IFRS 2022 update – IAS 8 Definition of Accounting Estimates – Your best read

by

IFRS 2022 update – IAS 8 Definition of Accounting Estimates

Effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2023.

On 12 February 2021, the International Accounting Standards Board (the IASB or the Board) issued amendments to IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes to Accounting Estimates and Errors, in which it introduces a new definition of ‘accounting estimates’. The amendments are designed to clarify the distinction between changes in accounting estimates and changes in accounting policies and the correction of errors.

Definition of an accounting estimate

The current version of IAS 8 does not provide a definition of accounting estimates. Accounting policies, however, are defined. Furthermore, the standard defines the concept of a “change in accounting estimates”. A mixture of a definition of one item with a definition of changes in another has resulted in difficulty in drawing the distinction between accounting policies and accounting estimates in many instances. In the amended standard, accounting estimates are now defined as, “monetary amounts in financial statements that are subject to measurement uncertainty”.

Read more

IFRS 2022 update – IFRS 16 Lease Liability in a Sale and Leaseback – Best read

by

IFRS 2022 update – IFRS 16 Lease Liability in a Sale and Leaseback

Effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2024.

Key requirements

On 22 September 2022, the International Accounting Standards Board (the IASB or Board) issued Lease Liability in a Sale and Leaseback (Amendments to IFRS 16) (the amendment). The amendment to IFRS 16 Leases specifies the requirements that a seller-lessee uses in measuring the lease liability arising in a sale and leaseback transaction, to ensure the seller-lessee does not recognise any amount of the gain or loss that relates to the right of use it retains.

A sale and leaseback transaction involves the transfer of an asset by an entity (the seller-lessee) to another entity (the buyer-lessor) and the leaseback of the same asset by the seller-lessee.

The amendment is intended to improve the requirements for sale and leaseback transactions in IFRS 16. It does not change the accounting for leases unrelated to sale and leaseback transactions.IFRS 16 Lease Liability in a Sale and Leaseback

Background

In a sale and leaseback transaction, the seller-lessee assesses whether the transfer of the asset satisfies the requirements in IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers to be accounted for as a sale. If it is accounted for as a sale, paragraph 100(a) of IFRS 16 requires the seller-lessee to measure the right-of-use asset arising from the leaseback at the proportion of the previous carrying amount of the asset that relates to the right of use retained by the seller-lessee.

However, IFRS 16 did not specify the measurement of the liability that arises in a sale and leaseback transaction. This has been addressed in the amendment.

Amendment to IFRS 16

After the commencement date in a sale and leaseback transaction, the seller-lessee applies paragraphs 29 to 35 of IFRS 16 to the right-of-use asset arising from the leaseback and paragraphs 36 to 46 of IFRS 16 to the lease liability arising from the leaseback. In applying paragraphs 36 to 46, the seller-lessee determines ‘lease payments’ or ‘revised lease payments’ in such a way that the seller-lessee would not recognise any amount of the gain or loss that relates to the right of use retained by the seller-lessee. Applying these requirements does not prevent the seller-lessee from recognising, in profit or loss, any gain or loss relating to the partial or full termination of a lease, as required by paragraph 46(a) of IFRS 16.

Read more

IFRS 2022 update – Classification of non-current liabilities with covenants – Best read

by

Overview – IFRS 2022 update – Classification of non-current liabilities with covenants

In October 2022, the IASB issued amendments that clarify that only covenants with which an entity must comply on or before the reporting date will affect a liability’s classification as current or non-current. IFRS 2022 update – Classification of non-current liabilities with covenants

Additional disclosures are required for non-current liabilities arising from loan arrangements that are subject to covenants to be complied with within twelve months after the reporting period.

The amendments will be effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2024, with early application permitted. IFRS 2022 update – Classification of non-current liabilities with covenants

Why this change?

In January 2020, the IASB issued amendments to paragraphs 69 to 76 of IAS 1 (the 2020 amendments) to specify the requirements for classifying liabilities as current or non-current. A key requirement of the 2020 amendments was that entities with liabilities that are subject to covenants to be complied with at a date subsequent to the reporting period (“future covenants”) do not have the right to defer settlement of the liabilities at the end of the reporting period if they do not comply with the covenants at that date. IFRS 2022 update – Classification of non-current liabilities with covenants

Stakeholders were concerned about the impact of this proposal and, as a result, the IFRS Interpretations Committee (the Committee) published a tentative agenda decision (TAD) in December 2020 explaining how to apply the proposal to three fact patterns. The Committee agreed with the concerns raised in comment letters responding to the TAD about the consequences of the 2020 amendments for certain scenarios and reported them to the Board. On that basis, the Board proposed amendments in November 2021, which, after further adjustments, resulted in the amendments issued in October 2022 (the 2022 amendments). IFRS 2022 update – Classification of non-current liabilities with covenants

Read more

IFRS 9 Best long-read SPPI Test

by

The SPPI Test

If an asset is in a hold-to-collect or hold-to-collect or sell business model, an entity assesses whether the cash flows from the financial asset meet the ‘solely payments of principal and interest’ (SPPI Test) benchmark – i.e. whether the contractual terms of the financial asset give rise, on specified dates, to cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest.

  • ‘Principal’ is the fair value of the financial asset on initial recognition. The principal may change over time – e.g. if there are repayments of principal.
  • ‘Interest’ is consideration for the time value of money and credit risk. Interest can also include consideration for other basic lending risks and costs, and a profit margin.

A financial asset that does not meet the SPPI Test is always measured at FVPL, unless it is a non-trading equity instrument and the entity makes an irrevocable election to measure it at FVOCI. Here is the decision tree to put the narrative in context:

SPPI Test

Contractual cash flows that meet the SPPI Test are consistent with a basic lending arrangement in the banking industry.

Read more

Low credit risk operational simplification

by

Low credit risk operational simplification

IFRS 9 contains an important simplification that, if a financial instrument has low credit risk, then an entity is allowed to assume at the reporting date that no significant increases in credit risk have occurred. The low credit risk concept was intended, by the IASB, to provide relief for entities from tracking changes in the credit risk of high quality financial instruments. Therefore, this simplification is only optional and the low credit risk simplification can be elected on an instrument-by-instrument basis.

This is a change from the 2013 ED, in which a low risk exposure was deemed not to have suffered significant deterioration in credit risk. The amendment to make the simplification optional was made in response to requests from constituents, including regulators. It is expected that the Basel Committee SCRAVL consultation document will propose that sophisticated banks should only use this simplification rarely for their loan portfolios.

For low risk instruments, the entity would recognise an allowance based on 12-month ECLs. However, if a financial instrument is not considered to have low credit risk at the reporting date, it does not follow that the entity is required to recognise lifetime ECLs. In such instances, the entity has to assess whether there has been a significant increase in credit risk since initial recognition that requires the recognition of lifetime ECLs.

The standard states that a financial instrument is considered to have low credit risk if: [IFRS 9.B5.22]

  • The financial instrument has a low risk of default
  • The borrower has a strong capacity to meet its contractual cash flow obligations in the near term
  • Adverse changes in economic and business conditions in the longer term may, but will not necessarily, reduce the ability of the borrower to fulfil its contractual cash flow obligations Low credit risk operational simplification

A financial instrument is not considered to have low credit risk simply because it has a low risk of loss (e.g., for a collateralised loan, if the value of the collateral is more than the amount lent (see collateral) or it has lower risk of default compared with the entity’s other financial instruments or relative to the credit risk of the jurisdiction within which the entity operates.

Read more

Payment holidays on loans

by

Payment holidays on loans under IFRS 9

Governments and banks have introduced payment deferral programs to support borrowers affected by Covid-19. But deferred payments are not forgiven and must be repaid in the future, raising prospective risks to the banking system. Thus, they should be designed to balance near-term economic relief benefits with longer-term financial stability considerations.

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and several prudential authorities have issued statements clarifying how payment deferrals should be considered in assessing credit risk under applicable accounting frameworks. These measures aim to encourage banks to continue lending, to avert an even deeper recession.

Prudential authorities are caught “between a rock and a hard place” as they encourage banks – through various relief measures – to provide credit to solvent, but cash-strapped borrowers, while keeping in mind the longer-term implications of these measures for the health of banks and national banking systems.

In navigating these tensions, banks and supervisors face a daunting task as borrowers that may be granted payment holidays have varying risk profiles. Distinguishing between illiquid and insolvent borrowers – amidst an uncertain outlook – should help guide banks’ efforts to support viable borrowers, while preserving the integrity of their reported financial metrics.

What is this all about?

Read more

IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows – Complete easy read

by

IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows

Most changes from IAS 17/IFRIC 4 to IFRS 16 relate to lessees, the companies renting a car, office or warehouse.

At first, IFRS 16 has affected balance sheet and balance sheet-related ratios such as the debt/equity ratio. Aside from this, IFRS 16 also influenced the income statement, because an entity now has to recognise interest expense on the lease liability (obligation to make lease payments) and depreciation on the ‘right-of-use’ asset (that is, the asset that reflects the right to use the leased asset).

Due to this, for lease contracts previously classified as operating leases the total amount of expenses at the beginning of the lease period will be higher than under IAS 17. Another consequence of the changes in presentation is that EBIT and EBITDA will be higher for companies that have material operating leases.

IFRS 16 also changes the cash flow statement. Lease payments that relate to contracts that have previously been classified as operating leases are no longer presented as operating cash flows in full. Only the part of the lease payments that reflects interest on the lease liability can be presented as an operating cash flow (depending on the entity’s accounting policy regarding interest payments).

Cash payments for the principal portion of the lease liability are classified within financing activities. Payments for short-term leases, leases of low-value assets and variable lease payments not included in the measurement of the lease liability remain presented within operating activities.

Presentation and disclosures

In the statement of cash flows, lease payments are classified consistently with payments on other financial liabilities:

  • The part of the lease payment that represents cash payments for the principal portion of the lease liability is presented as a cash flow resulting from financing activities.
  • The part of the lease payment that represents interest portion of the lease liability is presented either as an operating cash flow or a cash flow resulting from financing activities (in accordance with the entity’s accounting policy regarding the presentation of interest payments).
  • Payments on short-term leases, for leases of low-value assets and variable lease payments not included in the measurement of the lease liability are presented as an operating cash flow.

A simple example to classify the movements in Right-of-use assets is as follows:

IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows

A simple example to classify the movements in Lease liabilities is as follows:

IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows

On the balance sheet, the right-of-use asset can be presented either separately or in the same line item in which the underlying asset would be presented. The lease liability can be presented either as a separate line item or together with other financial liabilities. If the right-of-use asset and the lease liability are not presented as separate line items, an entity discloses in the notes the carrying amount of those items and the line item in which they are included.

In the statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income, the depreciation charge of the right-of-use asset is presented in the same line item/items in which similar expenses (such as depreciation of property, plant and equipment) are shown. The interest expense on the lease liability is presented as part of finance costs. However, the amount of interest expense on lease liabilities has to be disclosed in the notes.

IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows

IFRS 16 Leases presentation in cash flows

Country-by-Country tax reporting IAS 12 Risk or Profit

by

Country-by-Country tax reporting

Country-by-Country tax reporting has become a fact of life for multinational enterprises (MNEs) with worldwide revenue above EUR 750 million.

While most MNEs have developed processes to gather and report the required information, how well are they managing the risk associated with the Report?

Have they integrated the reporting process into their ongoing transfer pricing management and documentation?

Is the information generated by the reporting process consistent with the intent of their global transfer pricing policy?

Action 13 of the OECD’s Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action Plan introduced a CbC reporting template which certain multinational enterprises (MNE) are required to complete and submit (usually) to the tax authority in their home country.

Following a consultation process, the template was published in September 2014 and was finalised on October 5, 2015 when the OECD also published final implementation guidance.

The final OECD report recommended that CbC reporting commence for periods starting on or after January 1, 2016. In general, multinationals with consolidated group revenue of less than EUR 750 million (or equivalent in local currency) in the prior financial year are exempted from filing the CbC Report.

However, for those not exempt, filing with the parent country tax authority is typically due within 12 months of the group’s financial year-end. If the country of the MNE parent does not require reporting, it is the responsibility of the MNE to designate a surrogate parent in a country where the CbC Report can be filed.

One of the main reasons that tax authorities implemented the CbC reporting requirement was to gain a better understanding of a multinational group’s activities, value drivers, profit creation, and taxes paid in each of the jurisdictions in which it operates.

Read more

Uncertain tax treatments in IAS 12 and IFRIC 23

by

Uncertain tax treatments

Uncertain tax treatments – In short

Neither IAS 12 Income Taxes nor IFRIC 23 Uncertainty over Income Tax Treatments (the Interpretation) contain explicit requirements on the presentation of uncertain tax liabilities or assets in the statement of financial position.

This has led to diversity in practice. Some entities present uncertain tax liabilities as current (or deferred) tax liabilities and others include these balances within another line item such as provisions.

In September 2019, in response to a request for clarification on this matter, the IFRS Interpretations Committee (the IFRS IC or the Committee) published an agenda decision. The Committee concluded that an entity is required to present uncertain tax liabilities as current tax liabilities or deferred tax liabilities; and uncertain tax assets as current tax assets or deferred tax assets.

Based on an earlier agenda decision, the impact of uncertain tax treatments that meet the definition of income taxes should be presented in the statement of profit or loss in the line item ‘tax expense’.

Read more

What is the most important disclosure definition under IAS 1?

by

What is the disclosure definition under IFRS?

Disclosure definition – one of the best ways to explain the need for disclosures is provided in IAS 1.119 ‘management considers whether disclosure would assist users in understanding how transactions, other events and conditions are reflected in reported financial performance and financial position. Each entity considers the nature of its operations and the policies that the users of its financial statements would expect to be disclosed for that type of entity.‘

Let us point to some IFRS disclosure particularities

In IAS 1 Presentaion of Financial Statements the overall disclosure requirements are provided. Other IAS/IFRSs set out the recognition, measurement and disclosure requirements for specific transactions and other events (IAS 1.3).

An entity cannot rectify inappropriate accounting policies either by disclosure of the accounting policies used or by notes or explanatory material (IAS 1.18).

Some IAS/IFRSs specify information that is required to be included in the financial statements, which include the notes. An entity need not provide a specific disclosure required by a IFRS if the information resulting from that disclosure is not material. This is the case even if the IFRS contains a list of specific requirements or describes them as minimum requirements.

An entity shall also consider whether to provide additional disclosures when compliance with the specific requirements in IFRS is insufficient to enable users of financial statements to understand the impact of particular transactions, other events and conditions on the entity’s financial position and financial performance (IAS 1.31).

Minimum comparative information

In some cases, narrative information provided in the financial statements for the preceding period(s) continues to be relevant in the current period. For example, an entity discloses in the current period details of a legal dispute, the outcome of which was uncertain at the end of the preceding period and is yet to be resolved. Users may benefit from the disclosure of information that the uncertainty existed at the end of the preceding period and from the disclosure of information about the steps that have been taken during the period to resolve the uncertainty (IAS 1.38B).

Read more