News

India Image

Education material on Ind AS 27 and 28, updated overview of Ind AS, and Ind AS disclosure checklist

04 Jul 2018

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has issued educational material on Ind AS 27 'Separate Financial Statements' and on Ind AS 28 'Investment in Associates and Joint Ventures'. The ICAI has also published 'Indian Accounting Standards (Ind AS): An Overview (Revised 2018)'. In addition, the ICAI has published 'Indian Accounting Standards (Ind AS): Disclosures Checklist'.

The educational material contains a summaries of Ind AS 27 and Ind AS 28 discussing the key requirements of the standard sand frequently asked questions covering the issues. Please click for access to the education material on the ICAI website.

The overview of Ind AS offers a roadmap for Ind AS application; carve-outs from IFRS/IAS; changes in financial reporting under Ind AS compared to financial reporting under existing Indian accounting standards; and a summary of all the Ind AS including recent amendments to Ind AS. The publication can be downloaded free of charge from the ICAI website.

The disclosure checklist ist the first ever drawn up for Ind AS. It can be accessed here on the ICIA website.

AcSB (Accounting Standards Board - Canada) Image
OIC (Italy Organismo Italiano di Contabilità) (lt blue) Image

AcSB and OIC hold joint meeting

04 Jul 2018

On 20 June 2018, the Canadian Accounting Standards Board (AcSB) and the Italian standard-setter Organismo Italiano di Contabilità (OIC) held a joint meeting in Toronto. The meeting was the first bilateral meeting between the two standard-setters.

In addition to giving updates on their respective standard-setting activities at the meeting, the two boards exchanged views on implementation activities regarding the standards on financial instruments, revenue, and leases, technical issues on IFRS 17 and the IASB’s current project on rate-regulated activities. In addition, the AcSB and the OIC discussed two projects of individual interest, specifically, relevance of performance measures and business combinations under common control.

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

Accounting Standards Committee of Germany (ASCG) (lt blue) Image
Germany Image

Strong messages against EU carve-in carve-out proposal at ASCG anniversary event

03 Jul 2018

On 2 July 2018, the German standard-setter ASCG celebrated 20 years of its existence by hosting a festive event in Berlin that saw official addresses and a keynote speech by representatives from politics, industry and national and international standard-setting as well as two panel discussions on financial reporting in the times of changing values and technological disruption.

The welcome address by Prof Dieter Truxius, Vice-Chair of the Administrative Board of the ASCG and one of Germany's leading experts in accounting and controlling issues related to German family-owned businesses, already revealed a clear message that would resurface in all speeches and discussions. He noted that the German industry is extremely critical of proposals that might lead to modifying IFRSs during the EU endorsement process or even after they have been endorsed. Prof Truxius pointed at the potential of serious negative consequences for all companies based in the EU and operating internationally:

  • European companies could ultimately be threatened with exclusion from the global capital markets.
  • Europe's influence on the development of IFRSs could diminish.
  • European companies whose shares are listed in different trading venues could face higher costs if they have to prepare their financial statements according to IFRS and EU-IFRS in future.

He concluded: "Such trends lead to disparities in international accounting and prevent cross-border comparability of financial statements. Ladies and gentlemen, we should take a firm stand against this trend."

Dr Katarina Barley, Federal Minister of Justice and Consumer Protection, also picked up on the topic and noted how important it is that internationally operating companies have a common accounting language. Jean-Paul Gauzès, President of the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group Board, pointed at the long and trusted relationship between the German standard-setter and EFRAG, who have been working together for the European public good since 2001.

The keynote speech, which took the event into the direction of the motto of the afternoon, was delivered by Melanie Kreis, Chief Financial Officer, Deutsche Post DHL Group. She spoke on "Financial reporting - caught between the poles of entrepreneurial behaviour and social change" and offered insights into the group's early adoption of IFRS 16, non-financial reporting and carbon accounting, accounting for goodwill and impairment of goodwill, as well as digitalisation. Nevertheless, she also picked up on the EU Fitness Check and noted that not only the family-owned businesses but also the large listed groups in Germany oppose potential carve-ins and carve-outs. Her clear message on all the topics she spoke about was "think things through to the end, think of the effects for the companies that finally have to live with the result".

The two ensuing panel discussions showed an interesting combination of panelists. A Member of Parliament, a CFO, an NGO representative, and an auditor discussed "Changing behaviour by requiring ESG information – Where is the boundary of the financial report?". While it was noted by some that a lot of reporting on ESG issues is boilerplate, it was also stated that there was an increased visibility and awareness of information, not only from the outside but also within companies. Whether reporting requirements could and should be used to change behaviour was contested with views ranging from the role financial markets can play to achieve sustainability to the warning against overtaxing reporting with an inflation of additional requirements. Measurability (and therefore auditability) and materiality were also controversely discussed with the difference of materiality to an entity and materiality to society especially noted.

In the concluding panel, the IASB Chairman, a CAO of a digital company, an ESMA representative, and a professor of accounting discussed "Digital reporting vs. Reporting in a digital world". The opening round of questions alone showed the many facets of the topic with some insights of what is already possible proving to be almost scary. Questions around XBRL dominated the discussion on what is currently being done, which saw comments on comparability in connection with block tagging, detailed tagging, and use of XBRL extensions, although it was mentioned that XBRL might not be more than an interim solution. It was also noted that as a result of increasing digitalisation information overload ceases to be so much of a problem and materiality questions might need to be asked differently. However, it was warned that while more and more information can be processed electronically and, therefore, quicker understanding patterns and drivers has not become easier. It was asked whether and when a point comes where we trust machine judgement more than management judgement and whether at some point of time, reporting and consumption of financial information would become a game of "Watson against Watson". One important aspect in the whole discussion was also the question of what is being reported as companies with digital business models have huge amounts of intangibles they cannot show in their financial statements. Accounting for intangibles was clearly identified as an area where current financial reporting needs to evolve.

An informal exchange of opinions between the many national and international guests, which included representatives of the standard-setters from the US, Canada, Australia, Japan, and Hong Kong, concluded the event.

A German language summary of the event is available on the ASCG website.

IASB (International Accounting Standards Board) (blue) Image

IASB issues 'Investor Update' newsletter

03 Jul 2018

The IASB has issued the sixteenth edition of its newsletter 'Investor Update', which provides investors with quick access to information about current accounting and financial reporting topics.

This issue features:

  • Spotlight — IFRS 16 Leases
  • Spotlight — ESMA and IFRS Standards
  • In Profile —Selim Gogus, Credit Suisse HOLT
  • Project updates
  • Information on investor materials and current events

The Investor Update newsletter is available on the IASB’s website.

IASB webcast Image

Educational webcast on IFRS 9

29 Jun 2018

The IASB has released a webcast that discusses how to apply IFRS 9 'Financial Instruments' to financial assets with prepayment features.

The eleven minute webcasts focusses on the 'SPPI test', including the amendments made to the IFRS 9 requirements in October 2017.

Please click to access the webcast on the IASB website (available as full webcast or in a slides only version).

European Union Image

ECON motion for resolution on IFRS 17

29 Jun 2018

At its meeting on 18-19 June 2018, the members of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) of the European Parliament adopted a motion for resolution on IFRS 17 'Insurance Contracts'. The final text has now become available.

As reported earlier, the motion notes the benefits that IFRS 17 will bring about but also states that ECON members have several concerns regarding the standard.

Please click to access the motion for resolution on the European Parliament website.

IASB speeches (blue) Image

IASB chair provides update on current activities

28 Jun 2018

At the IFRS conference in Frankfurt, IASB Chair Hans Hoogervorst provided an update on the use of IFRS Standards around the world and the current thinking of the IASB.

In his overview of the current state of IFRS adoption, Hoogervorst also referred to the Brexit, the current transatlantic tensions and the rise of protectionism in general. Hoogervorst then transferred his considerations to accounting. He noted:

In 2011, even before the Trump era, it became clear that the United States would not be adopting IFRS Standards anytime soon. Fortunately, the rest of the world reacted just as it does now in the face of the American challenge to the global trade system: rather than following the United States in retreat, the use of IFRS Standards continued to spread around the world.

In this context, he also addressed the situation in the EU and the fitness check on public reporting by companies. He urgently warned against making local modifications to IFRS:

Acting in ‘enlightened self-interest’ means foregoing a smaller self-interest to achieve a bigger self-interest. Even when our stakeholders may not agree with certain aspects of our Standards, they know it is not in their ‘enlightened self-interest’ to modify them. They know this could set in motion a process of gradual balkanisation of the world of IFRS Standards, undoing the benefits of a single set of global standards.

Following his general observations, Mr Hoogervorst provided an update on the developments in IFRS Standards. The topics he covered included primary financial statements, the implementation of IFRS 17, and wider corporate reporting as well as financial instruments with characteristics of equity, where the IASB has recently issued a discussion paper on this research project.

For more information, see the speech transcript on the IASB’s website. A video recording is also available.

IASB meeting (blue) Image
FASB meeting (lt blue) Image

June 2018 IASB meeting notes posted

28 Jun 2018

The IASB met in London on 19–21 June 2018 to discuss fifteen topics and included an educational session with the FASB. We have posted our comprehensive Deloitte observer notes for all projects discussed during the meeting.

Joint IASB–FASB Education Meeting

The topics being discussed were mainly those related to Standards that the IASB and FASB developed together, or are largely converged, as well as new topics that both boards have on their work programmes.

Segment Reporting

The IASB’s and FASB’s Standards on segment reporting (IFRS 8 Segment Reporting and Accounting Standards Codification Topic 280, Segment Reporting) are largely converged. The IASB provided a summary of its post-implementation review of IFRS 8 and explained why it decided not to finalise the amendments to IFRS 8 it had exposed. The FASB outlined the targeted changes related to the segment aggregation process that it is considering making to Topic 280.

Primary Financial Statements and Financial Performance Reporting

Both boards are working on projects related to the primary financial statements. The IASB gave an overview of its Primary Financial Statements project and the FASB updated IASB members on the background and scope of its Financial Performance Reporting. The FASB is focusing on two types of improvements: disaggregation of performance information; and the structure of the performance statement (subtotals).

Disclosure Initiative and the Disclosure Framework

Both boards are working on projects related to improving disclosures in the financial statements. The IASB provided an update on its Disclosure Initiative—in particular the Principles of Disclosure and Targeted Standards-level Review of Disclosures projects. The FASB gave an update on its Disclosure Framework project.

Fair Value

The IASB’s and FASB’s Standards on measuring fair value (IFRS 13 Fair Value Measurement and Accounting Standards Codification Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement) are largely converged.

The FASB has developed amendments to the disclosure requirements for fair value measurements which it plans to finalise, by updating Topic 820, in the third quarter of 2018. The FASB provided an overview of those changes. The IASB set out the role of post-implementation reviews and provide some background on IFRS 13, including differences between Topic 820 and IFRS 13. The staff summarised the main messages received and how the IASB plans to consider the usefulness of disclosures as part of its work on ‘Better Communication in Financial Reporting’.

Goodwill and Impairment

The IASB and FASB requirements for business combinations were developed jointly. The requirements for the initial recognition and measurement of goodwill are therefore largely converged. The IASB and FASB requirements for the allocation of goodwill to cash-generating units and impairment are similar, but there are differences. Both boards have projects looking at goodwill. The boards shared information about those projects.

Implementation

The boards shared information about their respective implementation support activities undertaken regarding revenue recognition and leases.

Update on all projects not otherwise covered

The boards provided updates on their projects that will not otherwise be discussed during the Joint Education Session.

IASB Meeting

Disclosure Initiative

This session has three threads: Better Communication in Financial Reporting; Targeted Standards-level Review of Disclosures—Guidance for the Board; and Materiality.

The staff provided the background to, and current status of, the projects in Better Communication in Financial Reporting (Primary Financial Statements, Principles of Disclosure, Targeted Standards-level Review of Disclosures, Definition of Material, Management Commentary and IFRS Taxonomy). IASB members indicated that they were satisfied with the current interaction and distinction between them.

The staff presented an analysis and recommendations to the Board about the development of ‘Guidance for the Board’ to use when developing and drafting disclosure objectives and requirements. The IASB decided to assign a member of the IFRS Taxonomy team to each of the Board’s active projects in an advisory capacity when developing disclosure objectives and requirements. The IASB also supported using a five-step approach to develop disclosure objectives and requirements. The Board will select the Standards to review at its July 2018 meeting.

The IASB continued to consider the feedback on its proposed amendments to the definition of material, supporting all of the staff recommendations in relation to the effective date, ‘immaterial’ vs. ‘not material’, the materiality practice statement, use of the term ‘material’ and the definition of material of the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB).

Dynamic Risk Management (DRM)

The IASB decided that it will address as part of the first phase of DRM project the derivative financial instruments that may be used as the hedging instruments for DRM and their designation and de-designation. The IASB also supported the staff analysis of what performance means in the context of DRM and the information about DRM activities that should be provided in the statement of profit or loss.   

Research programme

The staff gave a general update on the research programme.

IBOR reform

The IASB decided to start a research project to consider the effects on financial reporting of potential discontinuation of IBORs (interest reference rates such as LIBOR, EURIBOR and TIBOR).

Primary Financial Statements

In developing the proposals for primary financial statements the staff have been focusing on non-financial entities. At this meeting the staff presented its preliminary analysis and observations about whether the tentative decisions made so far could apply, with little or no change, to financial entities. The IASB did not make any decisions.  

Insurance Contracts

The IASB decided to propose, as part of its annual improvements cycle, a series of amendments to IFRS 17 Insurance Contracts. This is to address problems where the drafting of IFRS 17 does not achieve what the Board intended.

Implementation

The staff had recommended that the IASB not finalise the amendments it proposed and exposed to IFRIC 14 IAS 19—The Limit on a Defined Benefit Asset, Minimum Funding Requirements and their Interaction. However, the Board voted in favour of the staff performing further work. The issue will be brought back at a future meeting.

Islamic Finance Consultative Group Update

The staff provided a summary of the March 2018 meeting of the Islamic Finance Consultative Group.

Business Combinations under Common Control 

The Board asked the staff to drop the Full Fair Value approach but continue to work on the Ceiling and Revised Ceiling approaches. IFRS 3 should be used as a basis and the staff should explore different overlays to providing the most useful information about BCUCC that affect NCI. 

Please click to access the detailed notes taken by Deloitte observers for the entire meeting.

IASB document (blue) Image

IASB publishes discussion paper on financial instruments with characteristics of equity

28 Jun 2018

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has published a comprehensive discussion paper DP/2018/1 'Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity'. The discussion paper defines the principles for the classification of financial liabilities and equity instruments without, however, fundamentally changing the existing classification outcomes of IAS 32. The IASB's proposed preferred approach is based on two features, timing and amount, and is accompanied by the provision of additional information through a separate presentation of expenses and income from certain financial liabilities in other comprehensive income and additional disclosures. The comment period ends on 7 January 2019.

 

Background

The project on financial instruments with characteristics of equity was originally commenced as a joint IASB-FASB project addressing the distinction between liabilities and equity. The joint project saw a discussion paper discussion paper Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity published in February 2008, however, during their joint meeting in November 2010, the IASB and FASB decided to defer further work on this project. In December 2012, as part of its response to the Agenda consultation 2011, the IASB formally reactivated this project as an IASB-only research project.

The main objective is to identify the characteristics that should be present in an instrument for it to be classified as either an equity or liability instrument. Accordingly, this project is exploring whether the existing requirements in IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation can be improved. The Board also examines presentation and disclosure requirements.

The project is linked to the Conceptual Framework as the complexity of questions around distinguishing between liabilites and equity meant that these were excluded from the project to revise the Conceptual Framework. The revised framework published in March 2018 therefore includes a revised definition of a liability and new supporting guidance, but the definition of equity remained unchanged and will be reviewed in this research project.

 

Summary of main proposals

To begin with, the IASB expects many of the existing classification outcomes of IAS 32 to remain unchanged if the approach preferred by the IASB is implemented.

In accordance with the preferred approach proposed by the IASB, equity is a residual that remains if the characteristics of a financial liability are not fulfilled. Accordingly, a financial instrument must be classified as a financial liability if its contractual terms contain an unavoidable obligation:

  • a) to transfer cash or another financial asset at a specified time other than at liquidation (timing feature);

    and/or

  • b) for an amount independent of the entity’s available economic resources (amount feature).

The analysis of the timing feature enables the assessment of funding liquidity and cash flows, including whether an enterprise has the economic resources necessary to meet its obligations at maturity and to estimate the need for economic resources at specific times. The timing feature can be specified as a fixed date as another date such as for example dates of coupon or interest payments.

The amount feature, on the other hand, supports the assessment of the balance sheet solvency and returns. This concerns in particular the question of whether an entity has sufficient economic resources to meet its obligations in terms of amount. It is central to the amount feature that a change in the value of the issuer's available economic resources does not limit the amount of the obligation. A simple example is the obligation to repay a loan when it matures: this obligation exists on the merits and in terms of amount, regardless of how the economic resources of the debtor develop. Nevertheless, there may also be changes in the amount of the obligation if, for example, the nominal amount changes due to exchange rates.

In the opinion of the IASB, the component approach already known under IAS 32 should be retained for compound financial instruments that contain both an equity and a liability component. Consequently, the issuer of a non-derivative financial instrument must assess whether it contains both a debt and an equity component. These components would continue to be classified separately as financial liabilities, financial assets or equity instruments.

A puttable instrument that comes puttable exception in IAS 32 would meet the definition of a financial liability if the Board’s preferred approach with timing feature and amount feature is applied. Consequently, the puttable exception would continue to be required under the Board’s preferred approach.

A derivative on own equity would be classified in its entirety. Such a derivative may be classified as an equity instrument, a financial asset or a financial liability in its entirety. The individual legs of the exchange would not be separately classified. A derivative on own equity would be classified as a financial asset or financial liability if:

  • a) the derivative requires the entity to deliver cash or another financial asset, and/or contains a right to receive cash, for the net amount at a specified time other than at liquidation - it is net-cash settled (timing feature); or
  • b) the 'net amount' of the derivative is affected by a variable that is independent of the entity’s available economic resources (amount feature).

The proposed preferred approach requires consistent accounting for redemption obligations, including NCI puts, and compound instruments with derivative components, e.g. convertible bonds. The IASB sees this as an improvement in the usefulness of financial statements because consistent debt and equity classifications are achieved for similar contractual rights and obligations.

In the opinion of the IASB, additional information on the timing feature is not necessary, as the current presentation and disclosure requirements in other IFRS Standards provide sufficient information to facilitate assessments of funding liquidity and cash flows. In contrast, additional disclosures on the amount feature are required to provide more comprehensive information to users of the financial statements; more detailed breakdowns are required in the balance sheet, the income statement and the revaluation reserve (other comprehensive income) to facilitate the assessment of solvency and return. The IASB proposes a separate disclosure in other comprehensive income for income and expenses from financial liabilities and derivative financial assets or financial liabilities that depend on the company's available economic resources, as well as partially independent derivatives. These amounts are not subsequently reclassified to profit or loss.

In addition, the discussion paper proposes to provide more comprehensive information on the characteristics of issued instruments, such as the ranking of financial liabilities and equity instruments in the event of liquidation.

Annexes to the discussion paper contain a discussion of the two alternative approaches discussed by the IASB, each based on only one of the two features, and a comparison of the classification of selected financial instruments under IAS 32 and under the IASB's preferred approach.

Comments on the discussion paper are requested by 7 January 2019.

 

Additional information

 

CFA Institute (lt green) Image
IFRS Foundation (blue) Image

CFA Institute and IFRS Foundation discuss technology’s impact on financial information

26 Jun 2018

At their 5 June 2018 event, the CFA Institute and the IFRS Foundation hosted a joint investor event, 'Transforming the impact of financial information—the role of technology,' where they discussed the benefits of technological advancements as well as its fears.

The panel discussed how technological developments in the collection and analysis of data has create an era of systematic investing which can search past price correlations and predict future changes in price. In addition, technological developments in AI are assisting auditors by flagging anomalies that may need to be investigated. Further, the automation of some task eliminates some of the human error that occurs during the collection of data.

The fears of technological advancements discussed by the panel included price crashes of exchanges within the highly automated trading environment; loss of jobs due to automation, and the loss of skepticism in the algorithms used (the human element).

For more information, please the event notes 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.