GAAP ALERT No.11/2009 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
Hot Spot: IASB Releases IFRS for SMEs – Effective Immediately
IASB ED on First Phase of Project to Replace IAS 39
Financial Instruments the US Influence
Valuations Council Launches Panel on Financial Instruments
AASB Releases ITC 21 ‘Credit Risk in Liability Measurement’
AASB Seeks Comment on Expected Loss Model
AASB Issues Editorial Amending Standards AASB 2009-6 and AASB 2009-7
Reporting Income from Non-exchange Transactions Proposals
CPAs Warns Members on Breaches of Auditing Standards
Corporations Amendment (Improving Accountability on Termination Payments) Bill 2009
Corporations Legislation Amendment (Financial Services Modernisation) Bill 2009
GAAP Consulting in Charter on APES 315 Compiled Information
Hot Spot: IASB Releases IFRS for SMEs – Effective Immediately
The IASB issued an IFRS designed for use by small and medium-sized entities (SMEs). The ‘IFRS for SMEs’ is a self-contained standard of about 230 pages, tailored for the needs and capabilities of smaller businesses. Many of the principles in full IFRSs for the recognition and measurement of assets, liabilities, income and expenses have been simplified. Topics not relevant to SMEs have been omitted. A number of required disclosures have been significantly reduced. Revisions to the IFRS will be limited to once every three years. Mr. Paul Pacter, Director of Standards for SMEs, said: “The IFRS for SMEs will provide businesses with a passport to raise capital on a national or an international basis”.
The ‘IFRS for SMEs’ responds to international demand from both developed and emerging economies for a rigorous and common set of accounting standards for smaller and medium-sized businesses that is much simpler than full IFRSs. The IASB has stated that ‘IFRS for SMEs’ provides improved comparability for users of accounts; enhances the overall confidence in the accounts of SMEs; and reduces the costs involved of maintaining standards on a national basis. The ‘IFRS for SMEs’ will also provide a platform for growing businesses that are preparing to enter public capital markets, where application of full IFRSs is required.
The ‘IFRS for SMEs’ is separate from full IFRSs, and is available for any jurisdiction to adopt whether or not it has adopted the full IFRSs. It is also for each jurisdiction to determine which entities should use the standard. It is effective immediately.
The ‘IFRS for SMEs’ does not address the following topics that are covered in full IFRSs: EPS; interim financial reporting; segment reporting; and special accounting for assets held for sale.
Options in full IFRSs not included in the ‘IFRS for SMEs’ include:
Financial instrument options, including available for sale, held to maturity and fair value options The revaluation model for property, plant and equipment, and for intangible assets Proportionate consolidation for investments in jointly controlled entities For investment property, measurement is driven by circumstances rather than allowing an accounting policy choice between the cost and fair value models, and Various options for government grants.
The main simplifications to the recognition and measurement principles in full IFRSs include:
Financial Instruments: Financial instruments meeting specified criteria are measured at cost or amortised cost. All others are measured at fair value through profit or loss
Derecognition: Establishes a simple principle for derecognition, the ‘pass through’ and ‘continuing involvement’ tests in full IFRSs are not required
Hedge Accounting: Requirements, including the detailed calculations, are simplified and tailored for SMEs
Goodwill and Other Indefinite life Intangible Assets: Now measured at amortised over their estimated useful lives (ten years if useful life cannot be estimated reliably)
Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures: Measured at cost unless there is a published price quotation (when fair value must be used)
Research and Development Costs: Recognised as an expense
Borrowing Costs: Recognised as an expense
Property, Plant and Equipment and Intangible assets: Residual value, useful life and depreciation method for items of property, plant and equipment, and amortisation period/method for intangible assets, need to be reviewed only if there is an indication they may have changed since the most recent annual reporting date
Defined Benefit Plans: All past service cost must be recognised immediately in profit or loss. All actuarial gains and losses must be recognised immediately either in profit of loss or other comprehensive income. An entity is required to use the projected unit credit method to measure its defined benefit obligation and the related expense only if it is possible to do so without undue cost or effort
Income Tax: Requirements follow the approach set out in ED ‘Income Tax’
Held for sale Classification: No separate held for sale classification; and holding an asset (or group of assets) for sale is an impairment indicator
Biological Assets: Fair value through profit or loss model is required for biological assets only when fair value is readily determinable without undue cost or effort. Otherwise, follow the cost depreciation impairment model, and
Equity settled Share based Payment: Where observable market prices are not available, directors’ best estimate of the fair value of the equity settled share based payment is used to measure the expense.
IFRS for SMEs incorporates the conclusions of the following Interpretations: IFRIC 2 ‘Members’ Shares in Co‐operative Entities and Similar Instruments’; IFRIC 4 ‘Determining whether an Arrangement contains a Lease’; IFRIC 8 ‘Scope of IFRS 2’; IFRIC 12 ‘Service Concession Arrangements’; IFRIC 13 ‘Customer Loyalty Programmes’; IFRIC 15 ‘Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate’; IFRIC 17 ‘Distributions of Non‐cash Assets to Owners’; and SIC‐12 ‘Consolidation – Special Purpose Entities’.
Introducing the ‘IFRS for SMEs’, Sir David Tweedie, IASB Chairman, said: “The publication of IFRS for SMEs is a major breakthrough for companies throughout the world. For the first time, SMEs will have a common high quality and internationally respected set of accounting requirements. We believe the benefits will be felt in both developed and emerging economies”.
The International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) and its Small and Medium Practices Committee have also welcomed the release of the IFRS for SMEs. IFAC encourages its 157 member organisations to carefully consider how to use the standard in their respective jurisdictions.
“This global accounting standard represents a very significant step on the path to global convergence of financial reporting practices by SMEs. It will contribute to enhancing the quality and comparability of SME financial statements around the world and assist SMEs in gaining access to finance,” remarks IFAC Chief Executive Ian Ball, adding, “The beneficiaries will be not only SMEs, but also their customers, clients, and all other users of SME financial statements.” IFAC is currently considering the role it can play together with its member bodies to facilitate implementation of the new standard.
“This is a deeply disappointing standard. Two accounting languages are created Full IFRS and IFRS for SMEs with all the costs and inconsistencies this entails. Different recognition and measurement rules are dressed up as simplifications”, stated Colin Parker, Principal, GAAP Consulting. Given the size test for corporate reporting and reporting entity regime, the AASB and other stakeholders will have to think long and hard about the benefits of this Standard in the Australian context”, he added. “If there is to be separate rules for SMEs, then they should apply the definition, recognition and measurement requirements of all accounting standards, with limited disclosures”, Colin stated. “We have no obligation to adopt IFRS for SMEs in Australia. Applying IFRS for SMEs to not-for-profit private sector entities and public sector entities is also problematic, IFRS for SMEs was not drafted in this context”, he concluded.
The next fortnightly issue of GAAP Alert will bring you up-to-date on IFRS for SMEs in the Australian context.
IASB ED on First Phase of Project to Replace IAS 39
The IASB published for public comment an exposure draft to improve financial instrument accounting. The proposals form part of the IASB’s comprehensive review of financial instrument accounting. The proposals, which the IASB believes will significantly reduce complexity and make it easier for investors to understand financial statements, address how financial instruments are classified and measured. The proposals address concerns raised by interested parties during the financial crisis (e.g., eliminating the different impairment approaches for available-for-sale assets and assets measured using amortised cost).
The proposals also respond directly to the recommendations and timetable set out by the G20 leaders and other international bodies. The IASB has split the comprehensive project into three phases (the other phases address the impairment methodology and hedge accounting). The IASB plans to complete the replacement of IAS 39 during 2010, although mandatory application will not be before January 2012.
The proposed changes in the ED include:
The removal of the four existing classifications in IAS 39, which eliminates the associated tainting rules of the held-to-maturity classification The introduction of criteria for two classifications [fair value and amortised cost], which consider the features of the instrument and the entity’s business model. This may result in Australian entities needing to fair value instruments that were previously measured at amortised cost A classification, in which fair-value changes and dividend income for equity instruments that are not traded by the entity, will be recognised in other comprehensive income instead of in profit or loss The removal of the cost exemption for equity instruments where there is no quoted market price in an active market and the fair value cannot be reliably measured, and The removal of the splitting rules for embedded derivatives.
These changes will reduce complexity in accounting for financial instruments. The IASB acknowledges that entities may need to employ valuation techniques to determine the fair value at each reporting date where there is not a market price available, which may make the preparation of financial statements more costly for some entities. However, the reduction of complexity and the accounting outcomes of the proposed changes are expected to provide easier-to-understand information for investors.
Introducing the ED, Sir David Tweedie, Chairman of the IASB, said: “The financial crisis has demonstrated that investors need to be given a better understanding of information presented in the financial statements about financial instruments held or issued by a company. Making it easier for investors to understand financial statements is an essential ingredient to the recovery of investor confidence. The proposals today are an important first step in this process. They also respond directly to concerns raised about the accounting for financial instruments”.
In finalising these proposals we will continue to work jointly with the US standard-setter, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, to achieve a common and improved accounting standard on financial instruments”, he concluded.
Comments on ED/2009/7 ‘Financial Instruments: Classification and Measurement’ are sought by 14 September 2009. The IASB plans to finalise the classification and measurement proposals in time for non-mandatory application in 2009 year-end financial statements.
The AASB plans to issue an Australian equivalent exposure draft shortly. The ED will be discussed at the July AASB meeting. It is expected that, if approved, the standard would be effective from 1 January 2012, with early adoption available at 31 December 2009.
AASB Releases ITC 21 ‘Credit Risk in Liability Measurement’
The AASB invites comment on ITC 21 Request for Comment on IASB Discussion Paper DP/2009/2 ‘Credit Risk in Liability Measurement’. Comments are due to the AASB by 7 August 2009 and to the IASB by 1 September 2009 (see GAAP Alert No. 102009).
AASB Seeks Comment on Expected Loss Model
The IASB has published a Request for Information ‘Impairment of Financial Assets: Expected Cash Flow Approach (Expected Loss Model)’ for comment by 1 September 2009. Impairment of financial assets will be considered by the IASB in the second phase of its comprehensive review of IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’. The AASB requests constituents to respond to both the AASB and the IASB. The AASB is seeking comments by 17 August 2009.
Main features of the expected cash flow approach include:
Interest revenue is recognised on the basis of expected cash flows (including expected credit losses) upon the initial recognition of an instrument Impairment results from an adverse change in credit loss expectations (i.e., expectations of credit losses are higher than those previously expected) An impairment loss is recognised in profit or loss and is measured as the difference between the carrying amount of the financial asset and the present value of the revised expected cash flows of that asset When determining the present value of expected cash flows, fixed rate instruments are discounted using the effective interest rate calculated upon the initial recognition of the instrument and variable rate instruments are discounted using the current effective interest rate
Subsequent or additional impairment loss is recognised through continuous re-estimation of credit loss expectations, and Reversal of impairment loss is recognised in profit or loss when there is a favourable change in credit loss expectations.
The Request for Information does not seek views on the relative advantages and disadvantages of alternative impairment approaches. Rather, it seeks information on the feasibility of an expected cash flow approach. The IASB will consider that input when developing its proposals for the impairment of financial assets, for which it plans to publish an exposure draft in October 2009.
Financial Instruments the US Influence
US President Obama presented a plan for regulatory reforms (‘Financial Regulatory Reform – A New Foundation’) that would consolidate banking regulators, create new government agencies and give new powers to the Federal Reserve. One proposal of particular interest to the accounting profession includes three recommendations addressed to accounting standard setters:
Clarify and make consistent the application of fair value accounting standards, including the impairment of financial instruments, by the end of 2009 Improve accounting standards for loan loss provisioning by the end of 2009 that would make the loan loss provisioning more forward looking, as long as the transparency of financial statements is not compromised, and Make substantial progress by the end of 2009 toward development of a single set of high quality global accounting standards.
Valuations Council Launches Panel on Financial Instruments
The International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC) launched an expert group to advise the IVSC Board on the valuation of financial assets and liabilities, and assist in developing relevant standards and guidance. The group, made up of 14 leading experts drawn from around the world, has been established to examine the types of guidance needed to avoid some of the difficulties that have been highlighted by the financial crisis. A member of the staff of the IASB will act as an observer.
Chris Thorne, chairman of the IVSC Standards Board said, “The need for international standards in valuing illiquid and/or complex financial instruments has never been greater, as was highlighted by the recent G20 Summit. The combination of inactive markets, with new FASB and IASB financial reporting requirements, has created unprecedented levels of inconsistency and confusion throughout the financial industry. The IVSC seeks to pioneer the movement towards improved standards, which can only increase transparency, preserve the integrity of financial statements and contribute to reducing the financial sector’s vulnerability.” The first meeting of the group is scheduled for London in late June, and is to report to the Board by 30 September. For further information on the IVSC see the website: www.ivsc.org.
Michel Prada, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the IVSC called for strong cohesion between the world’s accounting and valuation frameworks and professional communities. Sir David Tweedie, IASB Chairman welcomed the input of the IVSC in contributing to the standards set by the IASB, saying, “We are delighted to look to the IVSC for guidance on valuation issues. In the past, we have looked at valuation on an ad hoc basis, but we feel there is room for development in this area and closer collaboration with the IVSC is the ultimate outcome.”
In encouraging the launch of the IVSC’s Financial Instruments Expert Group, Sir David said, “The valuation of financial instruments is not something that the IASB was designed to specialise in and as such, we welcome the opportunity to work closely with our IVSC counterparts and look forward to the advice they will offer us to ensure the accuracy of our guidance in this area is maintained.”
Michel Prada, Chair of the IVSC Board of Trustees, said: “As recently highlighted by the G20 summit, it is clear that market participants and supervisors need to refer to a complete set of internationally recognised standards for valuations of all assets and liabilities that result in valuations produced with objectivity and integrity to ensure the rigorous conduct of ethical principles in business. This is the challenge that the IVSC is determined to meet in a complementary role with other standard setters, such as the IASB and the International Federation of Accountants.”
AASB Issues Editorial Amending Standards AASB 2009-6 and AASB 2009-7
The AASB issued AASB 2009-6 and AASB 2009-7, both titled Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards. The standards make editorial amendments to most Australian Accounting Standards and Interpretations, including amendments to reflect changes made to the text of IFRSs by the IASB. AASB 2009-06 is applicable to annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2009 that end on or after 30 June 2009. AASB 2009-7 is applicable to annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 July 2009.
Reporting Income from Non-exchange Transactions Proposals
The AASB and the NZ Financial Reporting Standards Board (FRSB) released a joint Exposure Draft on reporting income from non-exchange transactions, with the intention of subsequently issuing common standards. The ED 180 ‘Income from Non-exchange Transactions (Taxes and Transfers)’ proposes requirements for not-for-profit entities (NFPEs) in Australia and public benefit entities (PBEs) that have adopted New Zealand equivalents to IFRSs in New Zealand.
According to Bruce Porter, Acting Chairman of the AASB, and Joanna Perry, Chairman of the FRSB, accounting for government grants, donations and similar non-exchange transactions is of particular importance to many NFPEs/PBEs, which form a significant sector of both the Australian and New Zealand economies. Many such entities rely on grants and donations for a major part of their income, so this ED will be an important step in the process of producing more comparable financial reporting. The ED also addresses the reporting by governments of tax income.
The ED proposes that entities analyse a non-exchange transaction to determine the assets and liabilities to be recognised. Income would then be recognised as the difference between the amounts of those assets and liabilities.
The ED supports the view that grant monies received under a binding agreement, but in advance of the period for which the grant is intended to be used, should be recognised by the transferee upon receipt as income, unless the transferee has to satisfy performance obligations during that designated period. That is, the specification of a time basis for grants is not sufficient for the deferral of income and the recognition of a liability instead. The definition of “conditions on transferred assets” in the ED specifies the nature of performance obligations that would require the transferee to recognise a liability upon receipt of a grant.
The Boards have developed the ED jointly in the interests of harmonising trans-Tasman accounting requirements. In Australia, the resulting standard would supersede AASB 1004 Contributions. New Zealand does not currently have a standard addressing non-exchange transactions for PBEs. The ED is based on International Public Sector Accounting Standard IPSAS 23 ‘Revenue from Non-Exchange Transactions (Taxes and Transfers)’, issued by the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board. Comments are requested by the Boards by 30 November 2009.
“As the IPSASB becomes increasingly recognised as a quality standard-setter, it is expected that we will more frequently draw-down on its outputs, stated Jim Dixon, Public Sector expert, GAAP Consulting. “In the medium term, it will be interesting to see how the work of the IPSASB on its conceptual framework, and the work of the IASB on revenue recognition and its conceptual framework, influence revenue recognition globally; IPSAS 23 may need be revised”, Jim concluded.
CPAs Warns Members on Breaches of Auditing Standards
CPA Australia has reminded members where they undertake any type of audit work, they must be aware of the applicable auditing standards to their audit engagement and understand the application of those standards. The relevant auditing standards apply to all audits, regardless of the type of engagement or size of the organisation. CPA Australia has drawn members’ attention to reported breaches of two standards in particular: ASA 315 ‘Understanding the Entity and its Environment and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement’, and ASA 580 ‘Management Representations’.
ASA 315‘Understanding the Entity and its Environment and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement’ requires the auditor to understand the entity and its environment, including its internal control, enough to identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial report whether they are due to fraud or error. The auditor must also have sufficient understanding to design and perform further audit procedures. Breaches of ASA 315 included:
No documented risk assessment and internal control evaluation Audit plans and programs did not include obtaining an understanding of internal controls relevant to the audit No risk assessment were undertaken to obtain an understanding of the entity and its environment, and No documented identification and assessment of the risk of material misstatement at the financial report level.
ASA 580 ‘Management Representations’ requires the auditor to endeavour to obtain appropriate representations from management. Some members have breached ASA 580 because there was insufficient audit evidence that management acknowledged its responsibility for the fair presentation of the financial report in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework, even though they had approved the financial report. Examples of breaches of ASA 580 included:
The management (trustee) representation letter was not signed and therefore the trustees did not formally accept responsibility for the fair presentation of the financial report and compliance with legislation The members’ files did not contain written representations from management on matters material to the financial report Members’ had a letter on file which acknowledged management's responsibility for the fair presentation of the financial report, but there was no mention on those matters material to the financial report, and No management representations were obtained.
CPA Australia in its CPA Update Victoria has also advised members need to be aware of their obligations under APES 320 ‘Quality Control for Firms’, and ASA 240 ‘The Auditor’s Responsibility to Consider Fraud in an Audit of a Financial Report’.
“Firms must establish policies and procedures requiring documentation to provide evidence of the operation of each element of its system of quality control. It is not appropriate to download the sample quality control manual available on the website and rename it as your own. This may constitute a breach of APES 320”, CPA Australia noted. All six elements of the standard apply to all firms, whether the firm is a sole practitioner with no staff or a multi-partner practice.
Breaches of APES 320 included, but are not limited to:
No documented quality control policies and procedures Quality control policies and procedures do not address all six elements of the standard leadership responsibilities for quality within the firm (ethical requirements; acceptance and continuance of client relationships and specific engagements; human resources; engagement performance; monitoring), and Documented quality control policies and procedures that are not evidenced in the reviewed client files.
Breaches of ASA 240 “The Auditor’s Responsibility to Consider Fraud in an Audit of a Financial Report” included:
No documented evidence on the reviewed client's file that shows the member had performed any procedures to be able to assess and consider fraud in relation to the audit engagement The documented procedures reviewed on the client’s file did not include testing procedures around management's ability to override controls No evidence that the auditor identified and assessed the risks of material misstatement due to fraud No evidence that the auditor made enquiries of those charged with governance to determine whether they have knowledge of any actual, suspected or alleged fraud affecting the entity, and
Members need to ensure that if they undertake any type of audit work that they are aware of the applicable auditing standards to their audit engagement and understand the application of those standards.
“Members need to ensure that if they undertake any type of audit work that they are aware of the applicable auditing standards to their audit engagement and understand the application of those standards”, CPA Australia concluded.
Corporations Amendment (Improving Accountability on Termination Payments) Bill 2009
The Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate Law, Chris Bowen MP, introduced into the Parliament the ‘Corporations Amendment (Improving Accountability on Termination Payments) Bill 2009’. The Bill improves and strengthens the existing regulatory framework relating to the payment of termination benefits to company directors and executives. “Under laws left by the previous government, termination payments could reach up to seven times a director's total annual remuneration package before shareholder approval was required,” Mr. Bowen said.
“The new regulatory framework will ensure that termination benefits for company directors and executives exceeding one year’s average base salary are subject to shareholder approval”. “This legislation will better empower shareholders and improve the accountability of company management in setting remuneration”, Mr. Bowen concluded.
Other key features of the legislative package include:
The scope of the requirements relating to termination benefits is expanded to include senior executives or key management personnel of a disclosing entity The definition of what constitutes a “benefit” is broadened, including a requirement for a broad interpretation of the term “benefit” and a requirement that the substance should prevail over its legal form New regulation-making powers to specify what types of payments are, or are not, a termination benefit, and to define “base salary” The immediate repayment of unauthorised termination benefits with an increase in the penalty provisions, and The retention of the existing requirement for the giving of the benefit to be approved by a resolution passed at a general meeting.
The Federal Government has also directed the Productivity Commission to undertake an inquiry into the broader issue of executive remuneration. A report is due by 19 December 2009.
Corporations Legislation Amendment (Financial Services Modernisation) Bill 2009
The Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate Law, Chris Bowen MP, also introduced the Corporations Legislation Amendment (Financial Services Modernisation) Bill 2009 (Modernisation Bill) into Parliament. The Bill addresses three key areas of financial services regulation: margin lending; trustee companies; and debentures and promissory notes.
“For the first time, there will be a single, national market for trustee services, with transparent licensing requirements overseen by an appropriately resourced regulator”, Mr Bowen said. “Trustee companies will need to have adequate resources and meet the other conditions of their licence.” Traditional trustee company services will be regarded as financial services under Chapter 7 of the Corporations Act, and trustee companies will be required to hold an Australian financial services licence covering the provision of the relevant services.
The Bill amends the regulation of debentures and promissory notes and creates a register of debenture trustees. The changes harmonise the legal regime to require all retail debentures and promissory notes to be subject to the consumer disclosure and protection measures currently applying to debentures. This includes the requirement to have a trust deed and trustee arrangements, and to issue a full prospectus. These changes will improve protection for retail investors who invest in debentures and promissory notes, by creating a safer and consistent regime for their regulation, backed by a national register of debenture trustees. The register of debenture trustees will also add to transparency. ASIC will be required to create and maintain the register, which will be available for viewing by the public.
GAAP Consulting in Charter on APES 315 Compiled Information
Colin Parker and David Sauer, GAAP Consulting, have an article ‘Compilation Reports – New APES 315 Imposes more detailed requirements on financial statement compilation’ published in Charter (July 2009, pp 66-67). The article also includes an implementation plan for compilation of financial information. Colin, David and Justin Reid have presented several training sessions on these new and onerous rules for public practitioners and members in business.
Accounting
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 7 August ITC 21 Request for Comment on IASB Discussion Paper DP/2009/2 ‘Credit Risk in Liability Measurement’ – AASB 15 August ED 40 ‘Intangible Assets’ – IPSASB 15 August ED 41 ‘Entity Combinations from Exchange Transactions’ – IPSASB 17 August Request for information ‘Impairment of Financial Assets: Expected Cash Flow Approach (Expected Loss Model)’ – AASB 28 August ED 181 ‘Fair Value Measurement’ – AASB 1 September DP 2009/2 ‘Credit Risk in Liability Measurement’ 1 September ‘Request for Information (‘Expected Loss Model’) Impairment of Financial Assets: Expected Cash Flow Approach’ – IASB 14 September ED/2009/7 Financial Instruments: Classification and Measurement’ – IASB 28 September ED/2009/5 ‘Fair Value Measurement’ – IASB 30 September ED 179 ‘Superannuation Plans and Approved Deposit Funds’ – AASB 30 September ED 42 ‘Improvements to IPSASs’ – IPSAB 30 November ED 180 ‘Income from Non-exchange Transactions (Taxes and Transfers)’ – AASB 1 March 2010 ED ‘Management Commentary’ – IASB
Auditing
20 July ED 18/09 ‘Proposed Auditing Standard ASA 101 Preamble to Australian Auditing Standards’ – AUASB 20 July ED 19/09 ‘Proposed Auditing Standard ASA 520 Analytical Procedures’ – AUASB 20 July ED 20/09 ‘Proposed Auditing Standard ASRE 2410 Review of a Financial Report Performed by the Independent Auditor of the Entity’ – AUASB
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 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.
|
