Example accounting policies

Example accounting policies

Get the requirements for properly disclosing the accounting policies to provide the users of your financial statements with useful financial data, in the common language prescribed in the world’s most widely used standards for financial reporting, the IFRS Standards. First there is a section providing guidance on what the requirements are, followed by a comprehensive example, easy to tailor to the specific needs of your company.Example accounting policies

Example accounting policies guidance

Whether to disclose an accounting policy

1. In deciding whether a particular accounting policy should be disclosed, management considers whether disclosure would assist users in understanding how transactions, other events and conditions are reflected in the reported financial performance and financial position. Disclosure of particular accounting policies is especially useful to users where those policies are selected from alternatives allowed in IFRS. [IAS 1.119]

2. Some IFRSs specifically require disclosure of particular accounting policies, including choices made by management between different policies they allow. For example, IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment requires disclosure of the measurement bases used for classes of property, plant and equipment and IFRS 3 Business Combinations requires disclosure of the measurement basis used for non-controlling interest acquired during the period.

3. In this guidance, policies are disclosed that are specific to the entity and relevant for an understanding of individual line items in the financial statements, together with the notes for those line items. Other, more general policies are disclosed in the note 25 in the example below. Where permitted by local requirements, entities could consider moving these non-entity-specific policies into an Appendix.

Change in accounting policy – new and revised accounting standards

4. Where an entity has changed any of its accounting policies, either as a result of a new or revised accounting standard or voluntarily, it must explain the change in its notes. Additional disclosures are required where a policy is changed retrospectively, see note 26 for further information. [IAS 8.28]

5. New or revised accounting standards and interpretations only need to be disclosed if they resulted in a change in accounting policy which had an impact in the current year or could impact on future periods. There is no need to disclose pronouncements that did not have any impact on the entity’s accounting policies and amounts recognised in the financial statements. [IAS 8.28]

6. For the purpose of this edition, it is assumed that RePort Co. PLC did not have to make any changes to its accounting policies, as it is not affected by the interest rate benchmark reforms, and the other amendments summarised in Appendix D are only clarifications that did not require any changes. However, this assumption will not necessarily apply to all entities. Where there has been a change in policy, this will need to be explained, see note 26 for further information.

Read more

The Statement of Cash Flows

Statement of Cash Flows

IAS 7.10 requires an entity to analyse its cash inflows and outflows into three categories:

  • Operating;
  • Investing; and
  • Financing.

IAS 7.6 defines these as follows:

Operating activities are the principal revenue producing activities of the entity and other activities that are not investing or financing activities.’

Investing activities are the acquisition and disposal of long-term assets and other investments not included in cash equivalents.’

Financing activities are activities that result in changes in the size and composition of the contributed equity and borrowings of the entity.’

1. Operating activities

It is often assumed that this category includes only those cash flows that arise from an entity’s principal revenue producing activities.

However, because cash flows arising from operating activities represents a residual category, which includes any cashStatement of cash flows flows that do not qualify to be recorded within either investing or financing activities, these can include cash flows that may initially not appear to be ‘operating’ in nature.

For example, the acquisition of land would typically be viewed as an investing activity, as land is a long-term asset. However, this classification is dependent on the nature of the entity’s operations and business practices. For example, an entity that acquires land regularly to develop residential housing to be sold would classify land acquisitions as an operating activity, as such cash flows relate to its principal revenue producing activities and therefore meet the definition of an operating cash flow.

2. Investing activities

An entity’s investing activities typically include the purchase and disposal of its intangible assets, property, plant and equipment, and interests in other entities that are not held for trading purposes. However, in an entity’s consolidated financial statements, cash flows from investing activities do not include those arising from changes in ownership interest of subsidiaries that do not result in a change in control, which are classified as arising from financing activities.

It should be noted that cash flows related to the sale of leased assets (when the entity is the lessor) may be classified as operating or investing activities depending on the specific facts and circumstances.

Read more

The real meaning of Integrated reporting

The real meaning of integrated reporting

Integrated reporting is more than only aimed at informing interested stakeholders about performance achieved against targets, the vision and strategy adopted to serve the stakeholders’ interests, and other factors that can influence business performance in future.

Clearly regulations require companies to exercise transparency. However, a more fundamental reason for reporting lies in accountability: a company needs to account for the impact it has on the stakeholders it relates to. Not exercising such transparency would impose serious risks, including high financing costs to compensate for a lack of transparency or governance or, ultimately, losing the license to operate. By contrast, a transparent approach would not only improve reputation, but also would bind stakeholders such as employees to the company’s objectives.

The reason for including environmental and social factors in reporting

In today’s world companies play a significant role in shaping the future of society. Awareness of this has risen significantly over the last decades, resulting in changed attitudes towards the role business is expected to play.

It also resulted in changes in the views of business leaders about the role they want to play.

Business these days is seen more than ever as the agent of a wide group of stakeholders. Unlike the old paradigm that ‘the business of business is business’, companies accept wider accountability in current times towards the stakeholders whose interests they impact – no longer can companies focus only on the interests of those with a financial interest.

This wider accountability implies that companies have to fulfil the (information) needs of those who provide them with integrated reportingother economic resources such as labour, space, air or natural resources and those who enter into transactions with the organization such as customers. Therefore a company’s current performance and future ability to continue operations and achieve business growth needs to be evaluated on the basis of a comprehensive set of factors that influence these.

Read more

Operating cash flows under IAS 7

Operating cash flows

Cash flows must be analysed between operating, investing and financing activities.

For operating cash flows, the direct method of presentation is preferred, but the indirect method is acceptable.

Here are the differences and similarities between the direct and indirect method. Note the subtotals for operating, investing and financing activities are the same amount in both methods!

Indirect method cash flow statement

Direct method cash flow statement

Starts with:

Starts with:

  • Profit before tax
  • Adjustment for:
    • non-cash items
    • depreciation/amortization (add back to profit)
    • gain on disposal of NCA (deduct)
    • loss in disposal of NCA (add back)
    • remove impact of accruals
    • Interest expense (add back)
    • Interest income (deduct and relocate to Investing activities)
  • Movement on working capital items
    • Receivables (deduct increase, add decrease)
    • Payables (add increase, deduct decrease)
    • Inventory (deduct increase, add decrease)
    • Interest paid (deduct)
    • Taxation (including deferred tax movements) (deduct).
  • Acquisition cash flows
  • Receipts from customers
  • Less Payments to:
    • suppliers
    • employees
    • other operating expenses
    • interest charges
    • taxation

Operating cash flows

Cash Flows from Operating activities

Cash Flows from Operating activities

  • purchase of non-current assets
  • sale/disposal of non-current assets
  • acquisition cash flows
  • interest received/dividend received on investment.

Cash Flows from Investing activities

Cash Flows from Investing activities

  • purchase of (treasure) shares
  • cash from shares issued
  • dividend payments to owners
  • take loan/issue bonds
  • acquisition cash flows
  • payments under lease agreements

Cash Flows from Financing activities

Cash Flows from Financing activities

Common cash flow classification errors in practice

Read more

Determining a leases discount rate

Determining a leases discount rate

The definition of the lessee’s incremental borrowing rate states that the rate should represent what the lessee ‘would have to pay to borrow over a similar term and with similar security, the funds necessary to obtain an asset of similar value to the right-of-use asset in a similar economic environment.’ In applying the concept of ‘similar security’, a lessee uses the right-of-use asset granted by the lease and not the fair value of the underlying asset.

This is because the rate should represent the amount that would be charged to acquire an asset of similar value for a similar period. For example, in determining the incremental borrowing rate on a 5 year lease of a property, the security for the portion of the asset being leased (i.e. the 5 year portion of its useful life) would be likely to vary significantly from the outright ownership of the property, as outright ownership would confer rights over a period of time that would typically be significantly greater than the 5-year right-of-use asset contained in the lease.

In practice, judgement may be needed to estimate an incremental borrowing rate in the context of a right-of-use asset, especially when the value of the underlying asset differs significantly from the value of the right-of-use asset.

An entity’s weighted-average cost of capital (‘WACC’) is not appropriate to use as a proxy for the incremental borrowing rate because it is not representative of the rate an entity would pay on borrowings. WACC incorporates the cost of equity-based capital, which is unsecured and ranks behind other creditors and will therefore be a higher rate than that paid on borrowings.

Read more

Reform of interest rate benchmarks

Reform of interest rate benchmarks

Certain interest rate benchmarks including LIBOR, EURIBOR and EONIA are being or have recently been reformed.

What are interest rate benchmarks?

Interest rate benchmark are used to determine

  1. the amount of interest payable for a wide range of financial products such as derivatives, bonds, loans, structured products and mortgages, and
  2. the valuation of financial products.

The most common examples of interest rate benchmarks used in financial contracts across the world are the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and for the Euro, the Euro Interbank Offered Rate (EURIBOR) and Euro Overnight Index Average (EONIA).

Why are these benchmarks being reformed?

As benchmark rates are fundamental to so many financial contracts, they need to be robust, reliable and fit for purpose. Each of these interest rate benchmarks subject to reform were based on the rates at which banks lend to each other in the interbank market.

Financial regulatory authorities have expressed their concern that because interbank lending transactions have significantly decreased in recent years, the Reform of interest rate benchmarksbenchmark rates may no longer be representative or reliable.

This concern has resulted in recommendations made by the Financial Stability Board towards the global financial industry to reform the major interest rate benchmarks and to develop a set of alternative rates that are more representative of the current financial environment.

IFRS Reporting disclosure amendments

The amendments made to IFRS 9 Financial Instruments, IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement and IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures provide certain reliefs in relation to interest rate benchmark reform. The reliefs relate to hedge accounting and have the effect that the reforms should not generally cause hedge accounting to terminate. However, any hedge ineffectiveness should continue to be recorded in the income statement. Given the pervasive nature of hedges involving interbank offered rates (IBOR)-based contracts, the reliefs will affect companies in all industries.

Entities relying on the relief must disclose:

  1. the significant interest rate benchmarks to which the entity’s hedging relationships are exposed
  2. the extent of the risk exposure that the entity manages that is directly affected by the interest rate benchmark reform
  3. how the entity is managing the process of transition to alternative benchmark rates
  4. a description of significant assumptions or judgements that the entity made in applying the reliefs, and
  5. the nominal amount of the hedging instruments in those hedging relationships. [IFRS 7.24H]

Information about how the entity is managing the transition process will provide users with an indication of the extent to which management is prepared for the transition. For example, this could include explanations about differences in fallback provisions between the hedged item and the hedging instruments.

The amendments are not clear whether the disclosure of the extent of the risk exposure that the entity manages could be provided on a qualitative rather than quantitative basis. However, numerical disclosures may be more useful for users.

Accounting policies relating to hedge accounting will need to be updated to reflect the reliefs. Fair value disclosures may also be impacted due to transfers between levels in the fair value hierarchy as markets become more / less liquid.

Entities should consider whether further disclosure of the impending replacement of IBOR should be provided in other parts of the annual report, for example in management’s discussion and analysis.

This Example Disclosure Related party transactions shows the disclosures an entity would have to add if it has a loan with an interest rate based on 3-month GPB LIBOR and a cash flow hedge in the form of a floating-to-fixed rate interest rate swap that is referenced to LIBOR. The disclosures assume that the entity has adopted the hedge accounting requirements of IFRS 9.

While primarily illustrating the disclosures required by the amendments made to IFRS 7 and other hedge accounting disclosures affected by IBOR reform, extractsReform of interest rate benchmarks of other disclosures from the main body of the publication have been included, to provide some context for the additional disclosures.

New or revised disclosures are highlighted with shading. This appendix does not illustrate disclosures that may be required if the terms of the loan and the swap have moved to new benchmark rates.

12 Financial risk management (extracts)

12(a) Derivatives (extracts)

(iv) Hedge effectiveness (extracts)

Hedge ineffectiveness for interest rate swaps is assessed using the same principles as for hedges of foreign currency purchases. It may occur due to:

  • the credit value/debit value adjustment on the interest rate swaps which is not matched by the loan
  • differences in critical terms between the interest rate swaps and loans, and
  • the effects of the forthcoming reforms to GBP LIBOR, because these might take effect at a different time and have a different impact on the hedged item (the floating-rate debt) and the hedging instrument (the interest rate swap used to hedge the debt). Further details of these reforms are set out below. [IFRS 7.22B(c), IFRS 7.23D]

Ineffectiveness of CUXX,XXX has been recognised in relation to the interest rate swaps in other gains or losses in profit or loss for 2020 (2019 CUXX,XXX). The significant increase in ineffectiveness in the current year was caused by the expectation that the interest rate swap and the hedged debt will move from GBP LIBOR to SONIA at different dates. [IFRS 7.24C(b)(ii)]

12(b) Market riskReform of interest rate benchmarks

[IFRS 7.33]

(ii) Cash flow and fair value interest rate risk

[IFRS 7.21C]

The group’s main interest rate risk arises from long-term borrowings with variable rates, which expose the group to cash flow interest rate risk. Group policy is to maintain at least 50% of its borrowings at fixed rate, using floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps to achieve this when necessary.

Generally, the group enters into long-term borrowings at floating rates and swaps them into fixed rates that are lower than those available if the group borrowed at fixed rates directly. During 2020 and 2019, the group’s borrowings at variable rate were mainly denominated in Oneland currency units and US dollars. Except for the GBP LIBOR floating rate debt noted below, other variable interest rates were not referenced to interbank offered rates (IBORs) that will be affected by the IBOR reforms. [IFRS7.22A(a),(b), IFRS7.33(a),(b)]

Included in the variable rate borrowings is a 10-year floating-rate debt of CU10,000,000 (2019 CU10,000,000) whose interest rate is based on 3 month GBP LIBOR. To hedge the variability of in cash flows of this loan, the group has entered into a 10-year interest rate swap with key terms (principal amount, payment dates, repricing dates, currency) that match those of the debt on which it pays a fixed rate and receives a variable rate. [IFRS 7.24H(a)]

The group’s borrowings and receivables are carried at amortised cost. The borrowings are periodically contractually repriced (see below) and to that extent are also exposed to the risk of future changes in market interest rates.

The exposure of the group’s borrowings to interest rate changes and the contractual re-pricing dates of the borrowings at the end of the reporting period are as follows: [IFRS 7.22A(c), IFRS 7.34(a), IFRS 7.24H(b)]

Amounts in CU’000

2020

%of total

2019

% of total

Variable rate borrowings – GBP LIBOR

10,000

10%

10,000

12%

Variable rate borrowings – non-IBOR

43,669

46%

40,150

47%

Fixed rate borrowings – repricing or maturity dates:

– Less than one year

4,735

5%

3,895

5%

– 1 – 5 years

26,626

27%

19,550

23%

– Over 5 years

11,465

12%

11,000

13%

Total

97,515

100%

84,595

100%

An analysis by maturities is provided in note 12(d) below. The percentage of total loans shows the proportion of loans that are currently at variable rates in relation to the total amount of borrowings.

Instruments used by the group

Swaps currently in place cover approximately 37% (2019 – 37%) of the variable loan principal outstanding. The fixed interest rates of the swaps range between 7.8% and 8.3% (2019 – 9.0% and 9.6%), and the variable rates of the loans are between 0.5% and 1.0% above the 90 day bank bill rate or LIBOR which, at the end of the reporting period, were 8.2% and x.x% respectively (2019 – 9.4% and x.x%). [IFRS 7.22B(a), IFRS 7.23B]

The swap contracts require settlement of net interest receivable or payable every 90 days. The settlement dates coincide with the dates on which interest is payable on the underlying debt. [IFRS 7.22B(a)]

Effects of hedge accounting on the financial position and performance

The effects of the interest rate swaps on the group’s financial position and performance are as follows:

Amounts in CU’000

2020

2019

Interest rate swaps

Carrying amount (current and non-current asset)

[IFRS 7.24A(a)(b)]

453

809

Notional amount – LIBOR based swaps [IFRS 7.24H(b),(e)]

10,000

10,000

Maturity date [IFRS 7.23B(a)]

2030

2030

Hedge ratio [IFRS 7.22B(c)]

1 : 1

1 : 1

Change in fair value of outstanding hedging instruments since 1 January [IFRS 7.24A(c)]

xx

xx

Change in value of hedged item used to determine hedge effectiveness [IFRS 7.24B(b)(i)]

xx

xx

Weighted average hedged rate for the year [IFRS 7.23B(b)]

x.x%

x.x%

Notional amount – non-LIBOR based swaps [IFRS 7.24H(b),(e)]

10,010

8,440

Maturity date [IFRS 7.23B(a)]

2020

2019

Hedge ratio [IFRS 7.22B(c)]

1 : 1

1 : 1

Change in fair value of outstanding hedging instruments since 1 January [IFRS 7.24A(c)]

-202

1,005

Change in value of hedged item used to determine hedge effectiveness [IFRS 7.24B(b)(i)]

202

1,005

Weighted average hedged rate for the year [IFRS 7.23B(b)]

8.1%

9.

xx) Significant judgements

Interest rate benchmark reform

Following the financial crisis, the reform and replacement of benchmark interest rates such as GBP LIBOR and other interbank offered rates (‘IBORs’) has become a priority for global regulators. There is currently uncertainty around the timing and precise nature of these changes. [IFRS 7.24H(b)]

To transition existing contracts and agreements that reference GBP LIBOR to SONIA, adjustments for term differences and credit differences might need to be applied to SONIA, to enable the two benchmark rates to be economically equivalent on transition.

Group treasury is managing the group’s GBP LIBOR transition plan. The greatest change will be amendments to the contractual terms of the GBP LIBOR-referenced floating-rate debt and the associated swap and the corresponding update of the hedge designation. However, the changed reference rate may also affect other systems, processes, risk and valuation models, as well as having tax and accounting implications. [IFRS 7.24H(c)]

Relief applied

The group has applied the following reliefs that were introduced by the amendments made to IFRS 9 Financial Instruments in September 2019:

  • When considering the ‘highly probable’ requirement, the group has assumed that the GBP LIBOR interest rate on which the group’s hedged debt is based does not change as a result of IBOR reform.
  • In assessing whether the hedge is expected to be highly effective on a forward-looking basis the group has assumed that the GBP LIBOR interest rate on which the cash flows of the hedged debt and the interest rate swap that hedges it are based is not altered by LIBOR reform.
  • The group has not recycled the cash flow hedge reserve relating to the period after the reforms are expected to take effect.
Assumptions made

In calculating the change in fair value attributable to the hedged risk of floating-rate debt, the group has made the following assumptions that reflect its current expectations:

  • The floating-rate debt will move to SONIA during 2022 and the spread will be similar to the spread included in the interest rate swap used as the hedging instrument.
  • No other changes to the terms of the floating-rate debt are anticipated.
  • The group has incorporated the uncertainty over when the floating-rate debt will move to SONIA, the resulting adjustment to the spread, and the other aspects of the reform that have not yet been finalised by adding an additional spread to the discount rate used in the calculation. [IFRS 7.24H(d)]

Reform of interest rate benchmarks

Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks

Annualreporting provides financial reporting narratives using IFRS keywords and terminology for free to students and others interested in financial reporting. The information provided on this website is for general information and educational purposes only and should not be used as a substitute for professional advice. Use at your own risk. Annualreporting is an independent website and it is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or in any other way associated with the IFRS Foundation. For official information concerning IFRS Standards, visit IFRS.org or the local representative in your jurisdiction.

Reform of interest rate benchmarks

Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks Reform of interest rate benchmarks

IAS 16 Generation assets for Power and Utilities

Generation assets for Power and Utilities

– are often large and complex installations. They are expensive to construct, tend to be exposed to harsh operating conditions and require periodic replacement or repair. This environment leads to specific accounting issues.

1 Fixed assets and components

IFRS has a specific requirement for ‘component’ depreciation, as described in IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment. Each significant part of an item of property, plant and equipment is depreciated separately. Significant parts of an asset that have similar useful lives and patterns of consumption can be grouped together. This requirement can create complications for utility entities, because many assets include components with a shorter useful life than the asset as a whole.

Identifying components of an asset

Generation assets might comprise a significant number of components, many of which will have differing useful lives. The significant components of these types of assets must be separately identified. This can be a complex process, particularly on transition to IFRS, because the detailed record-keeping needed for componentisation might not have been required in order to comply with national generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). This can particularly be an issue for older power plants. However, some regulators require detailed asset records, which can be useful for IFRS component identification purposes.

An entity might look to its operating data if the necessary information for components is not readily identified by the accounting records. Some components can be identified by considering the routine shutdown or overhaul schedules for power stations and the associated replacement and maintenance routines. Consideration should also be given to those components that are prone to technological obsolescence, corrosion or wear and tear that is more severe than that of the other portions of the larger asset.

First-time IFRS adopters can benefit from an exemption under IFRS 1 First-time Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards. This exemption allows entities to use a value that is not depreciated cost in accordance with IAS 16, and IAS 23 Borrowing Costs as deemed cost on transition to IFRS. It is not necessary to apply the exemption to all assets or to a group of assets.

Read more

Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance

Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance

Expected credit losses continuously in focus

In December 2015, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (‘the Committee’) issued its Guidance on credit risk and accounting for expected credit losses (‘Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance’). The Guidance sets out supervisory guidance on sound credit risk practices associated with the implementation and ongoing application of expected credit loss (ECL) accounting frameworks, such as that introduced in IFRS 9, Financial Instruments.

The Committee expects a disciplined, high-quality approach to assessing and measuring ECL by banks. The Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance emphasises the inclusion of a wide range of relevant, reasonable and supportable forward looking information, including macroeconomic data, in a bank’s accounting measure of ECL. In particular, banks should not ignore future events simply because they have a low probability of occurring or on the grounds of increased cost or subjectivity.

In addition, the Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance notes the Committee’s view that that the use of the practical expedients in IFRS 9 should be limited for internationally active banks. This includes the use of the ‘low credit risk’ exemption and the ‘more than 30 days past due’ rebuttable presumption in relation to assessing significant increases in credit risk.

Obviously, banks keep in continued talks to their local regulator about the extent to which their regulator expects the (below) Banking IFRS 9 Guidance to apply to them.

Principles underlying the Banking IFRS 9 Guidance – in Summary

Supervisory guidance for credit risk and accounting for expected credit losses

Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance Basel Committee IFRS 9 Guidance

Principle 1

Responsibility

A bank’s board of directors and senior management are responsible for ensuring appropriate credit risk practices, including an effective system of internal control, to consistently determine adequate allowances.

Principle 2

Methodology

The measurement of allowances should build upon robust methodologies to address policies, procedures and controls for assessing and measuring credit risk

Banks should clearly document the definition of key terms and criteria to duly consider the impact of forward-looking information including macro-economic factors, different potential scenarios and define accounting policies for restructurings

Principle 3

Credit Risk Rating

A bank should have a credit risk rating process in place to appropriately group lending exposures on the basis of shared credit risk characteristics

Principle 4

Allowances adequacy

A bank’s aggregate amount of allowances should be adequate and consistent with the objectives of the applicable accounting framework

Banks must ensure that the assessment approach (individual or collective) does not result in delayed recognition of ECL, e.g. by incorporating forward-looking information incl. macroeconomic factors on collective basis for individually assessed loans

Principle 5

Validation of models

A bank should have policies and procedures in place to appropriately validate models used to assess and measure expected credit losses

Principle 6

Experienced credit judgment

Experienced credit judgment in particular with regards to forward looking information and macroeconomic factors is essential

Consideration of forward looking information should not be avoided on the basis that banks consider costs as excessive or information too uncertain if this information contributes to a high quality implementation

Principle 7

Common systems

A bank should have a sound credit risk assessment and measurement process that provides it with a strong basis for common systems, tools and data

Principle 8

Disclosure

A bank’s public disclosures should promote transparency and comparability by providing timely, relevant, and decision-useful information

Principle 9

Assessment of Credit Risk Management

Banking supervisors should periodically evaluate the effectiveness of a bank’s credit risk practices

Principle 10

Approval of Models

Supervisors should be satisfied that the methods employed by a bank to determine accounting allowances lead to an appropriate measurement of expected credit losses

Principle 11

Assessment of Capital Adequacy

Banking supervisors should consider a bank’s credit risk practices when assessing a bank’s capital adequacy

Principles underlying the Banking IFRS 9 Guidance

Read more

Low credit risk operational simplification

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

IAS 1 Common control transactions v Newco formation

Common control transactions v Newco formation

are two different events, that sometimes interactCommon control transactions v Newco formation

  • Common control transactions represent the transfer of assets or an exchange of equity interests among entities under the same parent’s control. “Control” can be established through a majority voting interest, as well as variable interests and contractual arrangements. Entities that are consolidated by the same parent—or that would be consolidated, if consolidated financial statements were required to be prepared by the parent or controlling party—are considered to be under common control.Determining whether common control exists requires judgment and could have broad implications for financial reporting, deals and tax. Just a few examples are:
    • A reporting entity charters a newly formed entity to effect a transaction.
    • A ‘Never-Neverland‘-domiciled company transfers assets to a subsidiary domiciled in a different jurisdiction.
    • Two companies under common control combine to form one legal entity.
    • Prior to spin-off of a subsidiary by a parent entity, another wholly owned subsidiary transfers net assets to the “SpinCo.”
    • As part of a reorganization, a parent entity merges with and into a wholly owned subsidiary.
  • Newco formations may be used in Business Combinations or businesses controlled by the same party (or parties). Just a few examples are: Common control transactions v Newco formation
    • A Newco can be formed by the controlling party (for example, to facilitate subsequent disposal of the newly created group through an initial public offering (IPO) or a spin-off or by a third-party acquirer (for example to raise funds to effect the acquisition); Common control transactions v Newco formation
    • A Newco can pay cash or shares to effect an acquisition; and
    • A Newco can be formed to acquire just one business or more than one business.

Read more