Share options

Fair value employee share options in IFRS 2

by

Fair value employee share options

Share options give the holder the right to buy the underlying shares at a set price, called the ‘exercise price’, over or at the end of an agreed period. If the share price exceeds the option’s exercise price when the option is exercised, then the holder of the option profits by the amount of the excess of the share price over the exercise price. Benefit is derived from the right under the option to buy a share for less than its value.

The holder’s cost is the exercise price, whereas the value is the share price. It is not necessary for the holder to sell the share for this profit to exist. Sale only results in realisation of the profit. Because an option holder’s profit increases as the underlying share price increases, share options are used to incentivise employees to contribute to an increase in the price of the underlying shares.

Employee options are typically call options, which give holders the right but not the obligation to buy shares. However, other types of options are also traded in markets. For example, put options give holders the right to sell the underlying shares at an agreed price for a set period.

Given that holders of put options profit when share prices fall below the exercise price, such options are not viewed as aligning the interests of employees and shareholders. All references in this section to ‘share options’ are to employee call options.

Share options granted by entities often cannot be valued with reference to market prices. Many entities, even those whose shares are quoted publicly, do not have options traded on their shares. Options that trade on recognised exchanges such as the Chicago Board Options Exchange are created by market participants and are not issued by entities directly.

Even when there are exchange-traded options on an entity’s shares for which prices are available, the terms and conditions of these options are generally different from the terms and conditions of options issued by entities in share-based payments and, as a result, the prices of such traded options cannot be used directly to value share options issued in a share-based payment.

Read more

Option valuation models

by

Option valuation models

Option valuation models use mathematical techniques to identify a range of possible future share prices at the exercise date. From these possible future share prices, the pay-off of an option can be calculated. These intrinsic values at exercise are then probability-weighted and discounted to their present value to estimate the fair value of the option at the grant date.

This narrative is part of the IFRS 2 series, look here.

Model selection

There are three main models used to value options:

  • closed-form models: e.g. the BSM model;
  • lattice models; and
  • simulation models: e.g. Monte Carlo models.

These models generally result in very similar values if the same assumptions are used. However, certain models may be more restrictive than others – e.g. in terms of the different pay-offs that can be considered or assumptions that can be incorporated.

For example, a BSM model incorporates early exercise behaviour by using an expected term assumption that is shorter than the contractual life, whereas a lattice model or Monte Carlo model can incorporate more complex early exercise behaviour.

Simple model explanation

The approach followed in, for example, a lattice model illustrates the principles used in an option valuation model in a simplified manner.

Read more

Employee share purchase plans

by

Employee share purchase plans

In an ESPP, the employees are usually entitled to buy shares at a discounted price. The terms and conditions can vary significantly and some ESPPs include option features. (IFRS 2.IG17)

In my view, the predominant feature of the share-based payment arrangement determines the accounting for the entire fair value of the grant. That is, depending on the predominant features, a share purchase plan is either a true ESPP or an option plan.

All of the terms and conditions of the arrangement should be considered when determining the type of equity instruments granted and judgement is required. The determination is important because the measurement and some aspects of the accounting for each are different (see below).

Options are characterised by the right, but not the obligation, to buy a share at a fixed price. An option has a value (i.e. the option premium), because the option holder has the benefit of any future gains and has none of the risks of loss beyond any option premium paid. The value of an option is determined in part by its duration and by the expected volatility of the share price during the term of the option.

In my view, the principal characteristic of an ESPP is the right to buy shares at a discount to current market prices. ESPPs that grant short-term fixed purchase prices do not have significant option characteristics because they do not allow the grant holder to benefit from volatility. I believe that ESPPs that provide a longer-term option to buy shares at a specified price are, in substance, option plans, and should be accounted for as such. (IFRS 2.B4-B41)

Examples of other option features that may be found in ESPPs are: (IFRS 2.IG17)

  • ESPPs with look-back features, whereby the employees are able to buy shares at a discount, and choose whether the discount is applied to the entity’s share price at the date of the grant or its share price at the date of purchase;
  • ESPPs in which the employees are allowed to decide after a significant period of time whether to participate in the plan; and
  • ESPPs in which employees are permitted to cancel their participation before or at the end of a specified period and obtain a refund of any amounts paid into the plan.

Read more

Determination of grant date in IFRS 2

by

Determination of grant date

The determination of grant date is important because this is the date on which the fair value of equity instruments granted is measured. Usually, grant date is also the date on which recognition of the employee cost begins. However, this is not always the case (Service commencement date and grant date in Determination of the vesting period).

‘Grant date’ is the date at which the entity and the employee agree to a share-based payment arrangement, and requires that the entity and the employee have a shared understanding of the terms and conditions of the arrangement. (IFRS 2.A)

In order for the employer and the employee to ‘agree’ to a share-based payment transaction, there needs to be both an offer and an acceptance of that offer. (IFRS 2.IG2)

Approval and communication by the employer

If the agreement is subject to an approval process, then the grant date cannot be before the date on which that approval is obtained. If a grant is made subject to approval – e.g. by a board of directors – then the grant date is normally when that approval is obtained.

The arrangement also needs to be communicated to the employees to achieve grant date.

In a broad-based unilateral grant of a share-based payment, there is often a period of time between board approval and communication of the terms of the award to individual employees. In some entities, the terms and conditions of the awards are communicated to each employee by their direct supervisor. Because of the varying schedules of employees and employers, it is possible that different employees may be informed of their awards on different dates.

Read more

Determination of the vesting period in IFRS 2

by

Determination of the vesting period

Service commencement date and grant date – The ‘vesting period’ is the period during which all of the specified vesting conditions are to be satisfied in order for the employees to be entitled unconditionally to the equity instrument. Normally, this is the period between grant date and the vesting date. (IFRS 2.A)

However, services are recognised when they are received and grant date may occur after the employees have begun rendering services. Grant date is a measurement date only. If grant date occurs after the service commencement date, then the entity estimates the grant-date fair value of the equity instruments for the purpose of recognising the services from the service commencement date until grant date.

A possible method of estimating the fair value of the equity instruments is by assuming that grant date is at the reporting date. Once grant date has been established, the entity revises the earlier estimates so that the amounts recognised for services received are based on the grant-date fair value of the equity instruments. In our view, this revision should be treated as a change in estimate. (IFRS 2.IG4, IGEx1A, IGEx2)

Case – Service commencement date before grant date

Determination of the vesting period

On 1 January Year 1, Company B sets up an arrangement in which the employees receive share options, subject to a four-year service condition. The total number of equity instruments granted will be determined objectively based on B’s profit in Year 1. The total number of options will be allocated to employees who started service on or before 1 January Year 1.

Significant subjective factors are involved in determining the number of instruments allocated to each individual employee and B concludes that grant date should be postponed until the outcome of the subjective evaluations is known in April Year 2 – i.e. subsequent to the approval of the financial statements for the reporting period ending 31 December Year 1.

Because the subjective factors are determined only in April Year 2, grant date cannot be before this date. However, in this case there is a clearly defined performance period, commencing on 1 January Year 1, which indicates that the employees have begun rendering their services before grant date. Accordingly, B recognises the cost of the services received from the date on which service commences – i.e. 1 January Year 1.

The estimate used in the Year 1 financial statements is based on an estimate of the fair value, assuming that grant date is 31 December Year 1. This estimate will be revised in April Year 2 when the fair value at grant date is determined.

Assume that B estimates on 31 December Year 1 that the grant-date fair value of an equity instrument granted will be 10 and the actual fair value on grant date of April Year 2 is 9. Based on preliminary profit figures, B further estimates at 31 December Year 1 that the total number of equity instruments granted will be 100, which is confirmed by the final profit figure. If all instruments are expected to and actually do vest, then the accounting is as follows.

Determination of the vesting period

Notes

1. 100 x 10.
2. 100 x 9.
3. 1,000 x 1/4.
4. 900 x 2/4.
5. 900 x 3/4.
6. 900 x 4/4.

Read more

Equity – 2 understand it all at best

by

Equity

There are, at least, two ways to discuss equity:

  • Equity is the residual interest in the assets of the entity after deducting all its liabilities, or
  • An equity instrument is any contract that evidences a residual interest in the assets of an entity after deducting all of its liabilities.

But also:

1. Equity the residual interest in the assets of the entity after deducting all its liabilities

1. Statement of Financial Position

Assets

Equity and liabilities

1. Non-current assets

2. Current assets

Help

Help

A – TOTAL ASSETS [1 + 2] = B

3. Non-current liabilities (including Provisions)

4. Current liabilities (including Provisions)

5. Equity [1 + 2 -/- 3 -/- 4]

Help

B – TOTAL EQUITY AND LIABILITIES [3 + 4 + 5] = A

Read more

11 Best fair value measurements under IFRS 13

by

11 Best fair value measurements under IFRS 13

Several IFRS standards provide guidance regarding the scope and application of the fair value option for assets and liabilities. Here they are from 1 to 11…….

1 Investments in associates and joint ventures

Investments held by venture capital organizations and the like are exempt from IAS 28’s requirements only when they are measured at fair value through profit or loss (FVPL) in accordance with IFRS 9. Changes in the fair value (FV) of such investments are recognized in profit or loss in the period of change.

The IASB acknowledged that FV information is often readily available in venture capital organizations and entities in similar industries, even for start-up and non-listed entities, as the methods and basis for fair value measurement are well established. The IASB also confirmed that the reference to well-established practice is to emphasize that the exemption applies generally to those investments for which fair value is readily available.

2 Intangible assets

Subsequent to initial recognition of intangible assets, an entity may adopt either the cost model or the revaluation model as its accounting policy. The policy should be applied to the whole of a class of intangible assets and not merely to individual assets within a class11 Best fair value measurements under IFRS 13, unless there is no active market for an individual asset.

The revaluation model may only be adopted if the intangible assets are traded in an active market; hence it is not frequently used. Further, the revaluation model may not be applied to intangible assets that have not previously been recognized as assets. For example, over the years an entity might have accumulated for nominal consideration a number of licenses of a kind that are traded on an active market. 11 Best fair value measurements under IFRS 13

The entity may not have recognized an intangible asset as the licenses were individually immaterial when acquired. If market prices for such licenses significantly increased, the value of the licenses held by the entity would substantially increase. In this case, the entity would be prohibited by IAS 38 from applying the revaluation model to the licenses, because they were not previously recognized as an asset.

Read more

IAS 33 EPS Impact of share-based payments

by

EPS Impact of share-based payments

Because share-based payments are common and they impact EPS, it is important to understand how IFRS 2 interacts with IAS 33. Accordingly, this narrative starts with an alternative IFRS 2 perspective and discusses the EPS implications of each type of arrangement under IFRS 2.

This narrative builds on the basic principles introduced in EPS or earnings per share, and sets out the specific basic and diluted EPS implications of the following types of instrument(s).

For details on the specific EPS implications of particular types of instrument, this chapter may need to be read in conjunction with the chapter on those specific instruments. For example, for a number of the instruments described in other chapters, the treasury share method is used in calculating diluted EPS. The general principles underlying the treasury share method are explained in detail in here, and the additional implications of applying the treasury share method to share-based payment instruments are further explained in 1.3 below.

Simply put, share-based payments are generally transactions in which an entity acquires goods or services (including employee services) in exchange for its (or another group entity’s) equity instruments or a liability that is based on the price or value of its (or another group entity’s) equity instruments. There are three main factors to be considered in assessing how a share-based payment will affect EPS.

IFRS 2 Conditions

Analysis

Settlement alternatives that drive the classification as equity- or cash-settled share-based payments under IFRS 2

They determine whether and how EPS is affected – e.g. if a share-based payment is a POS.

See 1 below

Vesting conditions

They impact how a share-based payment is dealt with in EPS – e.g. as an option or as a contingently issuable share.

See 2 below

Form of the instrument

It determines which other considerations might be necessary to understand the EPS implications – e.g. dividend entitlements for non-vested shares or exercise prices for options.

See 2 below

1. IFRS 2 Settlement alternatives

Read more

Contingently issuable POSs

by

Contingently issuable POSs

Contingently issuable POSs are not specifically defined in IAS 33, but they are closely related to contingently issuable ordinary shares (see Other contingencies in EPS and Contingently issued ordinary shares). These are POSs that are issuable for little or no cash or other consideration on the satisfaction of specified conditions. An example is a contingently issuable convertible instrument. [IAS 33.57]

This narrative builds on the basic principles introduced in EPS or earnings per share, and sets out the specific basic and diluted EPS implications of the following types of instrument(s).

EPS implications

Generally, by their nature contingently issuable POSs do not impact basic EPS. However, these instruments generally do impact diluted EPS and, similar to contingently issuable ordinary shares, their impact depends on the extent to which the specified conditions are met at the reporting date.

Potential impact on basic EPS

Potential impact on diluted EPS

The numerator is not affected, the denominator might or might not be affected.

The numerator might or might not be affected, the denominator is affected.

By their nature, contingently issuable POSs are generally ignored in basic EPS. This is because, on satisfying the specified conditions, POSs – as opposed to ordinary shares – will be issued, and these would not generally result in outstanding ordinary shares until they are exercised or otherwise converted. However, if any options that are contingently issuable can be exercised immediately for little or no further consideration, then the resulting options are included in the denominator from the vesting date (see EPS Implications).

IAS 33 prescribes a two-step approach for determining whether a contingently issuable POS is included in diluted EPS. [IAS 33.57]

Step i. Should the contingently issuable POS be assumed to be issuable?

This is the same assessment as that for contingently issuable ordinary shares (see EPS Implications and How to apply the test for different conditions in a contingent share agreement) – i.e. if the reporting date were the end of the contingency period, then would the POS be issuable? If the instrument passes the test in Step (i), then Step (ii) is applied.

Step ii. What is the impact on diluted EPS?

This is different from the requirements for contingently issuable ordinary shares. As opposed to including in the denominator the number of ordinary shares that would be issuable, the impact is determined based on the relevant guidance in IAS 33 for the type of POS in question – that is:

Dilutive or anti-dilutive?

Read more

EPS Calculation – IAS 33 Best complete read

by

EPS Calculation

Here is full example of an EPS Calculation. This narrative builds on the basic principles introduced in the narrative EPS, and sets out the specific basic and diluted EPS calculation rules as per IAS 33 Earnings per share.

Case

Company P earns a consolidated net profit of 4,600,000 during the year ended 31 December Year 1 and 5,600,000 during the year ended 31 December Year 2. The total number of ordinary shares outstanding on 1 January Year 1 is 3,000,000.

Various POSs are issued before 1 January Year 1 and during the years ended 31 December Year 1 and Year 2. During this period, the outstanding number of ordinary shares also changes.

The statement of changes in equity below summarises only the actual movements in the outstanding number of ordinary shares, followed by detailed information about such movements and POSs outstanding during the periods.

EPS Calculation

Details of the instruments and ordinary share transactions during Year 1 and Year 2

1. Convertible preference shares

At 1 January Year 1, P has 500,000 outstanding convertible preference shares. Dividends on these shares are discretionary and non-cumulative. Each preference share is convertible into two ordinary shares at the holder’s option.

The preference shares are classified as equity in P’s financial statements.

On 15 October Year 1, a dividend of 1.20 per preference share is declared. The dividend is paid in cash on 15 December Year 1. Preference dividends are not tax-deductible.

Read more