archive-com.com » COM » I » IASPLUS.COM

Total: 1447

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • IASB website available again
    2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 Info IASB website available again 03 Feb 2016 The IASB website which had been down for three days as a result of a major hardware failure at its hosting provider is available again The eIFRs section and the web shop are fully functional again the news section has been restored to the state of 19 January 2016 and will be available in full shortly We are proud that the IASB used IAS Plus to communicate with their readers when their website was down Related Topics Resources International Accounting Standards Board IASB Related news Pre meeting summaries for the February IASB meeting 09 Feb 2016 2016 IFRS Red Book coming in March 09 Feb 2016 Reactions to the proposed amendments intended to address concerns about the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the forthcoming new insurance contracts standard 08 Feb 2016 We comment on the IASB s proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 FEE briefing paper on the endorsement of IFRS 9 08 Feb 2016 February 2016 IASB meeting agenda posted 05 Feb 2016 All Related Related Publications Deloitte comment letter on proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 IFRS in Focus IASB issues amendments to IAS 7 Statement of Cash Flows requiring disclosure of changes in liabilities arising from financing activities 01 Feb 2016 Deloitte comment letter on the IASB s annual improvements to IFRSs 2014 2016 cycle ED 27 Jan 2016 IFRS industry insights Telecommunications sector Implications of the new leasing standard 21 Jan 2016 All Related Related Discussions Insurance contracts 20 May 2015 Rate regulated activities 24 Jul 2014 Investor outreach strategy 25 Feb 2014 IASB activities update 24 Feb 2014 All Related Related Dates February 2016 IASB meeting 16 Feb 2016 17 Feb 2016 London Comment deadline

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/news/2016/02/iasb-website-1 (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Deloitte comment letter on the IASB's annual improvements to IFRSs 2014-2016 cycle ED
    that was IASB published in November 2015 and makes proposes amendments to three IFRSs We believe the annual improvement project is efficient and effective method of handling isolated issues with IFRSs and support the amendments proposed in the exposure draft In addition we provided recommendations for drafting changes and amendments to transitional provisions Download the full comment letter below Download Related Topics Publication series Deloitte comment letters IASB IFRIC IFRSF Resources IASB exposure drafts International Accounting Standards Board IASB Projects Annual improvements 2014 2016 cycle Standards IAS 28 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures 2011 IFRS 1 First time Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards IFRS 12 Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities Related news Pre meeting summaries for the February IASB meeting 09 Feb 2016 2016 IFRS Red Book coming in March 09 Feb 2016 Reactions to the proposed amendments intended to address concerns about the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the forthcoming new insurance contracts standard 08 Feb 2016 We comment on the IASB s proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 FEE briefing paper on the endorsement of IFRS 9 08 Feb 2016 February 2016 IASB meeting agenda posted 05 Feb 2016 All Related Related Publications Deloitte comment letter on proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 IFRS in Focus IASB issues amendments to IAS 7 Statement of Cash Flows requiring disclosure of changes in liabilities arising from financing activities 01 Feb 2016 IFRS industry insights Telecommunications sector Implications of the new leasing standard 21 Jan 2016 IFRS in Focus IASB issues amendments to IAS 12 to clarify the recognition of deferred tax assets for unrealised losses related to debt instruments measured at fair value 20 Jan 2016 All Related Related Discussions IFRS 9 IAS 28 Is measurement of long term interests in

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/publications/global/comment-letters/2016/2014-2016-annual-improvements (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • IFRS industry insights: Telecommunications sector — Implications of the new leasing standard
    site Publication Directory Global publications Newsletters IFRS industry insights Publication series Analysis and opinion Special topics Member firm publications Non English publications Third party publications IFRS e learning Info IFRS industry insights Telecommunications sector Implications of the new leasing standard Published on 21 Jan 2016 This publication highlights issues from the new leasing standard that will be of interest to those in the telecommunications sector Download Related Topics Publication series IFRS industry insights Resources IASB finalised pronouncements International Accounting Standards Board IASB Standards IFRS 16 Leases Related news Pre meeting summaries for the February IASB meeting 09 Feb 2016 2016 IFRS Red Book coming in March 09 Feb 2016 Reactions to the proposed amendments intended to address concerns about the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the forthcoming new insurance contracts standard 08 Feb 2016 We comment on the IASB s proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 FEE briefing paper on the endorsement of IFRS 9 08 Feb 2016 February 2016 IASB meeting agenda posted 05 Feb 2016 All Related Related Publications Deloitte comment letter on proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 IFRS in Focus IASB issues amendments to IAS 7 Statement of Cash Flows requiring disclosure of changes in liabilities arising from financing activities 01 Feb 2016 EFRAG endorsement status report 29 January 2016 01 Feb 2016 Deloitte comment letter on the IASB s annual improvements to IFRSs 2014 2016 cycle ED 27 Jan 2016 All Related Related Discussions Insurance contracts 20 May 2015 Rate regulated activities 24 Jul 2014 Investor outreach strategy 25 Feb 2014 IASB activities update 24 Feb 2014 All Related Related Dates February 2016 IASB meeting 16 Feb 2016 17 Feb 2016 London Comment deadline on ED 2015 10 17 Feb 2016 Comment deadline on ED 2015 8 26 Feb

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/publications/global/ifrs-industry-insights/ifrs-16-telecommunications (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Insurance contracts
    reversals in the amount of cumulative revenue recognised will not occur This is because a current expected value model had been chosen for insurance contracts and revenue was unlikely to be recognised in full until the contract matures if the IFRS 15 high probability constraint applied Application of variable fee approach transition agenda paper 2C This paper considers whether the IASB s previous tentative decisions relating to transition would need to be modified if the IASB were to require that entities apply the variable fee approach to measure insurance contracts with direct participation features The IASB has proposed that an entity should measure and present insurance contracts at the beginning of the earliest period presented retrospectively if practicable When this is not practicable a simplified retrospective approach would be applied that would enable entities to approximate retrospective application for the measurement of each component of the fulfilment cash flows at initial recognition of the insurance contract The simplified retrospective approach might still be impracticable if the entity could not obtain information about the cash flows that occurred between the initial recognition of the contract and the beginning of the earliest period presented Accordingly the IASB tentatively decided that in such circumstances an entity should use a fair value approach for determining the CSM at initial recognition of the insurance contract An entity would determine the CSM at the beginning of the earliest period presented as the difference between the fair value of the insurance contract and the fulfilment cash flows measured at the beginning of the earliest period presented and determine interest expense and the related amount of OCI accumulated in equity by estimating the discount rate at the date of initial recognition using the simplified retrospective approach To comply with the principle of retrospective application the entity would need to determine the CSM at the beginning of the earliest period presented as if the new IFRS had always been applied The entity would not require historical information to determine the variable fee for service but it would require historical information to determine the cumulative amounts of the CSM loss recognised in profit or loss The Staff believes that retrospective application would often be impracticable for entities applying the variable fee approach because estimating that information would require the use of hindsight Furthermore the Staff notes that the simplified retrospective approach could not readily be applied to contracts that are accounted for using the variable fee approach because this estimates the CSM at the beginning of the earliest period presented as if all changes in estimates before that date were known at initial recognition Those changes include changes in the entity s share of the fair value of underlying items that would have unlocked the CSM at initial recognition without the use of hindsight The Staff proposed that the IASB considers two approaches to address this difference Option 1 is to not provide additional simplification for the variable fee approach The Staff notes that this would mean that an entity applying the variable fee approach would generally apply the fair value approach but the objective of this approach is not to estimate a value of CSM had the standard always been applied Consequently applying a fair value approach would mean that there would be reduced comparability between contracts written before and after the earliest period presented Option 2 would provide an additional simplification for the variable fee approach to the retrospective simplified approach In order to estimate how much CSM would have been released in each period between initial recognition and the beginning of the earliest period presented the entity could assume that the CSM at initial recognition was released according to the pattern of services The Staff believes that results achieved using this method could differ from those calculated using the retrospective approach only because an entity would assume that all changes in the variable fee for service resulting from changes in the fair value of the underlying items and fulfilment cash flows were known at initial recognition of the contract This is similar to the simplified retrospective approach for non participating contracts and on that basis the Staff believes that this method would provide a reasonable approximation of the retrospective approach Historical information might be needed to estimate the accumulated balance of OCI recognised at the beginning of the earliest period presented when the current period book yield approach is applied The Staff believes that this would be often impracticable without using hindsight Consequently the Staff proposed that the IASB provides a simplification to enable entities to approximate the cumulative OCI balance for insurance contracts The entity would assume that there are no differences in the accumulated balance of OCI for the insurance contracts and the underlying items because of differences in timing between the initial recognition of the insurance contracts and the underlying items It would also assume that the accumulated balance of OCI for the insurance contract is determined as follows when underlying items are measured at FVPL there would be no amounts accumulated in OCI for both underlying items and insurance contracts when underlying items are measured at FVOCI the accumulated balance of OCI for the insurance contracts would be equal and opposite to the accumulated balance of OCI recognised for the underlying items and when underlying items are measured at amortised cost the accumulated balance of OCI for the insurance contracts would be the difference between the amortised cost of the underlying items and their fair value IASB discussion An IASB member commented that he had no objection to further simplification for transition as a whole He was in favour of a single objective for transition and expressed doubts as to whether retrospective application would result in greater certainty or comparability given the estimates and assumptions that would be involved Another IASB member stated that the simplification to enable entities to approximate the cumulative OCI for the insurance contracts and the underlying items seemed sensible but she needed to understand this proposal better in order to understand why the approach labelled option 2 is a good proxy for retrospective application An IASB member stated that in many respects the fair value approach has a clearer objective but would result in a different CSM where market conditions had changed since the inception of a contract Another IASB member expressed the view that the fair value approach may be more appropriate as this would be more relevant and reliable than trying to apply retrospective application where data did not exist or was not reliable A further IASB member questioned whether retrospective application would be suitable for long duration contracts when the business model had changed since the date of inception of a contract Proposed accounting for indirect participation contracts agenda paper 2D An indirect participation contract has cash flows that vary with the returns on assets but does not create an obligation to pay the policyholder an amount based on the underlying items less a variable fee for service Accordingly an entity would not be able to apply the variable fee approach to these contracts Measurement Application of previous tentative decisions for measurement When a contract includes asset dependent cash flows the initial estimate of the fulfilment cash flows is determined using the entity s estimate of the expected cash flows discounted using a discount rate that reflects the extent of any dependence on asset returns After initial recognition the fulfilment cash flows could change The changes in estimates that arise as a consequence of changes in asset gains or losses and the corresponding change in the discount rates would be recognised in the statement of comprehensive income Changes in estimates of the participation percentage affect the consideration the entity will receive in return for undertaking the obligations provided by the contract Consequently the entity would recognise changes in the estimates of the profits for future services as an adjustment to the CSM and changes in the profits for services in the current and past periods immediately in profit or loss The CSM is not explicitly re measured in the IASB s tentative decisions The IASB has concluded that the discount rate used to determine the change in fulfilment cash flows that adjust the CSM should also reflect the characteristics of the cash flows of the insurance contract and should be determined at the date of initial recognition of the insurance contract The measurement of the CSM subsequent to initial recognition reflects the accretion of interest on the CSM using locked in rates as the IASB was persuaded that this is conceptually correct and would result in more useful information because it retains a clean separation of underwriting and investment results Implications for indirect participation contracts of the variable fee approach The CSM after initial recognition would differ between the general model and the variable fee approach In the variable fee approach changes in the estimates of the variable fee for future services that adjusts the CSM reflect the current period s estimate of asset returns This means that the adjustment to the CSM is determined using the discount rate at the date of the change in estimate the rate used to accrete interest on the CSM is a current interest rate and the opening balance of the CSM is re measured to reflect changes in discount rate In the general model the adjustment to the CSM is determined using the discount rate at initial recognition the rate used to accrete interest on the CSM is the interest rate at initial recognition and the opening balance of the CSM reflects the interest rate at initial recognition Application of the IASB s tentative direction for the disaggregation of interest expense for indirect participation contracts into an amount presented in profit or loss and in OCI The IASB has considered three variations to the approach to disaggregate interest expense These are a level yield method that would determine the interest expense in profit or loss using a single discount rate that exactly reverses out any amounts recognised in OCI over the life of the contract a projected crediting rate that reflects the pattern of expected crediting rates and a modified effective yield approach that would address the accounting mismatches that might arise between interest expense and investment income when an effective yield approach is applied where the underlying items are a mix of assets measured at FVPL and cost the underlying items measured at cost are sold and a realised gain or loss is presented in profit or loss without a corresponding change in amounts credited to policyholders Implications for the effective yield approach arising from the current period book yield approach The Staff proposed at the previous meeting that the current period book yield approach should only apply when there is no possibility of an economic mismatch i e when the entity s obligation is to pay to the policyholder an amount equal to the value of the underlying items less a variable fee for service and the entity holds the underlying items The Staff proposed that an effective yield approach for determining interest expense should apply when a contract does not qualify for the current period book yield approach The Staff thinks that contracts that are not eligible for the current period book yield approach can be classified between those contracts where the cash flows do not necessarily reflect the cash flows of the assets and those where they do reflect the cash flows of specified assets For the former category of contracts modifying the effective yield approach so that the investment expense reflects the investment income on the assets held would not portray an accurate depiction of the relationship between the assets and the insurance contract The latter category of contracts would be eligible for the current period book yield approach provided that the entity held the specified assets However where an entity did not apply this approach e g because it no longer met the criteria for the application of the current period book yield approach it may be justified to amend the effective yield approach to eliminate accounting mismatches between the cash flows of the insurance contract and the cash flows of the assets However in the Staff s view the effective yield approach should not be modified to reduce the accounting mismatches because if the effective yield approach is to apply to all contracts in which the cash flows vary with changes in investment returns then adjusting the effective yield on the insurance contract to reflect differences that arise in the timing of the recognition of gains and losses on the insurance contract would only increase the complexity of determining the effective yield and make it more difficult to understand its objective Further the investment expense in profit or loss should report on an accruals basis the investment expense incurred in the period regardless of the pattern of crediting notifying the policyholder of its entitlement to those payments Determining investment expense based only on the crediting rates for the period and ignoring the effect that changes in investment returns will have on future crediting rates is inconsistent with the expected cash flow principles in the proposed IFRS The Staff has revised its previous view when they recommended the projected crediting rate version of the effective yield The Staff now recommends that the IASB should use an effective yield approach on the assumption that there would be a revised scope of the effective yield approach and an OCI approach specifically when there is a clear link between underlying items and the cash flows of the insurance contract IASB discussion An IASB member stated that unlocking the CSM as a result of exercising discretion was good but it was necessary to set the definition of discretion more clearly Another IASB member felt that the most important issues to tackle are the scoping of the fair value approach and the application of the indirect participation contracts approach and the slicing of contracts into different pools Examples would be helpful to make the approaches more understandable He questioned whether having different approaches was worth the additional complexity or whether it would be better to have one approach An IASB member felt that the CSM could be re measured and this was implicitly being done when the variable fee approach is applied Several IASB members expressed a preference for using a current rate to unlock the CSM as they considered that this was more meaningful An IASB member considered that not using a current rate would result in an accounting mismatch which may drive insurers to using the OCI solution The Staff felt that this may be an economic mismatch rather than an accounting mismatch An IASB member asked whether there would be any criteria for when an insurer would cease to qualify for the current period book yield approach resulting from the absence of 100 matching with the underlying assets The Staff stated that this would be a matter of judgement but an IASB member felt that some guidance on this issue would be needed Presentation of interest expense for contracts with participation features whether to provide an accounting policy choice agenda paper 2E The IASB had tentatively decided that an entity should choose as its accounting policy to present the effect of changes in discount rates in profit or loss or in OCI Furthermore that accounting policy choice would apply to all contracts within a portfolio In reaching this conclusion the IASB sought to balance the competing demands of understandability and comparability Consequently entities would need to apply judgement as to the benefits and costs in deciding whether to present changes in discount rate in OCI or in profit or loss Effective yield approach There are many similarities between the effective yield approach and the use of locked in rates for contracts without participating features Applying the effective yield approach to contracts without participation features where there are no cash flows that vary with asset returns would result in the same outcome as applying locked in rates Furthermore an entity applying the effective yield approach to present the effect of changes in discount rates in OCI would need to make additional calculations to derive separate amounts on profit or loss and in OCI and permitting the effective yield approach creates additional complexity for users Permitting the same choice of accounting policy for indirect participation contracts and contracts without participation features would avoid differences in the outcome if an entity was required to apply the effective yield approach to indirect participation contracts and an entity could choose as its accounting policy whether to apply the locked in discount rate approach to contracts without participation features Such differences would be difficult to explain therefore the Staff believes that an entity should choose as its accounting policy to present interest expense either all in profit or loss or in profit and loss and OCI using the effective yield approach Current period book yield approach Under this approach the entity determines the investment expense on the insurance contract liability as equal and opposite in amount to the investment income on the underlying items that are reported in profit or loss Any difference between the interest expense reported in profit in profit or loss and the interest expense determined on a current basis would be reported in OCI The key advantage of this approach is that it fully eliminates any accounting mismatch between insurance investment expense on the liabilities and the investment income on the assets when there could be no economic mismatch between them In addition the Staff thinks that this approach is less complex to apply than other approaches However the Staff noted that complexity could arise once a portfolio of insurance contracts ceases to qualify for the current period book yield approach after inception because it no longer holds the underlying items In these circumstances the Staff thinks that the entity should be able to apply the approaches for presenting changes in discount rates for contracts that

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/meeting-notes/iasb/2015/may/insurance (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Rate-regulated activities
    look at the draft discussion paper first before proceeding on this issue The draft had now been provided to the IASB members and therefore the project manager asked the Board whether they agreed that all due process steps had been taken and whether the staff had permission to ballot 13 of the 14 Board members agreed The project manager then asked the IASB whether a comment period of 120 days was the appropriate time in their view She explained that the Board had considered 150 days before but that was due to the summer holidays in the Northern hemisphere As the discussion paper would not be issued before September 2014 this extended comment period would no longer be required All Board members agreed Related Topics Resources IASB due process International Accounting Standards Board IASB Projects Rate regulated activities Comprehensive project Related news Pre meeting summaries for the February IASB meeting 09 Feb 2016 2016 IFRS Red Book coming in March 09 Feb 2016 Reactions to the proposed amendments intended to address concerns about the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the forthcoming new insurance contracts standard 08 Feb 2016 We comment on the IASB s proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 FEE briefing paper on the endorsement of IFRS 9 08 Feb 2016 February 2016 IASB meeting agenda posted 05 Feb 2016 All Related Related Publications Deloitte comment letter on proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 IFRS in Focus IASB issues amendments to IAS 7 Statement of Cash Flows requiring disclosure of changes in liabilities arising from financing activities 01 Feb 2016 Deloitte comment letter on the IASB s annual improvements to IFRSs 2014 2016 cycle ED 27 Jan 2016 IFRS industry insights Telecommunications sector Implications of the new leasing standard 21 Jan 2016 All

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/meeting-notes/iasb/2014/july/rra (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Investor outreach strategy
    differently to incentivise and engage investors to provide us feedback on their work A wide ranging discussion followed as the Council debated these issues The Capers representative suggested that education be added to d especially with respect to users in the United States why IFRSs are important to US investors How IFRSs differ from US GAAP and what the effect of these differences might be A Canadian preparer echoed the need for better education to close the communication gap between what the IASB is proposing and how and why it matters to users The challenges of communicating the IASB s due process and the opportunities for users to influence the debate were discussed In many ways asking users to initiate their involvement at the exposure draft stage is too late for many investors Mr Macey noted that even now the initiative for many developments in corporate governance has come from asset managers not necessarily analysts The role of relevance to management of changes in IFRSs is as important to selling a change in accounting standards as it would be for investors and users The Leases project was an example of how the IASB might use a here is what you get now and here is what you will receive under the new standard Related Topics Resources International Accounting Standards Board IASB Related news Pre meeting summaries for the February IASB meeting 09 Feb 2016 2016 IFRS Red Book coming in March 09 Feb 2016 Reactions to the proposed amendments intended to address concerns about the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the forthcoming new insurance contracts standard 08 Feb 2016 We comment on the IASB s proposed amendments to IFRS 4 08 Feb 2016 FEE briefing paper on the endorsement of IFRS 9 08 Feb 2016 February 2016 IASB

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/meeting-notes/ifrs-ac/feb-2014/investor-strategy (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • IASB activities update
    make more modest adjustments to existing US GAAP and will no longer seek convergence with the IASB Council Members raised certain issues in particular in relation to Insurance It was noted that many insurers are endeavouring to improve their transparency and disclosure their principal concern is around issues of measurement There was also a short discussion of the post implementation review of IFRS 8 Operating Segments On the topic of Impairment there were several interventions trying to clarify some of the implications of having two major standards in use Mr Hoogervorst noted that the Financial Stability Board was aware of the challenges facing the two Boards indeed many of the FSB members had direct influence on the Boards respective decisions Charles Macek noted that the B20 Australia is attempting to influence the G20 to limit its ambition and to focus on removing boundaries to cross border activity as a foundation to global growth Financial reporting can help to remove barriers divergence in financial reporting standards makes this harder Mr Prada offered his view that it was important to maintain the momentum on financial reporting but as part of the solution to breaking down the barriers to global growth while not pinning success to specific deliverables It was important to maintain a sense of direction lest financial reporting slip from the political consciousness Technical Directors report Henry Rees noted that a discussion on portfolio macro hedging is in the final stages of preparation and will be issued later in Q2 The joint Revenue standard is in the final stages of editing and production and is expected to be issued early in Q2 2014 Alan Teixeira noted the Conceptual Framework project the staff is still analysing the comment letters received and expects to present a high level summary to the IASB in March 2014 The Council will discuss this at their June 2014 meeting On disclosure Dr Teixeira noted current progress in particular a forthcoming exposure draft of amendments to IAS 1 intended to unshackle preparers The ED will address how materiality is intended to be implemented in IFRSs On Materiality there is a working group including representatives of IOSCO the IAASB and others looking at materiality more broadly He mentioned that the IASB staff was aware of court decisions in the US the UK New Zealand the Netherlands and other jurisdictions that provided conflicting views on this issue Dr Teixiera also noted that the project on bearer plants amendments to IAS 41 would be kept narrow and not expanded to bearer animals but that a post implementation review of IAS 41 would be added to the list for the next IASB Agenda Review Dr Teixeira also mentioned progress being made in the area of effects analysis Finally the IFRSF s Tokyo Office will be undertaking a survey of how XBRL is used in electronic filings This study has a similar purpose as the IFRS Implementation survey to gather high quality data on those jurisdictions that require electronic filings whether those requirements

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/meeting-notes/ifrs-ac/feb-2014/iasb (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Reaktionen auf die vorgeschlagenen Änderungen, mit denen Bedenken in Bezug auf die unterschiedliche Zeitpunkte des Inkrafttretens von IFRS 9 und dem neuen Standard zu Versicherungen adressiert werden sollen
    Ist einer der Ansätze vorzuziehen Kann einer von beiden eventuell ganz fallengelassen werden Wie kann für den Aufschubansatz die vorherrschende Geschäftstätigkeit am besten bestimmt werden Was ist die sachgerechte Ebene für die Bestimmung der vorherrschenden Geschäftstätigkeit In Bezug auf die erste Frage gibt die große Mehrheit der Stellungnehmenden an dass beide Ansätze erforderlich sind Es wird festgehalten dass sowohl der Überlagerungsansatz als auch die zeitweilige Ausnahme von der Anwendung von IFRS 9 benötigt werden weil diese unterschiedliche Sachverhalte adressieren die von der Art der Geschäftstätigkeit und der Konzernstruktur abhängen An den Enden des Spektrums finden sich auf der einen Seite die Versicherungsbranche und auf der anderen Seite Adressatenvereinigungen Die Versicherungsbranche fordert einen Aufschub von IFRS 9 bis der neue Standard zur Versicherungsbilanzierung fertiggestellt ist in diesen Stellungnahmen werden im Wesentlichen Kostenargumente angeführt Einige Adressatengruppen fordern dagegen nur den Überlagerungsansatz zuzulassen es gibt sogar einige die argumentieren am besten solle gar nichts unternommen werden in diesen Stellungnahmen wird hauptsächlich die mangelnde Vergleichbarkeit hervorgehoben wenn mehrere Optionen bestehen Auf der Ebene darunter ist es hauptsächlich der Aufschubansatz der Vorschläge für eine Verfeinerung auslöst Während die meisten Stellungnehmenden der Meinung sind dass die Beurteilung der vorherrschenden Geschäftstätigkeit der richtige Ansatz ist sorgt der Vorschlag des IASB die vorherrschenden Geschäftstätigkeit auf Ebene der Berichtseinheit zu bestimmen für Verwirrung Die meisten Stellungnehmenden scheinen der Meinung zu sein dass der IASB die Konzernebene als Ebene der Berichtseinheit ansieht Andere sind allerdings der Meinung dass Ebene der Berichtseinheit eine leere Phrase ist die auch Ebenen unterhalb der Konzernebene beschreiben kann Die Frage wie Mischkonzerne zu behandeln sind ist in beiden Fällen wichtig Deshalb argumentieren Stellungnehmende die annehmen dass der IASB eine Bestimmung auf Konzernebene vorsieht oft dass eine Bestimmung unterhalb der Ebene der Berichtseinheit notwendig sei während Stellungnehmende die von einer Bestimmung auf tieferer Ebene ausgehen sich oft hinsichtlich der Auswirkungen auf den Konzern im Unklaren sind Die beiden folgenden Möglichkeiten scheinen sich herauszuschälen Die Beurteilung erfolgt auf Konzernebene und die Ergebnisse werden nach unten durchgereicht dies würde dazu führen dass reinen Versicherungsunternehmen die Tochterunternehmen von Mischkonzernen sind die Aufschuboption nicht zur Verfügung steht während ähnliche Unternehmen die keine Tochterunternehmen von Mischkonzernen sind die Option sehr wohl nutzen könnten Die Beurteilung erfolgt auf einer tieferen Ebene als die Konzernebene was dann die Frage aufwirft wie diese Beurteilung nach oben weitergereicht wird es könnte bedeuten dass Konzerne IFRS 9 und IAS 39 Zahlen zu konsolidieren hätten oder es könnte bedeuten dass in Frage kommende Tochterunternehmen zwei Sätze von Rechnungslegungsinformationen vorzuhalten hätten IAS 39 Zahlen für die Berichterstattung gegenüber ihren Adressaten und IFRS 9 Zahlen für die Berichterstattung innerhalb des Konzerns Es wird nach Stand der Informationen von der IASB Sitzung im Oktober 2015 derzeit davon ausgegangen dass der IASB die erneuten Erörterungen des Entwurfs im zweiten Quartal 2016 aufnehmen wird Endgültige Änderungen werden im dritten Quartal 2016 erwartet Zugehörige Themen Ressourcen IASB Projekte Unterschiedliche Zeitpunkte des Inkrafttretens von IFRS 9 und dem neuen Standard zu Versicherungen Versicherungsverträge Umfassendes Projekt Standards IAS 39 IFRS 4 IFRS 9 Sonstige Entwürfe

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/de/news/2016/februar/reactions-to-ed-2015-11?set_language=de (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive



  •