GAAP ALERT No.18/2008 Click here to read online

15 October 2008

By Colin Parker B.Bus FCA MAICD
Principal, GAAP Consulting, colin@gaap.com.au
Member of the Australian Accounting Standards Board

AASB October Meeting Highlights
AUASB September Meeting Highlights
ASIC Commences Action against KPMG over Westpoint Collapse
ASIC Releases Updated Regulatory Guide 43
Highlights from Additional October IASB Meeting
IASB Staff Position on SEC-FASB Clarification on Fair Value Accounting
IASB Response to Credit Crisis
IASB Amendments Permit Reclassification of Financial Instruments
IASB Provides Update on Applying Fair Value in Inactive Markets
IASB Proposes Improvements to Financial Instruments Disclosures
IASB October Meeting Agenda
SEC Commences Work on Congressionally Mandated Study on Accounting Standards
IPSASB October Meeting Agenda
IPSASB Releases Public Sector Conceptual Framework
New IAASB Audit Practice Alert Focuses on Fair Value Accounting Estimates
Outstanding Exposure Drafts

AASB October Meeting Highlights

The highlights of 13 October meeting included:
Global Credit Crisis: Noted that the IASCF Trustees agreed that the IASB’s normal due process be suspended so that it can deal urgently with proposals to amend IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’ in respect of the requirements relating to the reclassification of financial instruments from measurement at ‘fair value through the profit and loss’ to the ‘held-to-maturity’ category to achieve consistency with the US requirements. Agreed to monitor these developments with a view to ensuring that when the IASB amends IAS 39, Australian constituents will be able to maintain compliance with IFRSs
Discontinued Operations: Approved ED 167 ‘Discontinued Operations: Proposed Amendments to AASB 5’ following the issue of an ED by the IASB proposing amendments to IFRS 5. Comments to the AASB are requested by 5 December 2008
First-time Adoption of IFRSs: Approved ED 168 ‘Additional Exemptions for First-time Adopters: Proposed Amendments to AASB 1’ following the issue of an ED by the IASB proposing amendments to IFRS 1. Comments to the AASB are requested by 5 December 2008
Interpretations – Superannuation Contributions Tax: Decided to proceed to issue an Interpretation, and at its November meeting will consider a Draft Interpretation proposing that the superannuation contributions tax be included in the measurement of the defined benefit obligation
Superannuation Plans and Approved Deposit Funds: Considered a revised version of the draft ED for a replacement Standard for AAS 25 ‘Financial Reporting by Superannuation Plans’, and will continue its deliberations on a revised version of the draft ED at its November meeting
Conceptual Framework – Reporting Entity: Finalised its submission on the IASB-FASB Discussion Paper ‘Preliminary Views on an Improved Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting’
Conceptual Framework – Objective and Qualitative Characteristics: Finalised its submission on the IASB-FASB Conceptual Framework ED ‘The Objective of Financial Reporting and Qualitative Characteristics and Constraints of Decision-useful Financial Reporting Information’
Legal Process for Adopting IFRSs as Australian Requirements: Briefed on discussions with the Office of Legislative Drafting & Publishing of the Attorney-General’s Department regarding the legal process for adopting IFRSs in Australia, and decided that staff should continue discussions with the OLDP to proceed with establishing a more efficient approach
12-13 November Meeting Agenda: Anticipated agenda items include: Borrowing Costs (IPSASB ED); Business Combinations (Not-for-Profit Entities); Conceptual Framework (IPSASB DP); Differential Reporting; Interpretations (Superannuation Contributions Tax); Modifying IFRS for Not-for-Profit Entities; Non-exchange Income; Related Party Disclosures (Public Sector); and Superannuation Plans and Approved Deposit Funds, and
Board Membership: This was last meeting of the Chairman, David Boymal, who retires from the AASB on 4 November 2008. The new Chairman is yet to be announced.

AUASB September Meeting Highlights

Highlights of the 9 September AUASB meeting included:
Approval of Amendments to Assurance Standard on Compliance Engagements: Approved various amendments to ASAE 3100 comprising: clarification that the assurance practitioner cannot claim compliance with ASAE 3100 when the practitioner is unable to comply with fundamental ethical principles, including those relating to independence; inclusion of a definition of the term “compliance framework” as used in the context of ASAE 3100; and clarification that ASAE 3100 does not apply to audits or reviews of historical financial reports. The Standard will be operative for reporting periods commencing on or after 1 October 2008, and early adoption is permitted
ASA Redrafting (Clarity Format): Noted that the project is on track for completion of the redrafting of the Australian Auditing Standards (ASAs) by October 2009, and that the AUASB’s present intention is that the revised ASAs will be operative for reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010. Approved the following exposure drafts Clarity format: ASA 230 ‘Audit Documentation’; ASA 300 ‘Planning an Audit of a Financial Report’; ASA 540 ‘Audit of Accounting Estimates’; ASA 560 ‘Subsequent Events’; ASA 570 ‘Going Concern’; and ASA 600 ‘Group Audits’
Proposed Guidance Statement – Self-Managed Superannuation Funds: Approved Guidance Statement GS 009 ‘Financial and Compliance Audits of Self-Managed Superannuation Funds’, and
Authorised Deposit Taking Institutions: Approved a project plan to revise and reissue AGS 1008 ‘Audit Implications of Prudential Reporting Requirements for Authorised Deposit Taking Institutions’ that will follow the release by APRA of its revised Prudential Standard APS 310 ‘Audit and Related Arrangements for Prudential Reporting’.

ASIC Commences Action against KPMG over Westpoint Collapse

ASIC commenced action in the Supreme Court of Victoria against KPMG over its auditing of companies in the Westpoint Group which collapsed in early 2006 with losses in excess of $300 million. The claims are for negligent conduct by KPMG of audits of the financial accounts of various Westpoint companies for the years ended 30 June 2002, 2003 and 2004 and are in the order of $200 million. The action, if successful, could potentially benefit up to 80 per cent of investors in the Westpoint Group.

The civil proceedings have been launched under section 50 of the ASIC Act, which enables ASIC to commence proceedings for damages in the public interest. ASIC Chairman, Mr. Tony D’Aloisio said, ‘ASIC sees a clear public interest in using its powers in these circumstances to pursue compensation for the benefit of Westpoint investors’.

‘The proceedings brought by ASIC allege that KPMG negligently carried out audits of the plaintiff companies by failing to identify issues related to the continuing solvency of the companies and failing to qualify audits of the companies. The claim also alleges that KPMG should have notified ASIC that it had grounds to suspect that breaches of the Corporations Act were taking place within the plaintiff companies, including breaches of directors’ duties and rules against insolvent trading’, Mr. D’Aloisio said.

ASIC contends that a true understanding of the solvency of companies in the Westpoint Group could only be understood by an analysis of the Westpoint Group as a whole. This is because the Westpoint Group used a group ‘treasury model’ which utilised inter-company loans between mezzanine companies and development companies which were guaranteed by Westpoint Corporation Pty Ltd. The claim against KPMG has been formulated on the basis that KPMG owed each mezzanine company a duty of care in its capacity as auditor of Westpoint Corporation Pty Ltd, as well as in its capacity as auditor of each mezzanine company.

ASIC Releases Updated Regulatory Guide 43

ASIC has issued a revised version of its Regulatory Guide 43 ‘Financial Reporting and Audit Relief’. The document replaces Regulatory Guide 43 (formerly Policy Statement 43) ‘Accounts and Audit Relief’. The Guide sets out ASIC’s policy on the granting of relief from the financial reporting and audit provisions of Chapter 2M of the Corporations Act. While the underlying policy contained in the new guide is unchanged, it now provides more detail and has been updated for changes in legislation and case law.

Highlights from Additional October IASB Meeting

The IASB met for an additional meeting on 2 October. Highlights included:
Amendments to IFRS 7 ‘Financial Instruments Disclosures’: Agreed that proposed amendments to IFRS 7 relating to fair value measurement disclosures and liquidity risk disclosures amendments should be published as soon as possible, and separately from the consolidation proposals. Agreed a 60-day comment period for the exposure draft (ED) with a proposed effective date for annual periods beginning on or after 1 July 2009, with earlier application permitted
Consolidation: Continued discussion of ED for consolidation with the intention to publish the exposure draft in November 2008
Disclosures of Off Balance Sheet Entities: Tentatively decided that a reporting entity should disclose information that enables users of its financial statements to evaluate the nature of, and changes in, the market risk, credit risk and liquidity risk to which it is exposed as a consequence of its activities with structured entities. This exposure may arise as a result of both contractual and non-contractual commitments and from past and present activities. To meet this objective, a reporting entity would be required to disclose information about its involvement with structured entities, including details of the nature, purpose, size and type of activities in structured entities that it created or sponsored, or in which it has continuing involvement
Those disclosures would include:

for off balance sheet activities created or sponsored by the reporting entity, the scale of those activities (to include information on assets securitised and fee income earned by the reporting entity)
for off balance sheet activities in which the reporting entity has continuing involvement, the scale of those activities, its maximum exposure to loss and the carrying amount of its continuing involvement. If relevant to an assessment of exposure to risks, the reporting entity would disclose additional information about its exposure to loss (to include triggers and ranking of support), and the assets held by, and funding of, the structured entities, and
for off balance sheet activities for which the reporting entity has provided non-contractual support, information about the extent of, and reasons for, that support and whether it led to controlling the structured entity.

IASB Staff Position on SEC-FASB Clarification on Fair Value Accounting

The IASB noted the recent clarification made by the Office of Chief Accountant of SEC and the staff of the FASB. The clarification is not an amendment of FAS 157 ‘Fair Value Measurements’, but rather provides additional guidance for determining fair value in inactive markets. The IASB staff has reviewed the clarification by the SEC staff and the FASB staff, and considers it consistent with IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’.

Commenting on the SEC-FASB clarification, Sir David Tweedie, Chairman of IASB said: “The IASB is committed to doing its part in responding the credit crisis and recognises the need to provide additional and needed guidance on determining the fair value of financial instruments in illiquid markets. The SEC-FASB staff clarification on fair value accounting is a useful contribution, and our staff believes that it is consistent with IFRSs”. He concluded “We will continue to ensure that any IFRS guidance on fair value measurement is consistent with the clarification that has been provided by the US SEC staff and the FASB staff”.

IASB Response to Credit Crisis

The IASB is closely monitoring developments in USA and other jurisdictions to avoid unnecessary inconsistencies in accounting treatments under IFRSs and US GAAP. The IASB is committed to the following:
Consistency of Fair Value Measurement Guidance between IFRSs and US GAAP: On 16 September, the IASB staff issued draft guidance on fair value measurement of financial instruments in markets that are no longer active. The IASB noted the recent clarification made by the Office of the Chief Accountant of the US SEC and the staff of the FASB, and will continue to ensure that any IFRS guidance is consistent with the clarification that has been provided by the US SEC staff and the FASB staff for those companies using US GAAP. This will help ensure comparability across borders
Consideration of the Impact of US Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and Other Similar Programmes Internationally on Valuation of Assets and Liabilities: To work closely with the FASB to develop a common approach to issues related to the valuation of financial assets and liabilities resulting from purchases made through the US Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and any other similar international programmes
Immediate Consideration of Ability to Reclassify Financial Instruments: Noted that US GAAP permits entities, in rare circumstances, to reclassify financial instruments that are in the form of securities from their trading portfolio (measured at fair value with changes through the income statement) to ‘held to maturity’ (measured at amortised cost and subject to testing for impairment). The IASB also noted that US GAAP permits some loans that are not securities to be transferred from Held for Sale (measured at lower of cost or market with changes through the income statement) to Held for Investment (measured at amortised cost and subject to testing for impairment). The IASB will assess immediately any inconsistencies in how IAS 39 and US GAAP practice address the issue of reclassifications and whether to eliminate any differences. The IASB will discuss these matters and decide its position as part of its public meeting during the week of 13-17 October, and
Willingness to Participate in Studying Impact of Accounting in Credit Crisis: Recognised the need to continue to examine IFRS accounting principles for financial instruments. It published a discussion paper ‘Reducing Complexity in Reporting Financial Instruments’ which is the starting point for considering a possible replacement for IAS 39. The IASB will draw lessons from the credit crisis as it moves forward with its project to reconsider IAS 39. Consistent with discussions in the United States, the IASB will be willing to assist in any study that examines the quality of existing fair value information provided to investors and any impact of financial reporting on the credit crisis.

IASB Amendments Permit Reclassification of Financial Instruments

The IASB issued amendments to IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’ and IFRS 7 ‘Financial Instruments: Disclosures’ that would permit the reclassification of some financial instruments. The amendments to IAS 39 introduce the possibility of reclassifications for companies applying IFRSs, which were already permitted under US GAAP in rare circumstances. The deterioration of the world’s financial markets that has occurred during the third quarter of this year is a possible example of rare circumstances cited in these IFRS amendments. This action enables entities reporting according to IFRSs to use the reclassification amendment from 1 July 2008.

Sir David Tweddie said “In addressing the rare circumstances of the current credit crisis, the IASB is committed to taking urgent action to ensure that transparency and confidence are restored to financial markets. The IASB has acted quickly to address the concerns raised by EU leaders and others regarding the issue of reclassification. Our response is consistent with the request made by European leaders and finance ministers; it is important that these amendments are permitted for use rapidly and without modification”.

A warning has been sounded by GAAP Consulting Network member David Sauer for those wishing to reclassify their financial instruments. He notes “It is vital that preparers read the standard, as the option comes with conditions. Summarised or wishful reporting of the change in standards can mislead on what is permitted, e.g.,

Those charged with governance do not have an option to backdate reclassification decisions before 1 July 2008, or for periods which commence on 1 November 2008 or later
Reclassification decisions must be supported by evidence, for example that the entity has both the intention and ability to hold a financial asset for the foreseeable future or to maturity, and
The fair value of the financial asset at the reclassification date must be established by evidence, as it becomes the cost or amortised cost for financial assets reclassified from 'fair value through profit and loss' or 'available for sale' into 'loans and receivables' or 'held to maturity' categories. With markets recording substantial variations, identifying the date of reclassification and the evidence that existed at that date is a critical issue for preparers and auditors.”

IASB Provides Update on Applying Fair Value in Inactive Markets

The IASB provided an update on its work to consider the application of fair value when markets become inactive. IASB Expert Advisory Panel met in October and emphasised that the objective of a fair value measurement is the price at which an orderly transaction would take place between market participants on the measurement date, not the price that would be achieved in a forced liquidation or distress sale. It reaffirmed that such transactions should not be considered in a fair value measurement, whilst also noting that even in times of market dislocation not all market activity arises from forced liquidations or distress sales. The Panel also agreed to emphasise existing guidance within IFRSs that using the entity’s own assumptions about future cash flows and appropriately risk-adjusted discount rates is acceptable when relevant observable inputs are not available.

The Panel also reviewed the feedback received from interested parties on the draft document and started the process for completing its guidance. The final document of the Panel will include the guidance in the FASB Staff Position issued on 10 October on determining the fair value of a financial asset when the market for that asset is not active.

The IASB reaffirmed its belief that fair value measurement guidance under IFRSs and US GAAP is already consistent. The IASB and the FASB will continue to co-operate to ensure that applying fair value in inactive markets is dealt with consistently.

Sir David Tweedie, Chairman of the IASB, said: “First, that guidance within IFRSs is already clear that distress sales should not be included in fair value measurement. Secondly, that recent guidance from the FASB is consistent with the findings of our own expert panel on illiquid markets”.

IASB Proposes Improvements to Financial Instruments Disclosures

The IASB released proposals to improve the information available to investors and others about fair value measurements of financial instruments and liquidity risk. The proposals form part of the IASB’s response to the credit crisis and follow recommendations of the Financial Stability Forum, which had the support of the Group of Seven (G-7) Finance Ministers. The proposals also reflect discussions by the IASB’s Expert Advisory Panel on measuring and disclosing fair values of financial instruments when markets are no longer active. The exposure draft ‘Improving Disclosures about Financial Instruments (proposed amendments to IFRS 7)’ is open for public comment until 15 December 2008.

Introducing the proposals, Sir David Tweedie, said: “The credit crisis has heightened concerns about liquidity risk and pointed to the need for entities to explain more clearly to the outside world how they determine the fair value of financial instruments, especially those that are particularly complex. The proposals build on the advice we have received from the IASB’s Expert Advisory Panel”.

IASB October Meeting Agenda

The Agenda for 13-17 October meeting of the IASB includes the following:
Annual Improvements: IAS 39 – Definition of a derivative: Consider annual improvements on the definition of a derivative and the ED proposal to remove the reference to a non-financial variable specific to a party to the contract
Consolidation: Continue discussion draft of the Consolidation ED
ED Proposed Amendments to IFRS 2 and IFRIC 11 – Group cash-settled share-based payment transactions: Consider IFRIC discussions and the reasons underlying the recommended changes from the proposals in the ED
Expert Advisory Panel on Valuing Financial Instruments in Markets that have become Inactive: Consider update from Panel
Fair Value Measurement: Discuss whether to allow pricing conventions (a mid-price convention or bid price for assets and ask price for liabilities) even when another price within the bid-ask spread might be more representative of fair value. Also discuss whether the bid-ask spread guidance will apply to all levels of the hierarchy
Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity: Discuss which approach provides the best starting point for its future deliberations including considering comment letter analysis for the IASB discussion paper ‘Financial instruments with Characteristics of Equity’
IAS 39 – Application of the Effective Interest Rate Method: Discuss issues related to the application of the effective interest rate method to particular types of financial instruments
IFRS for Private Entities: Address several outstanding issues that have been deferred from previous meetings
Insurance Contracts: An education session and no decisions are expected
Derecognition: Consider present possible approaches to derecognition of financial assets
Reclassification of Financial Instruments: Consider any inconsistencies in how IAS 39 and US GAAP practice addresses reclassifications and whether to eliminate any differences. Assess the suitability of adopting the US GAAP approach, and whether adapting IFRSs will provide relevant information to users of financial statements
Technical Plan: Review of Technical Plan that sets out the expected timetable over the coming 18-24 months for projects on the IASB’s active agenda

SEC Commences Work on Congressionally Mandated Study on Accounting Standards

The SEC Commission announced additional details on the process and initial steps undertaken to conduct a study on "mark-to-market" accounting, as authorised by Sec. 133 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, signed into law by President Bush on 10 October.

Under that legislation, the SEC is required to conduct a study of "mark-to-market" accounting. The study is to be completed by 2 January 2009, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Under the terms of the EESA, the study will focus on:

Effects of such accounting standards on a financial institution’s balance sheet
Impacts of such accounting on bank failures in 2008
Impact of such standards on the quality of financial information available to investors
The process used by the FASB in developing accounting standards
Advisability and feasibility of modifications to such standards, and
Alternative accounting standards to those provided in FASB Statement Number 157.

The results of this study are likely to impact on IAS 139 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’.

IPSASB Releases Public Sector Conceptual Framework

The International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) has issued for comment the first in a series of consultation papers focused on the development of an international public sector conceptual framework. Entitled ‘Conceptual Framework for General Purpose Financial Reporting by Public Sector Entities’, the consultation paper identifies the IPSASB's preliminary views on the objectives and scope of financial reporting, the qualitative characteristics of information included in general purpose financial reports and the characteristics of public sector reporting entities. Comments on the consultation paper are requested by 31 March 2009.

“Our ultimate goal is to develop a framework that makes explicit the concepts, definitions, and principles that underpin the development of IPSASs,’’ stated IPSASB Chair Mike Hathorn. “Since it will apply across countries and jurisdictions with different political systems and forms of government, the framework will recognise the diversity that exists in the many jurisdictions that may adopt IPSASs and help to strengthen the transparency and consistency of financial reporting by governments worldwide. This makes receiving a broad spectrum of comments on this paper, and all our consultation papers, all the more significant”, he concluded.

IPSASB October Meeting Agenda

The Agenda for 28-31 October 2008 meeting of the IPSASB includes:

Global Economic Issues and Effect on Public Sector: Discussion of Issues
Conceptual Framework Phase 2: Discussion of Issues
Performance Reporting: Review/Approve Project Brief
Rules Of The Road/IASB Tracking/Workplan: Update/Revise
Social Benefits: Review Responses to ED On Disclosure and the Consultation Paper on Recognition and Measurement
Long Term Fiscal Sustainability: Discussion of Issues
Agriculture: Rules of the Road Analysis/ Review Exposure Draft
Intangible Assets: Approve Exposure Draft
Service Concessions: Review Responses/Consider Approach, and
Financial Instruments: Discussion of Issues.

New IAASB Audit Practice Alert Focuses on Fair Value Accounting Estimates

To assist auditors in addressing the challenges of auditing fair value accounting estimates, the staff of the IAASB released an audit practice alert ‘Challenges in Auditing Fair Value Accounting Estimates in the Current Market Environment’. The purpose of the alert is to highlight areas within the International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) that are particularly relevant in the audit of fair value accounting estimates in times of market uncertainty.

James Sylph, Executive Director, Professional Standards, noted, “Recent events in some of the world’s largest financial markets continue to call attention to the difficulties in establishing fair values. This Staff Audit Practice Alert responds to calls from the Financial Stability Forum and others for further guidance on the audit of fair value accounting estimates. I believe this alert will be relevant to auditors of entities of all sizes as they prepare for the next audit season.”

The alert also directs auditors to the recently revised ISA 540 (Revised and Redrafted) ‘Auditing Accounting Estimates, Including Fair Value Accounting Estimates, and Related Disclosures’, which was influenced by the changes in the credit markets during 2007. While not effective until audits of financial periods commencing on or after 15 December 2009, it includes guidance that is likely to be useful to auditors planning their 2008 engagements.

Merran Kelsall, AUASB Chairman, said the practice alert will be useful to Australian auditors when conducting financial report audit engagements. “The guidance, related to Auditing Standard ASA 545 ‘Auditing Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures’, will help raise awareness of the particular challenges associated with auditing fair value estimates in times of market ambiguity. In these uncertain financial times, Australian auditors need to be alert to the considerations in establishing fair values and to assess whether an entity will be able to continue as a going concern,” Ms Kelsall said.

Further, recognising the importance of appropriate standards on auditing estimates, the AUASB has issued an exposure draft of ASA 540 ‘Audit of Accounting Estimates including Fair Value Estimates and Related Disclosures’, a redraft of the current ASA 540 and ASA 545 in Clarity format. Comments are invited and are due to the AUASB by 15 October 2008. The existing ASA 545 will remain operational for reporting periods ending 31 December 2009.

Outstanding Exposure Drafts

Accounting

20 October ED 165 ‘Proposed Improvements to Australian Accounting Standards’ – AASB
31 October ED 166 ‘Simplifying Earnings per Share: Proposed amendments to AASB 133’ – IASB
7 November ‘Improvements to IFRS (Proposed amendments to International Financial Reporting Standards’ – IASB
5 December ‘Simplifying Earnings per Share (proposed amendments to IAS 33)’ – IASB
5 December ED 167 ‘Discontinued Operations: Proposed Amendments to AASB 5’ – AASB
5 December Approved ED 168 ‘Additional Exemptions for First-time Adopters: Proposed Amendments to AASB 1’ – AASB
15 December ‘Improving Disclosures about Financial Instruments (proposed amendments to IFRS 7)’ – IASB
23 January ‘Discontinued Operations – Proposed Amendment to IFRS 5’ – IASB
23 January ‘Additional Exemptions for First-time Adopters: Amendments to IFRS 1’ – IASB
31 March ‘Conceptual Framework for General Purpose Financial Reporting by Public Sector Entities’ – IPSASB

Auditing

15 October ASA 230 ‘Audit Documentation’, ASA 300 ‘Planning an Audit of a Financial Report’, ASA 540 ‘Auditing Accounting Estimates, including Fair Value Accounting Estimates and Related Disclosures’, ASA 560 ‘Subsequent Events’, ASA 570 ‘Going Concern’, and ASA 600 ‘Special Considerations – Audits of a Group Financial Report (including the Work of Component Auditors) – AUASB

Other

31 October Discussion Paper ‘Underlying Profit’ – Financial Services Institute of Australasia and the Australian Institute of Company Directors
‘Conceptual Framework for General Purpose Financial Reporting by Public Sector Entities’ – IPSASB’

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 Our Brochure

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.