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".
  • Fair value measurement
    Undertake research on the proposed measurement and feed the results of the research into the PIR of IFRS 13 She said that the staff proposed option c for the following reasons it would ensure that work on the measurement of quoted investments and quoted CGUs at fair value would continue any results from the work undertaken would be fed into the PIR of IFRS 13 which would translate in time savings while undertaking that review and the PIR would still provide a good platform for obtaining valuable information about the use of P Q for the purposes of building sound conclusions for the IASB She then opened the discussion to the Board The majority of Board members expressed strong support for option A instead of option C The reasons provided were the IASB had already conducted an outreach process and it did not seem reasonable to wait until the PIR was completed to finalise this issue the IASB should conduct research activities to understand the broad issues and the reasons behind the disagreement revealed by the comment letters the main issue to be explored would be whether P x Q provided a good answer for measuring investments in quoted subsidiaries for investment entities and there was disagreement that there could be other IFRS 13 issues related to the main issue under discussion On the other hand a few Board members supported the staff recommendation The reasons expressed for the support were related to the fact that there could be more issues related to IFRS 13 which at this stage were not known The PIR process could help to identify more issues and avoid duplications Another concern expressed related to the fact that users of financial statements had a preference for the use of P x Q while the feedback from preparers and auditors showed a different result The Project manager indicated that the reason for their support of option C was that at this stage they did not understand how pervasive the issue was she said that even though respondents disagreed with their proposal the staff did not think that there were too many entities with investments in quoted subsidiaries accordingly they believed the PIR process would help to better understand the broad implications of the issue The Chairman called a vote and Option A was supported by 10 Board members Agenda paper 15 2015 Agenda Consultation Permission to Publish the Request for Views The Project manager introduced the agenda paper She said that the paper provided the IASB with an update on the 2015 Agenda Consultation process and asked the IASB if it granted permission to publish the Request for Views 2015 Agenda Consultation The request for views would include an introduction including discussion of the time period covered by the agenda consultation process and the link with the Trustees Review of Structure and Effectiveness a description of the Board s evidence informed approach to standard setting an explanation of how the Board s current agenda had developed since

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


  • Agenda consultation
    Standards Projects Jurisdictions Resources My IAS Plus Topics Communications Toggle navigation Search site Navigation IASB meeting 20 and 22 23 July 2015 Insurance contracts IFRS Taxonomy education session IFRS implementation issues Rate regulated activities Dynamic risk management Revenue from contracts with customers Effective date of IFRS 15 Provisions and contingent liabilities IAS 37 research project education session Fair value measurement Financial instruments with characteristics of equity Agenda consultation Info Agenda consultation Date recorded 23 Jul 2015 Agenda Paper 15 2015 Agenda Consultation Permission to publish the Request for Views The Senior Technical Manager introduced the agenda paper that provided an update on the 2015 agenda consultation process and asked the IASB if it granted permission to publish the request for views RFV She recommended a significant overlap between the comment period for the agenda consultation RFV and the Trustees public consultation on the IFRS Foundation s structure and effectiveness to enable stakeholders to comment on both processes The agenda paper also contained a summary of the outreach conducted as well as the contents of the RFV She asked the IASB whether they agreed with the process and if they granted permission to publish the RFV The IASB agreed with both Related Topics Projects Agenda consultation 2015 Related news FASB adds four projects to research agenda 08 Feb 2016 IASB updates work plan 22 Jan 2016 We comment on the IASB agenda consultation 04 Jan 2016 Summary of the CMAC November 2015 meeting 22 Dec 2015 FEE believes IASB needs to take a more active role in driving the broader corporate reporting agenda 22 Dec 2015 ESMA proposes themed agenda consultations 03 Dec 2015 All Related Related Publications Deloitte comment letter on the IASB s second agenda consultation 04 Jan 2016 IFRS in Focus IASB publishes Request for Views to launch

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

  • IASB finalises amendments on sales or contributions of assets between an investor and its associate/joint venture
    requirements of IFRS 3 which considers the gaining or losing of control as a significant economic event that triggers remeasurement and gain loss recognition Consideration was also given as to whether all sales and contributions between an investor and an associate should give rise to fully recognised gains and losses which was viewed as more robust from a conceptual point of view However this idea was considered to be too broad for a narrow scope project Therefore the amendments require full gain or loss recognition for transactions between investors and associates only where a sale of contribution of assets constitutes a business Amendments Amendments to IAS 28 The requirements on gains and losses resulting from transactions between an entity and its associate or joint venture have been amended to relate only to assets that do not constitute a business A new requirement has been introduced that gains or losses from downstream transactions involving assets that constitute a business between an entity and its associate or joint venture must be recognised in full in the investor s financial statements A requirement has been added that an entity needs to consider whether assets that are sold or contributed in separate transactions constitute a business and should be accounted for as a single transaction Amendments to IFRS 10 An exception from the general requirement of full gain or loss recognition has been introduced into IFRS 10 for the loss control of a subsidiary that does not contain a business in a transaction with an associate or a joint venture that is accounted for using the equity method New guidance has been introduced requiring that gains or losses resulting from those transactions are recognised in the parent s profit or loss only to the extent of the unrelated investors interests in that associate or joint venture Similarly gains and losses resulting from the remeasurement at fair value of investments retained in any former subsidiary that has become an associate or a joint venture that is accounted for using the equity method are recognised in the former parent s profit or loss only to the extent of the unrelated investors interests in the new associate or joint venture Dissenting opinions Three IASB members have voted against the publication of the amendments One member disagrees with introducing another accounting difference that is dependent on the interpretation of the definition of a business when the line between what constitutes a business versus a collection of assets is frequently unclear often based on judgement and represents an interpretation challenge in practice Two members believe that amendments do not fully address the concerns they were intended to address Effective date The amendments are effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2016 Earlier application is permitted The IASB has decided that the amendments should apply prospectively to transactions that occur in annual periods beginning on or after the date that the amendments become effective as the Board believes that the benefits of comparative information would not exceed

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/news/2014/09/ifrs-10-ias-28 (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • IFRS implementation issues
    and joint ventures This project had already led to a balloted ED in November 2014 but had subsequently not been finalised The other project aimed to remove a conflict between the IFRS 10 and IAS 28 amendment that was issued in September 2014 and IAS 28 with respect to measurement on initial recognition of the retained equity accounted investment The Senior Technical Manager said that the new ED would be balloted with a more unique title to make it distinct from the September 2014 amendments She said that the November 2014 ED had one dissent which would be carried forward to the new ED She asked if there were any additional intentions to dissent One Board member said that she had dissented from the September 2014 amendments and did therefore not plan to dissent from the new ED although she still did not agree with the original amendment The Senior Director for Technical Activities replied that the dissents would be retained in the September 2014 amendments The Board member who dissented from the November 2014 ED asked whether it would be clear that he only dissented from the part of the ED that had originally been the November 2014 ED The Senior Technical Manager confirmed that The Board member asked whether constituents would be given the possibility to agree with one part of the ED and disagree with the other The Senior Technical Manager confirmed that there would be several questions on either part None of the other Board members indicated dissent from the ED The Senior Technical Manager asked whether the Board agreed with prospective application with early application permitted All agreed She then asked whether they agreed that there was no special additional relief for first time adoption She also asked whether the Board was satisfied with the due process and whether they had permission to ballot All agreed to all questions Agenda Paper 12C IFRIC Update The Senior Director for Technical Activities informed the Board that the IFRS 11 issues around Joint Operations would return at the next Interpretations Committee meeting One Board member said that he disagreed with the direction of the Interpretations Committee on the IAS 21 issue He summarised that the Committee had decided that an Interpretation should be published The Interpretation should state that if cash was received in advance in a foreign currency it would be translated on the day of receipt or its due date whichever was earlier Revenue would subsequently be recognised at that amount The Board member asked what would happen if the entity billed in advance but received the cash later He said that under the Committee s proposal the contract liability would not be subsequently translated however the contract asset i e the receivable would be translated at every reporting date In his view that was a mismatch as nothing would have happened that allowed for an exchange gain or loss He suggested that this should be considered in the proposal One Board member replied that this

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

  • IFRS implementation issues
    gave the staff permission to ballot the draft Interpretation All fourteen IASB members confirmed that they were satisfied that all due process requirements had been complied with that they agreed with a comment period of no less than 90 days and gave the staff permission to ballot the draft Interpretation No IASB members indicated that they intended to object to the release of the draft Interpretation NARROW SCOPE AMENDMENT IAS 12 INCOME TAXES RECOGNITION OF DEFERRED TAX ASSETS FOR UNREALISED LOSSES Summary of the Interpretations Committee s recommendations The Exposure Draft ED Recognition of Deferred Tax Assets for Unrealised Losses ED 2014 3 was published in August 2014 and contained a proposal to amend IAS 12 to clarify the guidance on recognition of a deferred tax asset that was related to a debt instrument measured at fair value At its March 2015 meeting the Interpretations Committee discussed the comments received on the ED and agreed to recommend that the IASB should proceed to finalise the proposed amendment however some Interpretations Committee members expressed specific concerns about the proposed amendments that they believed should be addressed when finalising the amendments The Technical Manager introduced the agenda paper provided an overview of the proposed amendment and asked the IASB members a whether they agreed with the recommended revisions to the proposed amendment to IAS 12 and b whether they agreed with the Interpretations Committee s recommendations about proceeding with the amendment to clarify the guidance on recognition of a deferred tax asset that is related to a debt instrument measured at fair value All fourteen IASB members confirmed that they agreed with the recommended revisions to the proposed amendment and with the Interpretations Committee s recommendations about proceeding with the amendment NARROW SCOPE AMENDMENT IFRS 8 OPERATING SEGMENTS CLARIFICATIONS ARISING FROM THE POST IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW Summary of due process The purpose of this agenda paper was to explain the due process steps that the IASB had taken before publication of the Exposure Draft Clarifications arising from the Post implementation Review Proposed amendments to IFRS 8 Operating Segments and to ask the IASB members whether they believed that the proposed amendment had been subject to adequate due process The Senior Technical Manager introduced the agenda paper and asked the IASB members a whether any members intended to dissent from any of the proposed amendment b whether they agreed with the staff recommendation that the proposals should be applied retrospectively and that earlier application should be permitted c whether they agreed that no specific additional relief was required for first time adoption d whether they were satisfied that all due process steps required to date had been complied with and e whether they gave the staff permission to start the balloting process An IASB member noted that in the May 2015 meeting the IASB had tentatively decided with respect to the proposed amendment that an entity should provide restated comparative period information in its first interim reporting following a reorganisation that if an entity

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

  • IASB issues new leasing standard
    right to direct the identified asset s use and to obtain substantially all the economic benefits from that use Overview of the new accounting model in IFRS 16 Under IFRS 16 a lessee recognises a right of use asset and a lease liability The right of use asset is treated similarly to other non financial assets and depreciated accordingly and the liability accrues interest This will typically produce a front loaded expense profile whereas operating leases under IAS 17 would typically have had straight line expenses as an assumed linear depreciation of the right of use asset and the decreasing interest on the liability will lead to an overall decrease of expense over the reporting period The lease liability is initially measured at the present value of the lease payments payable over the lease term discounted at the rate implicit in the lease if that can be readily determined If that rate cannot be readily determined the lessee shall use their incremental borrowing rate As with IFRS 16 s predecessor IAS 17 lessors classify leases as operating or finance in nature A lease is classified as a finance lease if it transfers substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership of an underlying asset Otherwise a lease is classified as an operating lease For finance leases a lessor recognises finance income over the lease term based on a pattern reflecting a constant periodic rate of return on the net investment A lessor recognises operating lease payments as income on a straight line basis or if more representative of the pattern in which benefit from use of the underlying asset is diminished another systematic basis Recognition exemptions Instead of applying the recognition requirements of IFRS 16 described above a lessee may elect to account for lease payments as an expense on a straight line basis over the lease term or another systematic basis for the following two types of leases leases with a lease term of 12 months or less and containing no purchase options this election is made by class of underlying asset and leases where the underlying asset has a low value when new such as personal computers or small items of office furniture this election can be made on a lease by lease basis Effective date IFRS 16 is effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2019 subject to EU endorsement Earlier application is permitted if IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers has also been applied Additional information IASB website Press release Project summary and feedback statement Fact sheet IFRS 16 Leases Access to the standard the illustrative examples and the basis for conclusions on eIFRS eIFRS subsription required Effects analysis Interview with Hans Hoogervorst introducing the standard Recording of web presentation on the new standard UK Accounting Plus Need to know newsletter summarising the new standard Overview of the project history Summary of IFRS 16 Leases Interview with Hans Hoogervorst and Veronica Poole The Bruce Column Bringing clarity to leases The

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en-gb/news/2016/01/ifrs-16?set_language=en-gb (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Bruce Column — Bringing clarity to leases: The new standard
    have a standard IFRS 16 is finally open for business and comes into force for reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2019 And the IASB is happy Chatting with its Chairman Hans Hoogervorst the other day he told me that by their reckoning 85 of leases are held off balance sheet at present And once IFRS 16 comes into force that figure will drop as he put it to zero In the short term there are going to have to be some tricky decisions to be made There will be more judgment and a steep learning curve though there are three years of lead in And there are peculiarities For example the way in which the standard setters have extricated themselves from the potentially time consuming and cost consuming issue of what should be done about small ticket items like office furniture has been described by Hoogervorst as not conceptually very beautiful The USD 5 000 indicative threshold is arbitrary but useful Certainly it will bring the cost of implementing the standard down But the whole issue of leases as ever is riddled with complexities and quirks The issue of leases versus contracts for services is a good example If a construction company hires another company to dig out a building site using the provider s equipment then that is a service If the company hired the equipment and then used its own team to do it that would be a lease The whole area of what is a lease and what is a contract for services may prove to be the most challenging of the practical aspects of the standard But overall the standard gets the work done and for the standard setters the important thing is achieving something that provides greater transparency and comparability Some airlines own most of their fleet Some lease most of their fleet IFRS 16 will take away the difference Balance sheets will show the assets Investors and analysts will no longer have to make their own basic adjustments The standard will do it for them Hoogervorst also thinks that the changes which the standard brings about will be eye opening for management and that CEOs may be surprised at how many leases they have on the balance sheet and the knock on effect that has in terms of finance It certainly means they will also have to take a look at any contracts they have which rely on IFRS statements And they will then have to make plans to explain to the people concerned like lenders how the financial statements will change when the new leases requirements take effect The risks will not have grown but they may on paper appear to have done so There is as ever much to be done not only in understanding but also communicating the impacts But the final result should be clearer for both preparers and in particular investors since a very obvious part of financing will become explicit rather than remaining implicit or

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/news/2016/01/bruce-column-leases (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • IFRS industry insights: Aviation sector — Implications of the new leasing standard
    Member firm publications Non English publications Third party publications IFRS e learning Info IFRS industry insights Aviation sector Implications of the new leasing standard Published on 15 Jan 2016 This publication highlights issues from the new leasing standard that will be of interest to those in the aviation industry Download Related Topics Publication series IFRS industry insights Resources IASB finalised pronouncements International Accounting Standards Board IASB Standards IAS 17 Leases IFRS 16 Leases SIC 15 Operating Leases Incentives SIC 27 Evaluating the Substance of Transactions in the Legal Form of a Lease IFRIC 4 Determining Whether an Arrangement Contains a Lease 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 Leases 17 Mar 2015 Rate regulated activities 24 Jul 2014 IAS 17 Meaning of incremental costs 25 Mar 2014 All Related Related Dates February 2016 IASB meeting 16 Feb 2016 17 Feb 2016 London Comment

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



  •