are borne by those producers who are in the market when the costs are incurred.

As there was uncertainty as to the workings of the directive, the IFRIC proceeded on the basis that the costs would be allocated based on the annual market share of the relevant producers. On this assumption, the IFRIC leaned toward concluding that the creation of the market share in the period in which the costs are incurred is the final aspect of the obligating event, and no provision should be recognised in prior periods. The cash outflows should, however, be considered in an impairment test on the related production assets.

It was agreed that the AIC would proceed on this basis.

Activities of Other Interpretation Bodies

The IFRIC noted a report on these activities.

Report of the Agenda Committee

The IFRIC noted the minutes of the Agenda Committee meeting.

The IFRIC considered adopting the following agenda items:

  • Discounting of current taxes.
  • Classification of interest and penalties on income taxes.

The staff recommended that neither item be adopted. The IFRIC agreed that the items would not be adopted onto the current agenda.

This summary is based on notes taken by observers at the IFRIC meeting and should not be regarded as an official or final summary.

Constitution review (old) Image

Deloitte CEO Bill Parrett comments on constitution review

04 Jun 2004

The Trustees of the IASC Foundation held the first of a series of public hearings as part of their review of the IASCF constitution on 3 June 2004 in New York.

Deloitte Chief Executive Officer Bill Parrett and Deloitte Global IAS Leader Ken Wild presented our firm's views. Click to download (PDF 26k).
IFAC (International Federation of Accountants) (lt gray) Image

IFAC research report on public sector budgetary reporting

04 Jun 2004

A research report on Budget Reporting published by the Public Sector Committee (PSC) of the International Federation of Accountants examines best practices in budget formulation and reporting under differing budget models and government administrative arrangements, and considers whether the PSC should develop an International Public Sector Accounting Standard (IPSAS) on budget reporting.

IPSASs are based (to the extent appropriate) on IFRSs. The report notes that "the International Accounting Standards Board has not established accounting standards for budgetary reporting by private sector entities." The report may be downloaded from IFAC's Website (no charge, but you must first register).
Constitution review (old) Image

Trustees meet with SAC committee on constitution review

03 Jun 2004

As part of their current Review of the IASC Foundation (IASCF) Constitution, the IASCF trustees' constitution committee met, on 2 June 2004 in a public session in New York, with a constitution subcommittee of the Standards Advisory Council (SAC).

The discussions focused both on the overall issues that the IASCF has identified for in-depth consideration and on the terms of reference for the SAC. The trustees will be conducting a number of meetings with interested parties, including more public hearings. Therefore, no conclusions were reached at this meeting. Presented below are the preliminary and unofficial notes taken by Deloitte observers at the meeting.

Notes of the Meeting of the IASCF and the SAC Constitution Committees2 June 2004, New York

1. Whether the objectives of the IASC Foundation should expressly refer to the challenges facing SMEs The members believed that the issues of SMEs should be considered by the IASB, but questioned the inclusion of such a requirement in the constitution. The overall belief of the members was that if the constitution were to include such a reference, that reference should not be in the paragraph discussing rigorous application (as proposed). That is, regardless of the standards that apply to an entity, they should all be applied with rigour.

2. Number of trustees and their geographical and professional distribution The trustees have proposed equal representation from North America, Europe, and Asia/Oceana regions. Some members suggested that the constitution not include any specific criteria, but require the selection of the best people. Others argued that the regions that apply IFRS should be represented more than North America. Members were concerned that excluding North America would send a message that convergence was not important – which was not the belief of most members. That is, involvement in the process will create interest to "join the game".

Members also noted that the purpose of financial information is for users and, therefore, the regions with the most dominant capital markets should be equally represented. There was also a suggestion to add trustees with backgrounds as regulators to the requirements in the constitution.

The subcommittees briefly discussed how trustees were selected. The current IASCF Chairman expressed concern that the process was already burdensome and that adding more requirements seemed unnecessary. One member suggested appointing a nominating committee (without much support).

3. The oversight role of the Trustees The trustees had recommended that the constitution be amended to include a requirement to "carefully consider the IASB's agenda". The members expressed concern with understanding exactly what is meant by that phrase and asked the wording in the constitution to be expanded. The IASCF Chairman noted that the trustees would not have veto power over agenda items, but would require the IASB to review the agenda items with the trustees on a regular basis. The intention of the trustees was to require the IASB to bring a potential agenda item to the trustees for positive approval. It was also suggested that the trustees could require the IASB to add an item onto its agenda. There was general consensus that the Trustees role in relation to the agenda should not be strengthened to the point of approval, but should be just short of that line.

Some members expressed concern that the current IASB members do not consider the practical implementation issues related to its proposals. There was consensus that the trustees should monitor this issue actively with each project.

Several members strongly encouraged the trustees to reconsider whether it should undertake educational activities. There were questions over due process, the costs needed to build up the infrastructure, and the ability to have appropriate review by the trustees (since supposedly the IASB staff would not be used). The trustees were surprised by the level of concern and countered that if the trustees do not undertake these activities, interpretations around the world could differ. The members noted that there is nothing the trustees can do to prevent this – including issuing training materials. The staff noted that the IASB is currently developing 2-page summaries of its standards targeted to CFOs. One CFO at the table stated that he already gets those summaries from the Big 4 Firms – why does he need another one from the trustees?

4. Funding of the IASC Foundation The IASCF Chairman asked for any bright ideas on how to raise funding. The only alternative discussed was whether it was feasible to implement a fee-based structure with the exchanges. One member also suggested a nominal fee for all purchases of securities over a certain amount. The concern was that any of these suggestions would have to be implemented by changing local laws.

5. The composition of the IASB The Trustees recommended keeping 14 Board members, but allowing between 2 and 4 part-time members. There was general agreement with this approach as some noted that the part-time member from the accounting profession added significant quality and real life experience to the Board.

Some members expressed concern about the composition of the Board with 10 of 14 being "Anglos". In addition, six come from countries that don't apply IFRS. The majority of the members believe membership of the IASB should be based on competence and not nationality.

6. The appropriateness of the IASB's existing formal liaison relationships There was general support for maintaining the requirement in the constitution to have liaison relationships. There was support, however, for ensuring the constitution remains flexible to change as situations change. One European member suggested that EFRAG replace the European national standard setters in the liaison relationships. The IASCF Chairman noted this would make it much easier and was open to pursuing this suggestion.

7. Consultative arrangements of the IASB The trustees expressed concern with cluttering up the constitution with due process issues. There was a suggestion that field tests (as distinct from merely field visits) should be mandatory on all projects. While there was not general support for making field tests mandatory, there was general agreement that field tests should be used more often. Several members suggested the IASB must validate to the trustees why it did not use field tests.

Concern was raised that the current activities of the IASB do not consider the difficulties raised by users of IFRS having different language requirements. For example, 3 months is too short for a comment period as exposure drafts are not translated in time. The IASCF Chairman expressed concern about the cost of translation. There was general agreement that the cost of being an international organisation includes the cost of ensuring those companies applying IFRSs can fully understand IFRSs.

8. Voting procedures of the IASB The Trustees have proposed changing the voting requirements from a majority (8 members) to requiring the vote of 9 members. There was no objection to 9; however, one member suggested raising the requirement to 10. There was little support for this suggestion.

9. Resources and effectiveness of the International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) The members recognised there is concern over IFRIC, but were not sure there was anything that related to the constitution. One member raised the question of whether IFRIC interpretations should be exposed. The general belief around the table was that recent experience suggests exposure should continue to be required.

10. The composition, role, and effectiveness of the SAC The subcommittee of the SAC presented draft recommendations to the trustees in how to improve its process. There was general concern that SAC was not operating effectively, and therefore as a result, the IASB was not receiving advice in a useable manner. The reasons for this were various and include the size of SAC, the chairmanship of SAC, etc. The SAC members suggested the SAC develop a charter that would govern its activities and submit that charter to the trustees for approval.

There was general agreement with this approach. In addition, there was general agreement the chairman of SAC should not an IASB member, but should be a paid position for either a part-time or full time individual. This issue will be discussed at a future trustees meeting.

This summary is based on notes taken by observers at the meeting and should not be regarded as an official or final summary.

IOSCO (International Organization of Securities Commissions) (dark gray) Image

New chairman of IOSCO Technical Committee

03 Jun 2004

The International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) has elected Andrew Sheng, Chairman of the Securities and Futures Commission of Hong Kong, as the new Chair of its Technical Committee.

IOSCO's Technical Committee, comprising representatives of 15 government agencies that regulate large, developed, and internationalised securities markets, deals with regulatory matters including financial reporting, disclosure matters, and International Financial Reporting Standards. In our news story of 24 May 2004 we reported two projects that have just been initiated by the Technical Committee relating to interpretation and enforcement of IFRSs.
European Union (old) Image

EC report on implementation of IFRSs in Europe

02 Jun 2004

The (PDF 148k) on the European Commission's Action Plan for Financial Services, which was presented to the 2 June 2004 meeting of the Council of Economics and Finance Ministers, provides an update on the implementation of IFRSs in Europe, including the following commentary on IAS 39: On IAS 39, discussions continue between the IASB and interested parties. On 21 April, the IASB re-exposed the fair value option in IAS 39. Further discussions relate to the presentation of cash flow hedges and the possible application of a third type of hedge.

On IAS 32, the Interpretation Committee of the IASB, IFRIC, is working on a draft interpretation regarding the treatment of cooperative shares that will be exposed for further comments in the near future. It is the Commission's intention to take stock of the ongoing discussions between the IASB and the European banking industry on IAS 39 at a next meeting of the Accounting Regulatory Committee, planned on 14 June.
Hong Kong Image

Hong Kong adopts IAS 32 and IAS 39

01 Jun 2004

The Hong Kong Society of Accountants has adopted HKAS 32 Financial Instruments: Disclosure and Presentation and HKAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement, effective 2005. These are the same as IAS 32 (revised 2003) and IAS 39 (revised 2004) except for certain transition provisions.

HKAS 32 and 39 are available on the HKSA Website.
News default Image

Joint Forum report on financial disclosure

01 Jun 2004

The Joint Forum has published a report, Financial Disclosure in the Banking, Insurance and Securities Sectors: Issues and Analysis examining the progress to date by regulators and other standard-setters in the area of financial disclosures and the progress made by financial firms in adopting certain enhanced disclosure recommendations published in 2001. The Joint Forum was established in 1996 by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the International Organization of Securities Commissions, and the International Association of Insurance Supervisors to deal with issues common to the banking, securities, and insurance sectors.

The report notes that a number of IASB projects are expected to improve disclosures by financial firms, including Financial Risk Disclosures, IFRS 4, and Insurance Contracts Phase II. Click to download:
IFRIC (International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee) (blue) Image

Interpretations Committee will meet this week in London

01 Jun 2004

The International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) will meet on 3 and 4 June 2004 at the offices of the IASB in London.

The agenda:

AGENDA OF THE IFRIC MEETING 3-4 JUNE 2004

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.