GAAP ALERT No.8/2009 To read on line please click here
By Colin Parker B.Bus FCA MAICD
Principal, GAAP Consulting, colin@gaap.com.au
Member of the Australian Accounting Standards Board (2006-2009)
INTRODUCTION
Annual Improvements (New Standards): Made AASB 2009-4 ‘Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards arising from the Annual Improvements Process’, and AASB 2009-5 ‘Further Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards arising from the Annual Improvements Process’. These Standards include amendments made to IFRSs by the IASB as a result of its Annual Improvements Process. AASB 2009-4 applies to annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 July 2009. AASB 2009-5 will apply to annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2010. Early adoption of amendments for individual pronouncements is permitted First-time Adoption of Australian Accounting Standards (Revised Standard): Made AASB 1 ‘First-time Adoption of Australian Accounting Standards’ (May 2009), consistent with the restructured IFRS 1 ‘First-time Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards’ issued by the IASB in November 2008. AASB 1 (May 2009) supersedes AASB 1 ‘First-time Adoption of Australian Equivalents to International Financial Reporting Standards’, and applies to annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 July 2009. Early adoption is permitted Differential Reporting Update: Decided that issues papers should be prepared for consideration on: analysis of various approaches to creating an alternative regime of reporting requirements (in addition to full IFRSs and the IFRS for SMEs) for application in preparing general purpose financial statements that involve full IFRS recognition and measurement requirements but reduced disclosures; and in an Australian context, the meaning of ‘holding assets in a fiduciary capacity’ referred to in the IASB’s definition of ‘public accountability’ Income from Non-Exchange Transactions (ED Approved): Approved the release of ED 180 ‘Non-exchange Transactions (Taxes and Transfers)’with a five month exposure period. ED 180 is based on IPSAS 23 ‘Revenue from Non-Exchange Transactions (Taxes and Transfers)’. The ED will be issued as a joint ED with the NZ FRSB. Comments will also be sought on the role of AASB Interpretation 1038 ‘Contributions by Owners Made to Wholly-Owned Public Sector Entities’ once a Standard based on the ED is issued Revenue Recognition IASB Submission: Considered comment letters on ITC 18 ‘Request for Comment on IASB Discussion Paper Preliminary Views on Revenue Recognition in Contracts with Customers’ and draft submission to IASB Financial Instruments Update: Noted the IASB’s intention to accelerate the process of revising IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’. The AASB will seek the views of key constituents regarding some of the issues being addressed by the IASB at its next meeting, and to provide its own views on the IASB’s preliminary decisions about the changes it might make to IAS 39, and Next Meeting on 24-25 June: Anticipated agenda items include: Differential Reporting; Fair Value Measurement; Financial Instruments; GAAP/GFS Harmonisation (Entities within the GGS); Income Tax; Interpretations; IPSASB Report; IPSASB IFRS Convergence Project (Agriculture, Financial Instruments); and Leases.
APES 305 Terms of Engagement Amendments
The APESB announced the issue of the revised APES 305 ‘Terms of Engagement’ (APES 305) to update the existing APES 305 of the same name. The following minor amendments are effective from 1 June 2009 and are: the use of “Professional Standards Legislation” rather than “Professional Services Legislation” (in paras. 4.5, 6.1 and 6.2); and updating the definition of the “Firm” in section 2 of the Standard, in line with the Compiled Version of APES 110 “Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants” issued in July 2008. These minor amendments are editorial in nature and do not affect the mandatory requirements established by the existing APES 305. Accordingly, the effective date of APES 305 of 1 July 2008 remains unaltered.
Sweeping Changes to Super and ADF Financial Statements Proposed by AASB
The way superannuation plans and approved deposit funds (ADFs) report financial results will change significantly, as the result of proposals in an exposure draft from the AASB. ED 179 ‘Superannuation Plans and Approved Deposit Funds’ aims to provide improved comparability of financial statements and more detailed disclosures regarding member benefits. The ED proposes to address a number of perceived gaps in the current superannuation reporting requirements, including a more rigorous approach to measuring defined benefit obligations, which will provide a more accurate picture of the solvency of defined benefit plans. Comments are sought by 30 September.
ED 179 proposals for a superannuation plan or ADF fund include:
Recognise all of its assets and liabilities in accordance with other applicable Australian Accounting Standards and measure them at fair value adjusted for transaction costs. There are number of exceptions to this principle Recognise and present all revenues, expenses, gains and losses in accordance with applicable Australian Accounting Standards. There are number of exceptions to this principle Present a statement of financial position, a statement of cash flows and, where relevant, a statement of changes in equity, in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards; an income statement instead of a single statement of comprehensive income or a separate income statement and a statement of comprehensive income; a statement of changes in member benefits; and notes in accordance with other relevant Australian Accounting Standards except where the disclosure principles and requirements in other Australian Accounting Standards: are not consistent with the measurement requirements in ED 179; or address the same items or events as the disclosure principles in ED 179 Present any difference between the amount of total assets and total liabilities (including member benefits and any obligations to employer sponsors) as equity in accordance with applicable Australian Accounting Standards Present its separate and consolidated financial statements together, and Disclose in the notes information that provides users of its financial statements with a basis for understanding (detailed disclosure are proposed).
Bruce Porter, Acting Chairman of the AASB, said that currently different types of superannuation plans are required to prepare different financial statements. “In particular, defined contribution plans are required to prepare cash flow statements whereas defined benefit plans are not. The ED proposes that this distinction be removed so that all plans present cash flow information to better meet user needs. In addition it is proposed that all super plans and ADFs prepare a statement of changes in member benefits, the purpose of which is to facilitate a clear presentation of the sources of change in member benefits.”
“The ED also proposes changes to how super plans and ADFs account for their interests in the assets of entities they control, to help ensure they are measuring the assets held by controlled entities in the same way they would measure all other types of investments; that is, at fair value,” Mr Porter said.
The resulting Standard will supersede AAS 25 ‘Financial Reporting by Superannuation Plans’ with key differences including that ED 179:
Does not differentiate between different types of superannuation plans and different reporting requirements on each type of plan Requires all superannuation plans and ADF to present a statement of cash flows, a statement of changes in member benefits and, where relevant, a statement of changes in equity Requires all assets except for tax assets, assets arising from insurance contracts issued by a superannuation plan or ADF and goodwill to be measured at fair value less transaction costs
Requires all liabilities except for tax liabilities, obligations for defined contribution members’ vested benefits, obligations for defined benefit members’ accrued benefits and obligations arising from insurance contracts issued by a superannuation plan or approved deposit fund to be measured at fair value plus transaction costs Requires all tax assets and liabilities to be measured in accordance with AASB 112 ‘Income Taxes’ Requires all assets and liabilities arising from insurance contracts issued by a superannuation plan or approved deposit fund to be recognised and measured in accordance with the principles and requirements applicable to life insurance contracts under AASB 1038 ‘Life Insurance Contracts’, and Requires contributions, transfers, rollovers and benefit payments to be presented in the statement of changes in member benefits.
APRA Enforceable Undertaking from former HIH Chairman
APRA announced it has accepted an enforceable undertaking from former HIH Insurance Ltd chairman Geoffrey Cohen. Mr Cohen was a non-executive director and chairman of the board of HIH and its predecessors from January 1992 until the company’s collapse in March 2001. He was also at times a member of HIH’s investment committee and audit committee, and chairman of the latter from August 1999 to February 2001. Mr Cohen has agreed not to work in the Australian insurance industry until 2015. The enforceable undertaking replaces a previous 2005 disqualification by APRA of Mr Cohen.
Mr Cohen acknowledged APRA’s concerns that led to his initial disqualification and agreed not to work in the Australian insurance industry for 10 years from the date of his disqualification. APRA’s concerns included that Mr Cohen did not competently and diligently carry out his duties and responsibilities in relation to:
The conduct of meetings and other procedural matters within his responsibility
The identification and management of potential conflicts between his personal interests and his responsibilities as chairman of the board and a director of HIH Taking all reasonable steps in relation to the concerns raised in Ernst & Young’s report of December 2000 about HIH’s solvency The Allianz transaction and the financial viability and consequences of proceeding with the joint venture arrangement Responding appropriately to issues of the legality of the Pacific Eagles Equities transaction, and Not ensuring that Rodney Adler and Ray Williams (who had an interest in the outcome of the decision) were not present when the decision of the investment committee to invest in Business Thinking Systems was ratified by the HIH Board.
Mr Cohen has accepted that with the benefit of hindsight and what has since transpired, he should have acted differently in relation to a number of the matters. He regretted the consequences that arose.
APRA Deputy Chairman Ross Jones said that the enforceable undertaking was an appropriate resolution to the ongoing dispute between Mr Cohen and APRA. ‘This outcome continues to achieve APRA’s objective of protecting policyholders by removing the person from the industry and gaining admissions without the need for protracted litigation,’ he said.
ICAA’s Essential Guidance for the 2009 Financial Year End
As the 30 June 2009 year-end approaches, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia released practical guidance to address the significant issues and areas preparers, audit committees and auditors need to consider when undertaking their professional responsibilities. ‘Essential guidance for the 2009 financial year end’ highlights circumstances that are of particular relevance to this reporting year end and require the exercise of significant professional judgement.
The Institute in preparing this guidance has undertaken analysis of previous reporting periods, current international developments and extensive communication with all parties directly involved with financial reporting and auditing. The guidance has been designed with practicality in mind, and should be used as a reference tool. The guidance can be downloaded from the Institute's website.
Lee White, the Institute’s General Manager of Leadership and Quality said, “The 30 June 2009 reporting period brings together a highly challenging set of circumstances for all involved. The global economic downturn and tight liquidity, have contributed to a very difficult reporting environment. The guidance includes three key areas of focus including, fair value, asset impairment and going concern.”
APRA’s Remuneration Proposals
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) released a consultation package on remuneration for authorised deposit-taking institutions and general and life insurance companies. The package comprises a discussion paper, draft extensions to the governance standards already applying in these industries and a draft prudential practice guide (PPG).
APRA’s proposals on remuneration are designed to ‘endorse and implement the FSF’s tough new principles on pay and compensation’ to quote from the Declaration by the Leaders of the G20 at their April meeting in London, by giving effect to the Financial Stability Forum’s (FSF) ‘Principles of Sound Compensation Practices’. They deal with an important deficiency highlighted by the FSF’s work, in which APRA participated, namely the lack of alignment of remuneration with risk management in many financial institutions. APRA’s proposals also respond to the Prime Minister’s request in October 2008 that APRA consider the linkages between remuneration practices and the capital adequacy requirements of regulated institutions.
APRA is intending to take a principles-based approach in this area, by requiring Boards of regulated institutions to have a remuneration policy that aligns remuneration arrangements with the long-term financial soundness of the institution and its risk management framework; at the same time, Boards would be able to design remuneration arrangements that suit the structure of their own institution. The policy would extend beyond senior executives to all persons who, because of their roles, have the capacity to make decisions that could materially affect the interests of depositors or policyholders, and owners.
“APRA has not addressed the absolute level of remuneration but the need to align remuneration incentives with good stewardship of institutions. That is why the proposed remuneration requirements are contained in our governance standards,” APRA Executive Member John Trowbridge said. “The risks associated with remuneration arrangements must be managed as part of the institution’s risk management framework,” Mr. Trowbridge added.
APRA also proposes that regulated institutions have a Board Remuneration Committee, comprising only independent directors with the appropriate experience and expertise. “Decisions relating to remuneration matters must be well founded and not influenced by conflicts of interest”, Mr. Trowbridge said.
Boards of regulated institutions will be held accountable for compliance with APRA’s prudential requirements for remuneration. APRA’s principles-based approach, rather than the prescription required in most disclosure regimes, together with its active supervision of regulated institutions, will be aimed at ensuring compliance with both the intent and the substance of these requirements. Where the remuneration arrangements of a regulated institution are likely to encourage excessive risk-taking, APRA has several supervisory options, including the power to impose additional capital requirements on that institution.
The PPG will assist regulated institutions to comply with the proposed requirements in the governance prudential standards and, more generally, will assist Boards in their consideration of prudent practice in remuneration. The PPG covers a number of issues, including the use of deferred compensation, the links between incentives and risk, the use of shares in incentive arrangements, the need to link incentive compensation to both forward-looking and backward-looking risk measures, and the balance between cash and non cash incentives.
APRA is seeking submissions on the draft standards and PPG by 24 July. It is expected that the final prudential standards and associated PPG will be released in September 2009 and be effective from 1 January 2010.
IASB ED on Fair Value Measurement
The IASB released published for public comment an exposure draft on new standards and guidance on fair value measurement. If adopted, the proposals would replace fair value measurement guidance contained in individual IFRSs with a single, unified definition of fair value, as well as further authoritative guidance on the application of fair value measurement in inactive markets. The proposals deal with how fair value should be measured when it is already required by existing standards; they do not extend its use. The proposals are set out in the ED ‘Fair Value Measurement’ which is open for comment until 28 September 2009. The AASB is expected to issue the Australian version for comment shortly.
The IASB’s starting point in developing the ED was the equivalent US standard, SFAS 157 ‘Fair Value Measurements’ as amended. The proposed definition of fair value is identical to the definition in SFAS 157 and the supporting guidance is largely consistent with US GAAP. To ensure consistency between IFRSs and US GAAP, the proposals incorporate recent guidance on fair value measurement published by the US FASB and are consistent with a report of the IASB’s Expert Advisory Panel published in October 2008 on fair value measurement in illiquid markets. This project forms part of a long-term program by the IASB and the FASB to achieve convergence of IFRSs and US GAAP, as described in the boards’ Memorandum of Understanding published in September 2008. It is also consistent with requests from G20 leaders to align fair value measurement in IFRSs and US GAAP.
Introducing the exposure draft, Sir David Tweedie, Chairman of the IASB, said: “This exposure draft is an important milestone in our response to the global financial crisis. It proposes clear and consistent guidance for the measurement of fair value and also addresses valuation issues arising in markets that have become inactive. The proposed guidance ensures consistency with US GAAP on issues related to fair value measurement and would achieve overall convergence with US GAAP”.
Commenting on the proposals, Jim Dixon, Associate, GAAP Consulting stated “Fair value can only be described as fair when all stakeholders to the financial reporting process are agreed on its meaning, measurement and methods of disclosure. Standard setters have a responsibility to develop concepts which are most useful to decision makers using financial statements to assist them in making resource allocation decisions. The IASB ED on Fair Value Measurement is a positive step in establishing fair value to its rightful pre-eminent position in GAAP”.
IASB Proposes to Clarify Prepayments to Pension Plans
The IASB published for public comment an ED of proposed amendments to IFRIC 14 ‘IAS 19 – The Limit on a Defined Benefit Asset, Minimum Funding Requirements and their Interaction’. The proposed amendments correct an unintended consequence of IFRIC 14, an interpretation of IAS 19 ‘Employee Benefits’. As a result of IFRIC 14, entities are in some circumstances not permitted to recognise as an asset some prepayments for minimum funding contributions. The proposals, if confirmed, would remedy this unintended consequence of IFRIC 14. The ED ‘Prepayments of a Minimum Funding Requirement’ is open for comment until 27 July 2009.
IASB May Meeting Highlights
Highlights of the 5 and 18-21 May meetings of the IASB included:
Replacement of IAS 39: Decided on a working premise to proceed with a two measurement category approach ‘fair value’ or ‘amortised cost’, and to use the classification approach for financial instruments in the forthcoming IFRS for SMEs. This approach distinguishes between: basic financial instruments that qualify for amortised cost measurement; and other financial instruments that are measured at fair value. Under the working premise the ED would: retain a fair value option so that entities could elect to measure at fair value financial instruments that qualify for amortised cost measurement; prohibit reclassifications between the fair value and amortised cost categories; allow presentation of fair value changes for particular financial instruments in other comprehensive income, but without any subsequent transfers to profit or loss; eliminate existing ‘tainting’ rules with entities required to present separately gains and losses on such disposals. Set a timetable for the publication of an ED on the classification and measurement of financial instruments by July 2009, and issue a standard in time for 2009 year-end financial statements. The ED will not deal with hedge accounting, as it will be addressed in a separate ED early in 2010 Conceptual Framework: Decided tentatively that the comment period for the forthcoming ED of the Reporting Entity chapter will be 120 days Joint Ventures: Continued its discussion of responses to ED 9 ‘Joint Arrangements’, and decided tentatively to: replace the term ‘shared decision-making’ by ‘joint control’ for all types of joint arrangement; merge ‘joint operations’ and ‘joint assets’ into a single type of joint arrangement called ‘joint operation’; and for a joint arrangement established in a separate entity, it is necessary to consider all relevant facts and circumstances to assess whether the arrangement is a joint operation or a joint venture. There should not be a rebuttable presumption that the arrangement is a joint venture. Expected that an IFRS will be released in the third quarter of 2009 Post-employment Benefits: Decided to align the disclosure requirements for post-employment benefits with those in IFRS 4 ‘Insurance Contracts’ and IFRS 7 ‘Financial Instruments: Disclosures’; require additional disclosures for participants in multi-employer plans; delete from IAS 19 the references to curtailments and settlements. Other changes proposed would remove the need to distinguish curtailments from negative past service cost and settlements from other remeasurements; require disclosure of the effect of plan amendments, with a narrative description of the amendments. An ED is expected in the fourth quarter of 2009
Consolidation: Discussed an overview of the responses to ED10 ‘Consolidated Financial Statements’, and will work towards an IFRS by the end of the year Rate-regulated activities: Continued its discussion of regulatory assets and liabilities, and will consider at a future meeting the remaining issues, including transition and first-time adoption. Directed the staff to draft an exposure draft for ballot Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity: Based on the discussion paper ‘Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity’ (February 2008), identified six draft principles to distinguish between equity and non-equity instruments and four supporting decision rules First-time Adoption of IFRSs: Continued deliberations issues arising from ED ‘Additional Exemptions for First-time Adopters: Proposed amendments to IFRS 1’ (September 2008) Insurance contracts: Continued its discussion of how an insurer should measure its insurance contracts Leases: Discussed how the right-of-use accounting model should be applied in the financial statements of lessors. Decided tentatively to develop an approach whereby the lessor retains the leased item in its statement of financial position and recognises an asset for its right to receive rental payments from the lessee, and a liability for its performance obligations under the lease Revenue Recognition: Discussed how an entity should account for: an option to renew goods and services promised in a contract; the effects of the customer’s credit risk; and uncertain consideration, and Annual Improvements: Discussed topics on interim financial reporting and business combinations, for possible inclusion in the exposure draft of annual improvements, for publication in August 2009.
IFRIC May Meeting Highlights
Highlights of the IFRIC 7 May meeting included:
IAS 12 ‘Income Taxes’ – Classification of Tonnage Taxes: A tax based on tonnage capacity is not income tax under IAS 12. IAS 12 applies to income taxes, which are defined as taxes that are based on taxable profit, and that the term ‘taxable profit’ implies a notion of a net rather than a gross amount. Taxes either on tonnage transported or tonnage capacity are based on gross rather than net amounts. Taxes on a notional income derived from tonnage capacity are not based on the entity’s actual income and expenses. The IFRIC also noted that under IAS 1 ‘Presentation of Financial Statements’ (para.85), an entity subject to tonnage tax would present additional subtotals in that statement if that presentation is relevant to an understanding of its financial performance. This item was not added to the agenda IAS 16 ‘Property, Plant and Equipment’ – Disclosure of Idle Assets and Construction in Progress: Noted that paragraph IAS 1 (para.112(c)) requires an entity to provide in the notes information that is not presented elsewhere in the financial statements that is relevant to their understanding. Disclosure regarding idle assets might be particularly relevant in the current economic environment. The IFRIC expected that entities would provide information in addition to that specifically required by IAS 16 (paras.74(b) and 79(a)) whenever idle assets or postponed construction projects become significant. This item was not added to the agenda Other agenda decisions: The IFRIC decided not to add the following items to its agenda: IAS 38 ‘Intangible Assets’ – Accounting for Sales Costs; IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’ – Participation Rights and Calculation of Effective Interest Rate; IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’ – Classification of Failed Loan Syndications; IAS 41 ‘Agriculture’ – Discount Rate Assumption used in Fair Value Calculations Tentative Agenda Decisions: The IFRIC reviewed the following matters and tentatively decided that they should not be added to its agenda: IFRS 3 ‘Business Combinations’ – Early Application of IFRS 3; IAS 7 ‘Statement of Cash Flows’ – Determination of Cash Equivalents; IAS 27 ‘Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements’ – Transaction Costs for Non-controlling Interests; IAS 28 ‘Investments in Associates’ – Potential effect of IFRS 3 ‘Business Combinations’ (as revised in 2008) and IAS 27 ‘Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements’ (as amended in 2008) on Equity Method Accounting; IAS 28 ‘Investments in Associates’ – Venture Capital Consolidations and Partial use of Fair Value through Profit or Loss; IAS 28 ‘Investments in Associates’ – Impairment of Investments in Associates; IAS 34 ‘Interim Financial Reporting’ – Interim Disclosures about Fair Value; IAS 38 ‘Intangible Assets’ – Compliance Costs for REACH; IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’ – Meaning of ‘significant or prolonged’; IFRIC 12 ‘Service Concession Arrangements’ – Scope of IFRIC 12; and IFRIC 18 ‘Transfers of Assets from Customers – Applicability to the customer’. These tentative decisions, including recommended reasons for not adding the items to the IFRIC agenda, will be reconsidered at the IFRIC meeting in July 2009. IAS 34 ‘Interim Financial Reporting’ – Interim disclosures about fair value: The IFRIC noted that in accordance with IAS 34, an interim financial report provides an update on the latest complete set of annual financial statements. When an event or transaction is significant to an understanding of the changes in an entity’s financial position or performance since the last annual financial period, in accordance with IAS 34 its interim financial report should provide an explanation of, and update to, the information included in the financial statements for the last annual financial period. The IFRIC concluded that IAS 34 provides sufficient guidance to enable entities to decide whether updates to fair value disclosures are required in interim financial reports and not to add the issue to its agenda.
IPSASB Reaffirms its IFRS Convergence Strategy with Emphasis on Financial Instruments
At its May 18–21 meeting in Washington DC, the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) of IFAC reaffirmed its commitment to its global convergence program and the development of standards dealing with financial instruments.
The IPSASB confirmed that it will continue its full consultation on EDs: ED 37 ‘Financial Instruments: Presentation’, ED 38 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement, and ED 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Disclosures, while recognising the intention of the IASB to modify aspects of its current standards relating to the measurement of financial instruments. The IPSASB will consider any changes ultimately adopted by the IASB in due course. Comments on EDs 37–39 are requested by 31 July.
“The IPSASB believes the public sector and its constituents are best served by having International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSASs) on financial instruments and removing reliance on the hierarchy at this time. The IPSASB strategy will provide stability for users and allow the IPSASB to manage the current period of uncertainty. The current global financial crisis underlines the importance of consistent financial reporting by governments of their exposures to financial instruments,” states Mike Hathorn, Chair of the IPSASB.
Accounting
12 June ITC 20 ‘Request for Comment on IASB Discussion Paper DP/2009/1 Leases – Preliminary Views’ – AASB 16 June ED 178 ‘Income Tax’ – AASB 30 June ED 36 ‘Agriculture’ – IPSASB 3 July ED 177 ‘Derecognition (Proposed Amendments to AASB 139 and AASB 7)’ – AASB 17 July ‘Leases: Preliminary Views’ – IASB 27 July ED ED/2009/4 ‘Prepayments of a Minimum Funding Requirement’ – IASB 31 July ED/2009/1 ‘Derecognition’ – IASB 31 July ED/2009/2 ‘Income Tax’ – IASB 31 July ED 37 ‘Financial Instruments: Presentation’ – IPSASB
31 July ED 38 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’– IPSASB 31 July ED 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Disclosures’– IPSASB 15 August ED 40 ‘Intangible Assets’ – IPSASB 15 August ED 41 ‘Entity Combinations from Exchange Transactions’ – IPSASB 28 September ED/2009/5 ‘Fair Value Measurement’ – IASB 30 September ED 179 ‘Superannuation Plans and Approved Deposit Funds’ – AASB
We’d like to know what you think about GAAP Alert. Please share your feedback by emailing info@gaap.com.au
Please forward this GAAP Alert to a colleague for their information and use. GAAP Alert registrations can be made directly at our website.
Please forward this GAAP Alert to a colleague for their information and use. GAAP Alert registrations can be made directly at http://www.gaap.com.au
Please click here if you wish to unsubscribe.
Consulting, Training, Information Services
© GAAP.COM.AU
While all reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of information contained in this newsletter, we take no responsibility for any action(s) taken on the basis of information contained herein or for any errors or omissions in that information. We expressly disclaim any liability whatsoever, to any person in relation to any reliance, in whole or in part, on such information. Readers should consult a suitably qualified professional adviser to obtain advice tailored to their particular circumstances.
|
