International GAAP 2017 (eBook)

Preface

The IASB reported earlier this year that 122 of the 147 jurisdictions they have researched require the use of IFRS for all or most listed companies and financial institutions, and a further 13 jurisdictions permit the use of IFRS. Several large economies like China, India and Japan do not require IFRS for all or most of their listed companies, but they have made considerable progress to move towards or to converge with IFRS. While it is unlikely that the United States will adopt IFRS in the near term, there are more than 500 foreign IFRS reporters with a significant market capitalisation listed on US markets and many US investors are familiar with IFRS-based financial statements. Global financial reporting is now in a position where there are essentially only two global-scale systems of financial reporting – IFRS and US GAAP.

In 2016, the IASB completed its project on lease accounting and made considerable efforts to provide implementation and adoption support regarding the new revenue recognition and financial instruments standards.

The publication of IFRS 16 – Leases, which is effective from 1 January 2019 onwards, marks the completion of the IASB's long-running project on lease accounting. The main objective of the new standard – to bring most lease obligations that are currently not recognised, on to the balance sheet – is converged with the FASB's objective. However, certain requirements for the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of leases by lessees and lessors differ. IFRS 16 is more complex than its predecessor, IAS 17 – Leases, and is giving rise to implementation questions that the IASB will need to address in a timely manner.

IFRS 9 – Financial Instruments – and IFRS 15 – Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which are effective from 1 January 2018, introduce important improvements and fill major gaps in the existing literature. The joint IASB/FASB transition resource group for revenue recognition (TRG) and the IASB's transition resource group for impairment of financial instruments have provided valuable forums for identifying interpretation questions that inevitably arise when entities implement complex accounting standards. In April 2016, the IASB published amendments that improve the guidance in IFRS 15 and address some issues that the TRG discussed. These amendments and the many interpretations and emerging practices regarding the new standards have been included in this edition of International GAAP and will help companies that are implementing these standards.

In the past year, the IASB has worked on its projects on insurance contracts and the conceptual framework. The work on insurance contracts, the IASB's longest running project, is crucial because as Hans Hoogervorst noted in comments to the European Parliament: ‘[i]nsurance is an extremely important business with substantial systemic risks. These risks are currently amplified by the current environment of persistently low interest rates. … 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.' In February 2016, the Board concluded that it had completed all the necessary due process steps and instructed the staff to commence the drafting process. A final standard is now expected to be published in the first half of 2017. In order to address the complex interaction between IFRS 9 and the insurance contracts project, the IASB published, in September 2016, amendments to IFRS 4 – Insurance Contracts. These amendments provide certain reliefs to insurers that are intended to mitigate the impact of applying IFRS 9 until the new insurance contracts standard becomes effective.

The IASB is redeliberating its revised conceptual framework based on the comments received in response to the exposure draft Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting. Some of the most challenging areas being discussed are measurement, the distinction between debt and equity, and the role of profit and loss versus other comprehensive income. While it is hard to make progress on such major conceptual issues, these are nevertheless the areas that will be most important to constituents. The IASB expects to publish the revised conceptual framework in the first half of 2017.

The IASB has recently been considering its priorities for the period from 2016 to 2020, based on the feedback it received in response to its request for views 2015 Agenda Consultation. The IASB's new work programme can be broken down into the following main categories, each of which contains a number of projects:

• Standard-setting and relating projects – conceptual framework, disclosure initiative: materiality practice statement, insurance contracts, and rate-regulated activities;
• Implementation and other activities – implementation and adoption support activities, post-implementation reviews, and a public consultation on small and medium-sized entities;
• Active research agenda – principles of disclosure, primary financial statements, financial instruments with characteristics of equity, goodwill and impairment, dynamic risk management, and business combinations under common control; and
• Research pipeline – equity method of accounting, extractive activities, pollutant pricing mechanisms, provisions, contingent liabilities and contingent assets (review of IAS 37), variable and contingent consideration, and feasibility studies (on small and medium-sized entities, post-employment benefits that depend on asset returns, and high inflation).

We believe that these are important areas of accounting where the IASB will be able to make meaningful improvements in financial reporting. In particular, the IASB is addressing the needs of users and preparers of financial statements by focussing on better communication (by way of better disclosures and presentation), implementation and adoption support, and post-implementation reviews of existing standards.

We think that it is important for the IASB to consider carefully the scope of a new project before starting the development of a new standard. This is to avoid scope-creep and projects taking longer than necessary to complete. In addition, the decision to undertake a major project should not automatically lead to the decision not to address urgent practical issues affecting the same area of accounting. In our view, such a situation might warrant two projects: one to solve the existing practical issue; and one to address the more fundamental and conceptual issues.

The IFRS Foundation Trustees identified, in the 2015 review of the organisation, the consistency of application and implementation of IFRS as one of the IFRS Foundation's primary strategic goals. They correctly see this in a holistic manner as requiring: clear drafting of standards; guidance that is consistent with a principle-based approach to standard setting; a responsive approach towards requests for interpretations; close co-operation with enforcers and educational efforts.

We believe the IASB should take its time in the final drafting stages of a standard, i.e. between the final redeliberations and the issuance of the standard, thereby ensuring that the drafting of the standard is clear and unambiguous. Drafting accounting standards for a worldwide audience involves a particular level of complexity because constituents interpret the wording in the context of their own experience and background. In addition, the operability of a standard enhances its quality to a large degree and we believe that the benefits of spending more time on this during the drafting phase outweigh the costs of doing so.

The consistent application of IFRS remains essential to its credibility. We believe that International GAAP, now in its twelfth edition, plays an important role in ensuring consistent application. Our team of authors and reviewers hails from all parts of the world, and includes not only our global technical experts but also senior client-facing staff. This gives us an in-depth knowledge of practice in many different countries and industry sectors, enabling us to go beyond mere recitation of the requirements of standards to explaining their application in many varied situations.

We are deeply indebted to many of our colleagues within the global organisation of EY for their selfless assistance and support in the publication of this book. It has been a truly international effort, with valuable contributions from EY people around the globe.

Our thanks go particularly to those who reviewed, edited and assisted in the preparation of drafts, most notably:John Alton, Mark Barton, Silke Blaschke, Jason Bond, Brian Byrne, Larissa Clark, Tony Clifford, Muriel Courel, Tai Danmola, Jackson Day,Alison Dobbie, Chantelle Duffy, Charles Feeney, Lisa Filomia-Atkas,Josh Forgione, Peter Gittens, Lindsay Gotsman, Laure Guégan, Paul Hebditch, Jennifer Hillenmeyer, Deborah Jones,Guy Jones, Akashi Kohno, Steinar Kvifte, Vincent de La Bachelerie, Martin Lee, Twan van Limpt, Meredith Lloyd, Michiel van der Lof, James Luke, Mark Mahar,Robert McCracken, Joseph McGrath, Ellie Morris,John O'Grady, Eric Ohlund,Gerard van Santen, Cyra Sharma, Rachel Simons,Alison Spivey, Paul Sutcliffe, Leo van der Tas, Evangelia Tsakiroglou, Hans van der Veen, Emma VanEmon, Jana Wahrisch, Arne Weber, Chris White and Luci Wright.

Our thanks also go to everyone who directly or indirectly contributed to the book's creation,...