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".
  • IFRS 9 — Financial Instruments
    eventual recipient unless it collects equivalent amounts on the original asset the entity is prohibited from selling or pledging the original asset other than as security to the eventual recipient the entity has an obligation to remit those cash flows without material delay Once an entity has determined that the asset has been transferred it then determines whether or not it has transferred substantially all of the risks and rewards of ownership of the asset If substantially all the risks and rewards have been transferred the asset is derecognised If substantially all the risks and rewards have been retained derecognition of the asset is precluded IFRS 9 paragraphs 3 2 6 a b If the entity has neither retained nor transferred substantially all of the risks and rewards of the asset then the entity must assess whether it has relinquished control of the asset or not If the entity does not control the asset then derecognition is appropriate however if the entity has retained control of the asset then the entity continues to recognise the asset to the extent to which it has a continuing involvement in the asset IFRS 9 paragraph 3 2 6 c These various derecognition steps are summarised in the decision tree in paragraph B3 2 1 Derecognition of financial liabilities A financial liability should be removed from the balance sheet when and only when it is extinguished that is when the obligation specified in the contract is either discharged or cancelled or expires IFRS 9 paragraph 3 3 1 Where there has been an exchange between an existing borrower and lender of debt instruments with substantially different terms or there has been a substantial modification of the terms of an existing financial liability this transaction is accounted for as an extinguishment of the original financial liability and the recognition of a new financial liability A gain or loss from extinguishment of the original financial liability is recognised in profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraphs 3 3 2 3 3 3 Derivatives All derivatives in scope of IFRS 9 including those linked to unquoted equity investments are measured at fair value Value changes are recognised in profit or loss unless the entity has elected to apply hedge accounting by designating the derivative as a hedging instrument in an eligible hedging relationship Embedded derivatives An embedded derivative is a component of a hybrid contract that also includes a non derivative host with the effect that some of the cash flows of the combined instrument vary in a way similar to a stand alone derivative A derivative that is attached to a financial instrument but is contractually transferable independently of that instrument or has a different counterparty is not an embedded derivative but a separate financial instrument IFRS 9 paragraph 4 3 1 The embedded derivative concept that existed in IAS 39 has been included in IFRS 9 to apply only to hosts that are not financial assets within the scope of the Standard Consequently embedded derivatives that under IAS 39 would have been separately accounted for at FVTPL because they were not closely related to the host financial asset will no longer be separated Instead the contractual cash flows of the financial asset are assessed in their entirety and the asset as a whole is measured at FVTPL if the contractual cash flow characteristics test is not passed see above The embedded derivative guidance that existed in IAS 39 is included in IFRS 9 to help preparers identify when an embedded derivative is closely related to a financial liability host contract or a host contract not within the scope of the Standard e g leasing contracts insurance contracts contracts for the purchase or sale of a non financial items Reclassification For financial assets reclassification is required between FVTPL FVTOCI and amortised cost if and only if the entity s business model objective for its financial assets changes so its previous model assessment would no longer apply IFRS 9 paragraph 4 4 1 If reclassification is appropriate it must be done prospectively from the reclassification date which is defined as the first day of the first reporting period following the change in business model An entity does not restate any previously recognised gains losses or interest IFRS 9 does not allow reclassification for equity investments measured at FVTOCI or where the fair value option has been exercised in any circumstance for a financial assets or financial liability Hedge accounting The hedge accounting requirements in IFRS 9 are optional If certain eligibility and qualification criteria are met hedge accounting allows an entity to reflect risk management activities in the financial statements by matching gains or losses on financial hedging instruments with losses or gains on the risk exposures they hedge The hedge accounting model in IFRS 9 is not designed to accommodate hedging of open dynamic portfolios As a result for a fair value hedge of interest rate risk of a portfolio of financial assets or liabilities an entity can apply the hedge accounting requirements in IAS 39 instead of those in IFRS 9 IFRS 9 paragraph 6 1 3 In addition when an entity first applies IFRS 9 it may choose as its accounting policy choice to continue to apply the hedge accounting requirements of IAS 39 instead of the requirements of Chapter 6 of IFRS 9 IFRS 9 paragraph 7 2 21 Qualifying criteria for hedge accounting A hedging relationship qualifies for hedge accounting only if all of the following criteria are met the hedging relationship consists only of eligible hedging instruments and eligible hedged items at the inception of the hedging relationship there is formal designation and documentation of the hedging relationship and the entity s risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedge the hedging relationship meets all of the hedge effectiveness requirements see below IFRS 9 paragraph 6 4 1 Hedging instruments Only contracts with a party external to the reporting entity may be designated as hedging instruments IFRS 9 paragraph 6 2 3 A hedging instrument may be a derivative except for some written options or non derivative financial instrument measured at FVTPL unless it is a financial liability designated as at FVTPL for which changes due to credit risk are presented in OCI For a hedge of foreign currency risk the foreign currency risk component of a non derivative financial instrument except equity investments designated as FVTOCI may be designated as the hedging instrument IFRS 9 paragraphs 6 2 1 6 2 2 IFRS 9 allows a proportion e g 60 but not a time portion eg the first 6 years of cash flows of a 10 year instrument of a hedging instrument to be designated as the hedging instrument IFRS 9 also allows only the intrinsic value of an option or the spot element of a forward to be designated as the hedging instrument An entity may also exclude the foreign currency basis spread from a designated hedging instrument IFRS 9 paragraph 6 2 4 IFRS 9 allows combinations of derivatives and non derivatives to be designated as the hedging instrument IFRS 9 paragraph 6 2 5 Combinations of purchased and written options do not qualify if they amount to a net written option at the date of designation IFRS 9 paragraph 6 2 6 Hedged items A hedged item can be a recognised asset or liability an unrecognised firm commitment a highly probable forecast transaction or a net investment in a foreign operation and must be reliably measurable IFRS 9 paragraphs 6 3 1 6 3 3 An aggregated exposure that is a combination of an eligible hedged item as described above and a derivative may be designated as a hedged item IFRS 9 paragraph 6 3 4 The hedged item must generally be with a party external to the reporting entity however as an exception the foreign currency risk of an intragroup monetary item may qualify as a hedged item in the consolidated financial statements if it results in an exposure to foreign exchange rate gains or losses that are not fully eliminated on consolidation In addition the foreign currency risk of a highly probable forecast intragroup transaction may qualify as a hedged item in consolidated financial statements provided that the transaction is denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of the entity entering into that transaction and the foreign currency risk will affect consolidated profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraphs 6 3 5 6 3 6 An entity may designate an item in its entirety or a component of an item as the hedged item The component may be a risk component that is separately identifiable and reliably measurable one or more selected contractual cash flows or components of a nominal amount IFRS 9 paragraph 6 3 7 A group of items including net positions is an eligible hedged item only if it consists of items individually eligible hedged items the items in the group are managed together on a group basis for risk management purposes and in the case of a cash flow hedge of a group of items whose variabilities in cash flows are not expected to be approximately proportional to the overall variability in cash flows of the group it is a hedge of foreign currency risk and the designation of that net position specifies the reporting period in which the forecast transactions are expected to affect profit or loss as well as their nature and volume IFRS 9 paragraph 6 6 1 For a hedge of a net position whose hedged risk affects different line items in the statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income any hedging gains or losses in that statement are presented in a separate line from those affected by the hedged items IFRS 9 paragraph 6 6 4 Accounting for qualifying hedging relationships There are three types of hedging relationships Fair value hedge a hedge of the exposure to changes in fair value of a recognised asset or liability or an unrecognised firm commitment or a component of any such item that is attributable to a particular risk and could affect profit or loss or OCI in the case of an equity instrument designated as at FVTOCI IFRS 9 paragraphs 6 5 2 a and 6 5 3 For a fair value hedge the gain or loss on the hedging instrument is recognised in profit or loss or OCI if hedging an equity instrument at FVTOCI and the hedging gain or loss on the hedged item adjusts the carrying amount of the hedged item and is recognised in profit or loss However if the hedged item is an equity instrument at FVTOCI those amounts remain in OCI When a hedged item is an unrecognised firm commitment the cumulative hedging gain or loss is recognised as an asset or a liability with a corresponding gain or loss recognised in profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 8 If the hedged item is a debt instrument measured at amortised cost or FVTOCI any hedge adjustment is amortised to profit or loss based on a recalculated effective interest rate Amortisation may begin as soon as an adjustment exists and shall begin no later than when the hedged item ceases to be adjusted for hedging gains and losses IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 10 Cash flow hedge a hedge of the exposure to variability in cash flows that is attributable to a particular risk associated with all or a component of a recognised asset or liability such as all or some future interest payments on variable rate debt or a highly probable forecast transaction and could affect profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 2 b For a cash flow hedge the cash flow hedge reserve in equity is adjusted to the lower of the following in absolute amounts the cumulative gain or loss on the hedging instrument from inception of the hedge and the cumulative change in fair value of the hedged item from inception of the hedge The portion of the gain or loss on the hedging instrument that is determined to be an effective hedge is recognised in OCI and any remaining gain or loss is hedge ineffectiveness that is recognised in profit or loss If a hedged forecast transaction subsequently results in the recognition of a non financial item or becomes a firm commitment for which fair value hedge accounting is applied the amount that has been accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve is removed and included directly in the initial cost or other carrying amount of the asset or the liability In other cases the amount that has been accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve is reclassified to profit or loss in the same period s as the hedged cash flows affect profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 11 When an entity discontinues hedge accounting for a cash flow hedge if the hedged future cash flows are still expected to occur the amount that has been accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve remains there until the future cash flows occur if the hedged future cash flows are no longer expected to occur that amount is immediately reclassified to profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 12 A hedge of the foreign currency risk of a firm commitment may be accounted for as a fair value hedge or a cash flow hedge IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 4 Hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation as defined in IAS 21 including a hedge of a monetary item that is accounted for as part of the net investment is accounted for similarly to cash flow hedges the portion of the gain or loss on the hedging instrument that is determined to be an effective hedge is recognised in OCI and the ineffective portion is recognised in profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 13 The cumulative gain or loss on the hedging instrument relating to the effective portion of the hedge is reclassified to profit or loss on the disposal or partial disposal of the foreign operation IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 14 Hedge effectiveness requirements In order to qualify for hedge accounting the hedge relationship must meet the following effectiveness criteria at the beginning of each hedged period there is an economic relationship between the hedged item and the hedging instrument the effect of credit risk does not dominate the value changes that result from that economic relationship and the hedge ratio of the hedging relationship is the same as that actually used in the economic hedge IFRS 9 paragraph 6 4 1 c Rebalancing and discontinuation If a hedging relationship ceases to meet the hedge effectiveness requirement relating to the hedge ratio but the risk management objective for that designated hedging relationship remains the same an entity adjusts the hedge ratio of the hedging relationship i e rebalances the hedge so that it meets the qualifying criteria again IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 5 An entity discontinues hedge accounting prospectively only when the hedging relationship or a part of a hedging relationship ceases to meet the qualifying criteria after any rebalancing This includes instances when the hedging instrument expires or is sold terminated or exercised Discontinuing hedge accounting can either affect a hedging relationship in its entirety or only a part of it in which case hedge accounting continues for the remainder of the hedging relationship IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 6 Time value of options When an entity separates the intrinsic value and time value of an option contract and designates as the hedging instrument only the change in intrinsic value of the option it recognises some or all of the change in the time value in OCI which is later removed or reclassified from equity as a single amount or on an amortised basis depending on the nature of the hedged item and ultimately recognised in profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 15 This reduces profit or loss volatility compared to recognising the change in value of time value directly in profit or loss Forward points and foreign currency basis spreads When an entity separates the forward points and the spot element of a forward contract and designates as the hedging instrument only the change in the value of the spot element or when an entity excludes the foreign currency basis spread from a hedge the entity may recognise the change in value of the excluded portion in OCI to be later removed or reclassified from equity as a single amount or on an amortised basis depending on the nature of the hedged item and ultimately recognised in profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraph 6 5 16 This reduces profit or loss volatility compared to recognising the change in value of forward points or currency basis spreads directly in profit or loss Credit exposures designated at FVTPL If an entity uses a credit derivative measured at FVTPL to manage the credit risk of a financial instrument credit exposure it may designate all or a proportion of that financial instrument as measured at FVTPL if the name of the credit exposure matches the reference entity of the credit derivative name matching and the seniority of the financial instrument matches that of the instruments that can be delivered in accordance with the credit derivative An entity may make this designation irrespective of whether the financial instrument that is managed for credit risk is within the scope of IFRS 9 for example it can apply to loan commitments that are outside the scope of IFRS 9 The entity may designate that financial instrument at or subsequent to initial recognition or while it is unrecognised and shall document the designation concurrently IFRS 9 paragraph 6 7 1 If designated after initial recognition any difference in the previous carrying amount and fair value is recognised immediately in profit or loss IFRS 9 paragraph 6 7 2 An entity discontinues measuring the financial instrument that

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/standards/ifrs/ifrs9 (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive


  • IFRS 4 — Insurance Contracts
    and income or expense from reinsurance contracts against the expense or income from the related insurance contract Changes in accounting policies IFRS 4 permits an insurer to change its accounting policies for insurance contracts only if as a result its financial statements present information that is more relevant and no less reliable or more reliable and no less relevant IFRS 4 22 In particular an insurer cannot introduce any of the following practices although it may continue using accounting policies that involve them IFRS 4 25 measuring insurance liabilities on an undiscounted basis measuring contractual rights to future investment management fees at an amount that exceeds their fair value as implied by a comparison with current market based fees for similar services using non uniform accounting policies for the insurance liabilities of subsidiaries Remeasuring insurance liabilities The IFRS permits the introduction of an accounting policy that involves remeasuring designated insurance liabilities consistently in each period to reflect current market interest rates and if the insurer so elects other current estimates and assumptions Without this permission an insurer would have been required to apply the change in accounting policies consistently to all similar liabilities IFRS 4 24 Prudence An insurer need not change its accounting policies for insurance contracts to eliminate excessive prudence However if an insurer already measures its insurance contracts with sufficient prudence it should not introduce additional prudence IFRS 4 26 Future investment margins There is a rebuttable presumption that an insurer s financial statements will become less relevant and reliable if it introduces an accounting policy that reflects future investment margins in the measurement of insurance contracts IFRS 4 27 Asset classifications When an insurer changes its accounting policies for insurance liabilities it may reclassify some or all financial assets as at fair value through profit or loss IFRS 4 45 Other issues The standard clarifies that an insurer need not account for an embedded derivative separately at fair value if the embedded derivative meets the definition of an insurance contract IFRS 4 7 8 requires an insurer to unbundle that is to account separately for deposit components of some insurance contracts to avoid the omission of assets and liabilities from its balance sheet IFRS 4 10 clarifies the applicability of the practice sometimes known as shadow accounting IFRS 4 30 permits an expanded presentation for insurance contracts acquired in a business combination or portfolio transfer IFRS 4 31 33 addresses limited aspects of discretionary participation features contained in insurance contracts or financial instruments IFRS 4 34 35 Disclosures The standard requires disclosure of information that helps users understand the amounts in the insurer s financial statements that arise from insurance contracts IFRS 4 36 37 accounting policies for insurance contracts and related assets liabilities income and expense the recognised assets liabilities income expense and cash flows arising from insurance contracts if the insurer is a cedant certain additional disclosures are required information about the assumptions that have the greatest effect on the measurement of assets liabilities

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/standards/ifrs/ifrs4 (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Insurance and IFRS 9
    insurance contracts Standard or 1 January 2021 the Deferral Approach and to give entities issuing insurance contracts that implement IFRS 9 the option to remove from profit or loss some of the accounting mismatches and temporary volatility that could occur before the new insurance contracts Standard is implemented the Overlay Approach First time adopters The staff recommendation was that first time adopters be prohibited from using either of the approaches in the temporary package They argued that it is unlikely to be relevant to first time adopters and because they are not already applying IFRS the arguments about comparability being undermined are not relevant Comment period The staff recommendation was that the IASB exposes the proposed temporary measures for 60 days on the grounds that it is urgent and narrow in scope If the IASB support the recommendation the staff expect to be able to publish the exposure draft in December 2015 and with the goal of finalising the package in the third quarter of 2016 IASB discussion and decisions Comment period In considering the comment letter period the Board agree with the Staff recommendation that the matter is both narrow in scope and urgent and agreed to a comment period of 60 days The due process requires for the comment letter period to be a minimum of 120 days unless the matter is narrow in scope and urgent in which case it can be not less than 30 days This decision would now need to be approved by Due Process Oversight Committee First time adopters The IASB agreed with the Staff recommendation to prohibit deferral and overlay approaches to implementation of IFRS 9 for first time adopters see paper 14B This is on the grounds that both the deferral approach and the overlay approach require information resulting from applying IAS 39 in part or in full which in itself would be a new requirement for first time adopters Accordingly both approaches are considered not to be relevant to first time adopters and prohibiting them is consistent with the principles of IFRS 1 of applying the current versions of IFRSs and enhancing comparability within entity over time Next steps and timing Next steps Expected timetable ED is published to amend IFRS 4 December 2015 60 day comment period ends February 2016 Redeliberations on the ED proposals Second Quarter of 2016 Amendments to IFRS 4 issued Third Quarter of 2016 Related Topics Projects Different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the new insurance contracts standard Insurance contracts Comprehensive project Quick links Access to the agenda papers for the meeting on the IASB website Related news 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 Summary of the December 2015 ASAF meeting now available 22 Jan 2016 EFRAG

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/meeting-notes/iasb/2015/october/insurance-and-ifrs-9 (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Agenda consultation 2015
    reviews Agenda consultations Completed projects Items not added to the agenda IFRIC Navigation Agenda consultations Agenda consultation 2011 Agenda consultation 2015 Info Agenda consultation 2015 Background The IFRS Foundation Due Process Handbook requires the IASB to undertake a public consultation on its work programme every three years The first agenda consultation was launched in 2011 with a final Feedback Statement Agenda Consultation 2011 published in December 2012 Accordingly a second agenda consultation began in 2015 The time period affected by the results of the consultation is the IASB work programme from mid 2016 to mid 2020 Current status of the project The agenda consultation has been launched in August 2015 A Request for Views was published on 11 August 2015 Comments are requested by 31 December 2015 Project milestones Date Development Comments 11 August 2015 Request for Views document published Comments requested by 31 December 2015 Related Discussions 2015 Agenda Consultation Response to the IASB s Request for Views 10 Nov 2015 The purpose of this session was to discuss the wording of the comment letter prepared by the staff and to decide whether it should be sent to the IASB Agenda consultation 23 Jul 2015 The Board was updated on the 2015 agenda consultation process and approved the publish of a request for views All Related Quick links Agenda consultation 2011 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

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

  • Post-employment benefits — Comprehensive project
    IASB considered the following topics 1 p resentation of remeasurements 2 feedback on tentative decisions to date 3 project status 4 effective date of any amendments and transitional requirements Post employment benefits 02 Feb 2011 The IASB 1 received an updated timetable for issue of the standard 2 discussed the distinction between defined benefit plans and defined contribution plans 3 considered the accounting for risk sharing features in a defined benefit plan Post employment benefits 21 Jan 2011 The IASB 1 reconsidered an earlier tentatively decision to retain the option of presenting the remeasurement component in either profit or loss or other comprehensive income 2 interactions between the projects on IAS 19 and IAS 37 Post employment benefits 13 Dec 2010 The staff presented the IASB with an analysis of the responses received on the Exposure Draft Defined Benefit Plans Topics included 1 past service costs curtailments and settlements 2 multi employer plans 3 tax and administration costs 4 mortality assumptions 5 incorporating IFRIC 14 6 identification of back end loaded plans 7 interim reporting 8 state plan and group plan disclosures Post employment benefits 16 Nov 2010 The IASB continued its discussion of the proposals in the exposure draft Defined Benefit Plans In response to the main issues raised by respondents the staff developed recommendations for specific disclosure presentation and classification items Post employment benefits 20 Oct 2010 The IASB discussed 1 comments received on the Exposure Draft Defined Benefit Plans 2 the recognition of changes in the defined benefit liability or asset 3 the disaggregation of changes in the defined benefit liability or asset into the service cost finance cost and remeasurement components 4 the definition of the finance cost component Post employment benefits 16 Sep 2010 The IASB considered a very broad summary of the feedback received from the extensive outreach activities conducted during the exposure period of the ED Defined Benefit Plans including an overview of the main issues raised by participants Post employment benefits 18 Feb 2010 The Board discussed a proposed disclosure package to accompany the forthcoming exposure draft of amendments to IAS 19 Employee Benefits Post employment benefits 21 Jan 2010 The staff presented proposed disclosure requirements on the disaggregation of information about actuarial gains and losses arising on the defined benefit obligation and to the total amount of post employment benefit expense in the period Post employment Benefits 18 Dec 2009 The Board discussed service cost and interest income on plan assets Post employment Benefits 17 Nov 2009 The Board discussed the presentation of pension costs and its tentative decision to require disclosure of accumulated benefit obligation Post employment benefits 22 Oct 2009 The Board discussed proposed amendment of IFRIC 14 and IAS 19 Post employment Benefits 15 Sep 2009 The Board discussed a timetable proposed by the IASB staff for the proposed Post Employment Benefits exposure draft Discount rate in IAS 19 Transitional provisions 04 Aug 2009 The Board discussed the transitional arrangements to be proposed for the amendment to IAS

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/projects/research/long-term/post-employment-benefits (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Financial instruments with characteristics of equity
    recommendations for narrow scope amendments of IAS 21 however in relation to the comprehensive review proposal the IASB would i ask the KASB to continue their research on foreign currency issues focusing on performance reporting ii include those issues in the 2015 agenda consultation and iii move the foreign currency translation research project from high priority to a long term project In addition the Board approved the scope and next steps for the Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity research project Finally the Board was provided with an overview of the status of the Research Programme Conceptual framework 19 Jun 2014 The Board continued its redeliberations of the feedback in the Conceptual framework project In this session the IASB discussed the distinction between profit or loss and OCI economic resources and benefits executory contracts the unit of account communication principles as well as materiality under presentation and disclosure and the distinction between liabilities and equity The research programme 22 Apr 2014 The Board received a presentation by the Senior Director for Technical Activities on the IASB s research programme He outlined how the research activities had developed over time and how they became a more formal part of the due process He gave an overview of the current inventory of research projects and discussed their staffing As a particular example the project manager on the research project for distinguishing liabilities from equity provided an overview of the project plan No decisions were taken IAS 27 and IAS 32 Accounting for put options written over non controlling interests 06 Jan 2011 The IFRS Interpretations Committee discussed whether the impacts of subsequent remeasurement of a non controlling interest put prior to exercise or lapse should be recognised in profit or loss or equity Financial instruments with characteristics of equity 22 Oct 2010 The IASB and FASB considered the ways forward in the financial instruments with characteristics of equity project and initial suggestions of some Board members to perform a targeted improvements approach in the areas of fixed for fixed guidance convertible debt and redeemable and puttable instruments Given concerns raised the Boards decided to remove the project from its active agenda for the time being Financial instruments with characteristics of equity 14 Sep 2010 The staff provided the IASB details of possible ways to proceed in the project ranging from continuing with the pre ballot draft to abandoning the project The discussion focused on convergence with the FASB and the potential for a common project in this area IAS 27 Put options written over non controlling interests 01 Sep 2010 The Committee received a request for guidance on how an entity should account for changes in the carrying amount of a financial liability for a put option written over shares held by a non controlling interest shareholder NCI put in the consolidated financial statements of a parent entity Financial instruments with characteristics of equity 21 Jul 2010 The project team presented the Board the results of the external review of the staff

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/projects/research/short-term/fice (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Recording and statements at public hearing on IFRS 9
    FASB on the new impairment model different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the new standard on insurance and overlay vs deferral approach differences between IAS 39 and IFRS 9 and comments on fair value accounting in general 12 month expected credit losses principles rules based accounting and the question of judgement complexity impact analyses at EFRAG and the IASB and whether the differences between IAS 39 and IFRS 9 are improvements or whether IAS 39 should be retained and IFRS 9 not endorsed Opening the session the ECON Chair as well as the Chair of the IFRS Permanent Team of ECON had stated that they had received overwhelming support by virtually all stakeholders arguing for a swift endorsement During the presentations and the discussion it turned out that three of the experts were of the same opinion while only one expert expressed doubt of IFRS reporting in general Please click for the following additional information on the European Parliament website Presentation by Mr Barckow Presentation by Mr Véron Presentation by Mr Haaker Presentation by Mr Ashley Recording of the public hearing please be aware that you can change the language to all official languages of the European Union Related Topics Resources IFRSs in Europe Events of 2015 Projects Different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the new insurance contracts standard Standards IFRS 9 Financial Instruments Related news 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 EU endorsement of IFRS 9 now expected in the second half of 2016 04 Feb 2016 EBA launches an

    Original URL path: http://www.iasplus.com/en/news/2015/12/econ-ifrs-9 (2016-02-10)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Hoogervorst discusses major IASB projects at European Parliament meeting
    companies would be affected by changes to leases guidance However he affirmed that the IASB had looked at all the possible risks very carefully and concluded that the risks and costs associated with the new standard are manageable Moving on to insurance Mr Hoogervorst said that the IASB expects to 1 finish its deliberations soon and 2 publish a new standard around the end of 2016 He noted the importance of the insurance project Today s accounting Standards for the insurance contracts are highly defective There is no real global standard and there is a wide variety of practices around the world Some of these standards provide information that is clearly wrong Mr Hoogervorst noted that the IASB s new standard would be based on current measurement but that the complexity of the insurance industry is making it difficult to resolve all the accounting issues involved He said that the effective date of the new insurance contracts standard would be later than that of IFRS 9 but understands that this will be problematic to the insurance industry We have recently exposed a possible solution to this problem which includes the option of a deferral of IFRS 9 for pure insurance companies For conglomerates that combine insurance with banking activities we will make it possible to adjust Profit or Loss for the effects of IFRS 9 through what we have called the overlay approach We will evaluate the feedback we get on our proposals in the spring and expect to finalise our decisions well before the summer During the following question and answer session Mr Hoogervorst was again asked by several ECON members about the different effective dates of IFRS 9 and the new insurance standard He stressed We believe there is something of an issue however he also stated That does not mean that we will want to go all the way in adressing this issue Again Mr Hoogervorst highlighted the overlay approach Asked after the deferral approach and a possible application below the reporting entity level he commented That is taking flexibility a bit too far Regarding the conceptual framework Mr Hoogervorst said that the IASB expects to publish a new version in 2016 which will include the issues of prudence and stewardship For more information see Mr Hoogervorst s full remarks on the IASB s website or a video recording of the entire ECON meeting which also features a Q A session with the Chairman of the IFRS Foundation Trustees Michel Prada Please note that the recording including Mr Hoogervorst s introductory remarks can be watched in any of the EU s official languages Related Topics Resources International Accounting Standards Board IASB IFRSs in Europe Events of 2016 Other Hoogervorst 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

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



  •