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

Some challenges in measurement bases for best 1 in quality IFRS reporting

Some challenges in measurement bases

for best 1 in quality IFRS reporting

– When applied to financial reporting the term measurement can give a misleading Some challenges in measurement basesimpression of certainty and objectivity. In daily life, measurements are typically made of the physical characteristics of physical objects – such as height, weight, temperature and so on. If accurate measurement tools are employed, information of this sort is objective and uncontroversial (a ‘fact’). The subjects of measurement in financial reporting, however, are abstract concepts of uncertain meaning such as income and net assets (an ‘estimate’).

For this reason alone, their measurement is always liable to be controversial.

All measurements in financial reporting are expressed in monetary terms and therefore purport to be measurements of value. However, value can mean different things. A particular asset might be valued at, for example, its historical cost, its replacement cost or its market value. It cannot be said that any one of these measurements is the one and only correct value for the asset. Each value, if the measurement is made properly, will be correct on the basis being used. In the conceptual framework, the financial reporting standard-setters refer to the different attributes of assets and liabilities, which give different values when measured. Historical cost, replacement cost and market value are all attributes in this sense.

The diversity of the purposes for which financial reporting information is used means that a basis of measurement appropriate for one purpose may not be appropriate for all other purposes. If you ask someone the question, ‘What is this company’s income?’, the reply ‘Why do you want to know?’ may be a sensible first step towards providing a useful answer. There is no single, right answer to the question. Some challenges in measurement bases

As said before financial reporting measurements are inherently a matter of judgment, subjectivity and convention. Measurements of transactions for financial reporting that are affected by one or more of these fundamental problems when one measurement technique is used may well be faced by another fundamental problem if an alternative technique is tried. For such items there is no escape from subjectivity in measurement.

Read more

Beware of COVID 19 Rent concessions IFRS accounting

Beware of COVID 19 Rent concessions IFRS accounting

IFRS 16 amendments Corona Rent concessions provide relief to lessees in accounting for rent concessions.

IFRS 16 Rent concession amendments in a nutshell

The lessee perspective

The amendments to IFRS 16 add an optional practical expedient that allows lessees to bypass assessing whether a rent concession that meets the following criteria is a lease modification:

  • it is a direct consequence of COVID-19; Beware of COVID 19 Rent concessions IFRS accounting
  • the revised lease consideration is substantially the same as, or less than, the original lease consideration;
  • any reduction in the lease payments applies to payments originally due on or before June 30, 2021; and
  • there is no substantive change to the other terms and conditions of the lease.

Lessees who elect this practical expedient account for qualifying rent concessions in the same way as changes under IFRS 16 that are not lease modifications. The accounting will depend on the nature of the concession, but one outcome might be to recognize negative variable lease payments in the period in which the lessor agrees to an unconditional forgiveness of lease payments.

Lessees are required to apply the practical expedient consistently to similar leases and similar concessions. They must also disclose if they elected the practical expedient and for which concessions, as well as the amount recognized in profit and loss in the reporting period to reflect changes in lease payments that arise from rent concessions to which they have applied the practical expedient.

The amendments are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 1, 2020, with early application permitted.

Read more

IFRS 2 Fair value of equity instruments granted

IFRS 2 Fair value of equity instruments granted – Share-based payment transactions with employees are measured with reference to the fair value of the equity instruments granted (IFRS 2.11).

The fair value of a equity instrument granted is determined as follows (IFRS 2.16-17):

  • If market prices are available for the actual equity instruments granted – i.e. shares or share options with the same terms and conditions – then the estimate of fair value is based on these market prices. IFRS 2 Fair value of equity instruments granted
  • If market prices are not available for the equity instruments granted, then the fair value of equity instruments granted is estimated using a valuation technique.

IFRS 2 (IFRS Read more

IFRS 2 How to easily determine the grant date

IFRS 2 How to easily determine the 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 (see 6.4.10) (reference will follow). (IFRS 2 11)

‘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 Definitions) IFRS 2 How to easily determine the grant date

In order for … Read more

Fair value measurement

Fair Value Measurement can present significant challenges for preparers of financial statements, particularly because it involves using judgment and estimation. Further, it is the market participant view that shapes fair value, so preparers need to monitor whether the valuation models and assumptions they use for financial reporting appropriately reflect those of market participants.

Fair Value Measurement under IFRS 13:Fair value measurement

  1. defines fair value;
  2. sets out in a single IFRS a framework for measuring fair value; and
  3. requires disclosures about fair value measurements.

The definition of fair value focuses on assets and liabilities because they are a primary subject of accounting measurement. In addition, IFRS 13 is applied to an entity’s own equity instruments measured at fair value.

The … Read more

Allocation to periods and assets

Allocation to periods and assetsAllocation to periods and assets – Many measurements in financial reporting involve allocations of costs and revenues to different accounting periods and different assets. These allocations inevitably include an element of arbitrariness and therefore subjectivity. Just to name a few obvious items:

  • Depreciation of fixed assets involves judgmental allocation decisions (See explanation below).
  • Where assets are bought for stock (or inventory) and subsequent resale, unless the cost of each one can be individually identified (or unless their purchase price never changes), calculation of a particular asset’s purchase price involves a judgmental allocation.
  • For measurements of discounted future liabilities, allocation to different accounting periods depends on the choice of an appropriate discount rate, which inevitably involves a significant element
Read more

Verifiability

Verifiability helps assure users that information faithfully represents the economic phenomena it purports to represent. Verifiability means that different knowledgeable and independent observers could reach consensus, although not necessarily complete agreement, that a particular depiction is a faithful representation. Quantified information need not be a single point estimate to be verifiable. A range of possible amounts and the related probabilities can also be verified.