10.2 Scope
10.2.1 General
ASC 470-50
05-2 This Subtopic . . .
provides guidance on whether an exchange of debt
instruments with the same creditor constitutes an
extinguishment and whether a modification of a debt
instrument should be accounted for in the same manner as
an extinguishment.
40-8 Transactions involving
the modification or exchange of debt instruments shall
only result in gain or loss recognition by the debtor if
the conditions for extinguishment of debt described in
paragraph 405-20-40-1 are satisfied or if the guidance
in this Subtopic requires that accounting.
ASC 470-50-40-6 through 40-20 address the debtor’s accounting for (1)
modifications of the terms of existing debt instruments and (2) exchanges of
debt instruments with the same creditor. This guidance, which applies to all
entities, also addresses:
-
The contemporaneous exchange of cash and debt instruments with the same creditor (see Section 10.2.2).
-
A binding commitment to modify, exchange, or redeem debt on terms that differ from the original debt terms (see Section 10.2.3).
-
The payment of consent fees to obtain a waiver of a covenant violation (see Section 10.2.4).
-
For consolidated financial statements, the exchange of debt issued by one entity within the consolidated group for debt issued by another entity within that group (see Section 10.2.10).
-
An exchange of debt for liability-classified shares of common or preferred stock (see Section 10.2.12).
ASC 470-50-40-21 through 40-23 contain separate guidance for the evaluation of
modifications and exchanges of line-of-credit and revolving-debt arrangements
(see Section 10.6).
ASC 470-50 does not address:
-
Nonbinding offers to modify, exchange, or redeem debt (see Section 10.2.3).
-
TDRs (see Section 10.2.5 and Chapter 11).
-
Debt modifications or exchanges at or near the maturity date of the original debt (see Section 10.2.6).
-
Prespecified changes in cash flows as a result of the application of contractual provisions (e.g., the exercise of a contractual redemption feature; see Section 10.2.7).
-
Transactions among debt holders (see Section 10.2.8).
-
Transactions with parties other than the creditor (see Section 10.2.9).
-
Conversions of debt into equity-classified shares of preferred or common stock (see Section 10.2.11).
-
Exchanges of debt for equity-classified common or preferred shares (see Section 10.2.12).
-
The creditor’s accounting for modifications and exchanges of investments in debt instruments.
-
Modifications or exchanges of derivatives (e.g., forwards, swaps, warrants, or options).
Further, a debtor may elect not to apply the guidance in ASC 470-50 to certain
market issuances of new debt to replace old debt (see Section
10.2.13).
ASC 848 permits debtors to elect not to apply extinguishment
accounting to certain debt modifications made in connection with reference-rate
reform even if ASC 470-50 would have required such accounting to be applied (see
Section
14.2.5).
10.2.2 Contemporaneous Exchange of Cash and Debt Instruments
ASC 470-50
40-9 Transactions involving
contemporaneous exchanges of cash between the same
debtor and creditor in connection with the issuance of a
new debt obligation and satisfaction of an existing debt
obligation by the debtor would only be accounted for as
debt extinguishments if the debt instruments have
substantially different terms, as defined in this
Subtopic.
When a debtor repays debt for cash, the debt is generally
considered extinguished (see Section 9.2). However, if a debtor (or its agent; see Section 10.5) repays outstanding debt for cash
and contemporaneously issues new debt to the same creditor for cash, the net
effect of the two transactions is an exchange of debt instruments. Therefore,
the transactions generally need to be analyzed on a combined basis in accordance
with the guidance in ASC 470-50.
In evaluating multiple transactions between the same debtor and creditor under
ASC 470-50-40-9, an entity must consider whether the transactions were executed
both contemporaneously and in contemplation of each other (i.e., contingent on
one another). While it would generally be difficult to establish that
contemporaneous transactions between a debtor and a creditor were not contingent
on one another, the relevant facts and circumstances must be evaluated. For
example, the following factors may suggest that two transactions should not be combined:
-
Lack of legal or contractual linkage between the transactions.
-
A sufficient period has elapsed between the two transactions during which the debtor and creditor are exposed to the risk that the second transaction will not take place (i.e., the second transaction is not firmly committed).
Under ASC 470-50, a debtor accounts for an exchange of debt instruments as an
extinguishment of the existing debt instrument if the debt instruments have
substantially different terms (see Section 10.4.2). A
contemporaneous exchange of cash and debt instruments with the same creditor is
accounted for as a modification of the original debt if the terms are not
substantially different (see Section 10.4.3).
ASC 470-50-40-9 does not apply when new debt is issued to a
different creditor. When a debtor or its agent repays debt by using proceeds
from debt issued to a different creditor, the original debt is accounted for as
extinguished even if there have been no or only insignificant changes to the
debt terms.
10.2.3 Intention, Offer, or Commitment to Modify, Exchange, or Redeem Debt
ASC 470-50
55-8 This Subtopic applies
to transactions in which the terms of a debt instrument
are modified through execution of a binding contract
between the debtor and creditor that requires a debt
instrument to be redeemed at a future date for a
specified amount.
55-9 The following
situations do not result in an extinguishment and would
not result in gain or loss recognition under either
paragraph 405-20-40-1 or this Subtopic:
- An announcement of intent by the debtor to call a debt instrument at the first call date . . . .
If a debtor (or its agent; see Section
10.5) enters into a binding agreement with a creditor to redeem or
exchange debt or otherwise modify its terms, the binding agreement represents a
debt modification that should be evaluated under ASC 470-50. Therefore, the
debtor should determine whether the debt terms as modified by the binding
agreement are substantially different from the original debt terms (see
Section 10.4).
The debtor’s mere announcement that it expects or intends to
modify, exchange, or redeem debt is not evaluated as a modification or exchange
under ASC 470-50. If a debtor provides the creditor with an offer to redeem the
debt or otherwise modify the debt terms or exchange the debt and the creditor
has not accepted the offer, a debt modification generally has not occurred.
Therefore, ASC 470-50 does not apply. However, if a creditor accepts the offer
and the revised debt terms therefore become binding on both the debtor and
creditor, the debtor should determine whether the revised debt terms are
substantially different from the terms of the original debt instrument (see
Section
10.3).
10.2.4 Consent Fees Paid by a Debtor to Obtain a Covenant Waiver
An entity might pay fees or other consideration, such as
warrants, to a creditor to compensate for a violation of a debt covenant. If the
fee was not part of the original debt terms but was negotiated at the time of
the violation, it represents a modification that should be evaluated under ASC
470-50. Such fees and other noncash consideration should be reflected in the
performance of the 10 percent cash flow test (see Section 10.3.3.2.4).
If a modification or exchange is accounted for as a debt extinguishment, the
debtor should apply the guidance in ASC 470-50-40-17(a) on debt extinguishments
and include the fee paid in the calculation of the debt extinguishment gain or
loss (see Section 10.4.2). Otherwise, it applies ASC
470-50-40-17(b), which states that an entity should defer such fees along with
any existing unamortized premium and discount and use the interest method to
amortize them as an adjustment to interest expense over the remaining life of
the modified debt instrument (see Section 10.4.3).
10.2.5 Troubled Debt Restructurings
ASC 470-50
15-3 The guidance in this
Subtopic does not apply to the following transactions
and activities: . . .
b. Extinguishments of debt through a troubled
debt restructuring. (See Section 470-60-15 for
guidance on determining whether a modification or
exchange of debt instruments is a troubled debt
restructuring. If it is determined that the
modification or exchange does not result in a
troubled debt restructuring, the guidance in this
Subtopic shall be applied.) . . .
ASC 470-50 does not apply to modifications or exchanges that qualify as TDRs. For
a detailed discussion of the scope of the TDR guidance, see Section 11.2.
ASC 470-60
55-5 The following model
should be applied by a debtor when determining whether a
modification or an exchange of debt instruments is
within the scope of this Subtopic.
10.2.6 Modifications or Exchanges at or Near the Debt’s Maturity
A modification or an exchange of debt with an existing creditor
that occurs at or near (e.g., within three months of) the debt’s stated maturity
is treated as an extinguishment (see Section 9.3) unless one or more of the
following conditions exist:
- The modification or exchange represents a TDR.
- The debtor would be unable to repay the debt at maturity or refinance it with another lender (e.g., in the absence of the modification or exchange, the debtor would default on the repayment at maturity, but the modification or exchange would not be treated as a TDR because the creditor did not provide a concession to the debtor).
- The modification or exchange is not substantive (e.g., the maturity date of the debt instrument is extended for a week for administrative purposes).
If none of the above three conditions are met and the modification or exchange of
debt is at or near (e.g., within three months of) the debt’s stated maturity,
the debtor recognizes the new debt instrument at fair value. The difference
between this amount and the net carrying amount of the extinguished debt is
recognized as an extinguishment gain or loss.
If the modification or exchange represents a TDR, the debtor should apply ASC
470-60 (see Chapter 11). In the event that
the modification or exchange is not a TDR but the debtor would be unable to
repay the debt at maturity or refinance it with another lender in the absence of
the modification or exchange, the guidance in ASC 470-50 applies to the
modification or exchange. If the modification or exchange is not substantive,
the modified or exchanged instrument would not be considered extinguished under
ASC 470-50.
10.2.7 Application of Contractual Provisions
Prespecified changes to the cash flows of a debt instrument that result from the
application of an existing contractual term (e.g., the exercise of an option or
trigger of a contingent payment feature under a debt instrument’s original
terms) generally do not represent debt modifications. For instance, the exercise
of a prepayment option that permits the debtor to prepay all or a portion of the
debt’s principal balance is not evaluated as a modification. Similarly, the
exercise of a right to convert a variable-rate debt instrument into a fixed-rate
instrument or the payment of contingent interest upon the occurrence of an event
of default is not treated as a debt modification. Changes to the cash flows of a
debt instrument that result solely from the application of contractual terms of
a debt instrument should be reflected in the application of the interest method
(see Section 6.2) and should also be evaluated for separation under
ASC 815-15 (see Chapter 8). Special considerations are necessary if a debtor or
creditor exercises a contractual provision in conjunction with a modification or
exchange (see Section 10.3.3.2.3).
Example 10-1
Change in Terms of Auction Rate Securities
Company B has issued various series of auction rate
securities (ARSs). The ARSs were not issued at a
discount or premium, and the terms of the securities
require the coupon rate to reset through a Dutch auction
process. Once reset, the coupon rate will remain the
same until the next auction.
The period between auctions is referred to as the “reset
frequency” or “mode.” The terms of the agreement allow B
to change the mode from three to six months by providing
the holders of the securities with notice of B’s
intention to do so 30 days before the effective date of
the mode change.
Recently, the auction for B’s debt securities failed,
which has triggered a provision in the agreement that
automatically increases the coupon rate for each debt
security in the series to a penalty rate of 20 percent.
In accordance with the terms of the agreement, B has
notified the holders of the debt securities of its
intention to increase the mode from three to six
months.
Company B’s decision to increase the mode from three to
six months does not represent a modification to the
agreement that should be accounted for in accordance
with ASC 470-50, because the agreement allows B to
change the mode from three to six months.
Whether the extension of the mode of an ARS is a
modification depends on whether the agreement allows the
issuer to unilaterally extend the mode or the range over
which the mode may be extended. If an agreement allows
extension of the mode and the new mode is within the
allowable range, the extension is not considered a
modification that requires further analysis.
However, if the agreement does not allow the issuer to
unilaterally extend the mode, or if the mode is
extending beyond the allowable range, the issuer should
determine whether the extension is a modification
requiring analysis under ASC 470-50. For example, if the
agreement allows an extension of the mode but the new
reset frequency is not within the agreement’s allowable
range, the extension would be a modification of the
original indenture and would require analysis under ASC
470-50.
10.2.8 Transactions Among Debt Holders
ASC 470-50
40-7 Transactions among debt
holders do not result in a modification of the original
debt’s terms or an exchange of debt instruments between
the debtor and the debt holders and do not impact the
accounting by the debtor.
55-6 If a debt instrument is
transferred from one debt holder to another in
connection with a modification or exchange, including
transfers from an intermediary acting as principal to
another debt holder, the debtor is not impacted by the
exchange as long as the funds do not pass through the
debtor or its agent.
ASC 470-50 does not apply to transactions in which the debtor is not a party.
When a creditor sells or otherwise transfers debt to a different entity without
any involvement of the debtor, there is no accounting required by the debtor
(i.e., the debt is not accounted for as having been modified or extinguished
even though the creditor has changed).
However, if a debtor or its agent receives or pays cash in connection with a
transfer of debt between debt holders (e.g., as a transfer consent fee) or the
terms are modified in connection with such a transfer (e.g., to remove transfer
restrictions), the debtor should consider whether the substance of the
transaction is a repayment of the existing debt by using proceeds from debt
issued to a different creditor (which would be accounted for as an
extinguishment of the original debt; see Section
9.3) or a modification of the debt terms (which would be
evaluated under ASC 470-50). If a holder of debt initiates the transaction and
pays the debtor a fee solely to remove a transfer restriction in connection with
its transfer of the debt to a different holder, the substance of the transaction
is likely that of a modification of existing debt, which should be evaluated to
determine whether it should be accounted for as a modification or extinguishment
under ASC 470-50. However, if a debtor initiates the transaction and the funds
pass through the debtor or its agent, the substance of the transaction may be
that of a repayment of the existing debt and the issuance of new debt to a
different holder.
If a contractual modification and transfer of a debt instrument, in substance,
represents a market issuance of new debt to replace old debt, the debtor may
elect to treat it as an extinguishment of the original debt even if no funds
pass through the debtor or its agent. This guidance is only applicable if the
terms of the new debt are equivalent to those of an arm’s-length market offering
(e.g., market yield and credit spread) that is independent of the redemption of
the old debt (see Section 10.2.13).
10.2.9 Transactions With Third Parties
ASC 470-50
15-3 The guidance in this
Subtopic does not apply to the following transactions
and activities: . . .
c. Transactions entered into between a debtor
or a debtor’s agent and a third party that is not
the creditor.
55-9 The following
situations do not result in an extinguishment and would
not result in gain or loss recognition under either
paragraph 405-20-40-1 or this Subtopic: . . .
c. An agreement with a creditor that a debt
instrument issued by the debtor and held by a
different party will be redeemed.
ASC 470-50 does not apply to transactions between the debtor (or
its agent) and a party other than the holder of the debt unless that other party
is acting as an agent in the transaction (see Section 10.5.2). For example, if a debtor
enters into a call option or forward purchase agreement that would result in a
debt redemption upon settlement, that transaction would not be evaluated under
ASC 470-50 if the counterparty does not hold the debt that is subject to
redemption.
10.2.10 Exchanges of Debt Issued by Different Entities Within a Consolidated Group
In consolidated financial statements, the debt of any entity within the
consolidated group represents debt of the reporting entity. If debt issued by
one entity within the group (e.g., a subsidiary) is exchanged for debt issued by
another entity within the group (e.g., the parent), that debt exchange should be
evaluated under ASC 470-50 to determine whether extinguishment or modification
accounting is appropriate in the consolidated financial statements that include
both of those entities. However, ASC 470-50 does not apply to financial
statements that do not include both entities.
10.2.11 Convertible Debt
ASC 470-50
15-3 The guidance in this
Subtopic does not apply to the following transactions
and activities:
- Conversions of debt into equity securities of the debtor pursuant to conversion privileges provided in the terms of the debt at issuance. Additionally, the guidance in this Subtopic does not apply to conversions of convertible debt instruments pursuant to terms that reflect changes made by the debtor to the conversion privileges provided in the debt at issuance (including changes that involve the payment of consideration) for the purpose of inducing conversion. Guidance on conversions of debt instruments (including induced conversions) is contained in paragraphs 470-20-40-13 and 470-20-40-15. . . .
If an issuer modifies or exchanges an outstanding convertible debt instrument, it
should assess whether the transaction should be accounted for as a modification
or an extinguishment of the original instrument under ASC 470-50. This guidance
does not apply to:
-
Conversions that occur under the original terms of the instrument (see Chapter 12).
-
Changes to the terms of the conversion privileges that represent an induced conversion under ASC 470-20 (see Section 12.3.4).
-
Conversion price adjustments that are made in accordance with the original terms of the instrument. For example, an adjustment under a down-round protection feature is not evaluated as a modification under ASC 470-50. Instead, the issuer should evaluate such provisions under other applicable GAAP.
10.2.12 Exchanges of Debt for Common or Preferred Stock
ASC 470-50
15-2 The guidance in this
Subtopic applies, in part, to the following transactions
and activities:
-
Extinguishments of debt effected by issuance of common or preferred stock, including redeemable and fixed-maturity preferred stock, that do not represent the exercise of a conversion right contained in the terms of the debt at issuance.
If a debtor settles outstanding debt by issuing equity-classified shares
(including equity instruments classified in temporary equity), the guidance on
modifications and exchanges in ASC 470-50 does not apply. Instead, the exchange
is accounted for as a debt extinguishment under ASC 470-50-40-3 (see
Section 9.3.3) unless it is a TDR (see Chapter 11) or represents a conversion (see
Chapter 12).
If outstanding debt is exchanged for shares that must be
classified as liabilities under ASC 480 (i.e., mandatorily redeemable financial
instruments and certain variable-share obligations; see Deloitte’s Roadmap
Distinguishing
Liabilities From Equity), the guidance on modifications
and exchanges of debt in ASC 470-50 should be applied.
10.2.13 Market Issuances of New Debt to Replace Old Debt
If a debtor issues new debt and uses some or all of the proceeds
to contemporaneously repurchase some or all of its existing debt according to
either its preexisting redemption terms or a tender offer made to all holders of
the existing debt, the debtor would not necessarily be required to view all or a
portion of those transactions as a debt exchange to which ASC 470-50 applies
even if some of the new debt is purchased by investors that held the debt that
was redeemed. Instead, it is acceptable for the debtor to evaluate the
substantive terms of the transactions to determine whether they should be
analyzed as either (1) an extinguishment of the existing debt under ASC 405-20
and the separate issuance of new debt (see Chapter 9) or (2) an exchange of debt
instruments under ASC 470-50-40-6 through 40-12 for the portion of new debt held
by continuing investors.
In evaluating whether transactions with continuing investors
should be analyzed as a debt exchange under ASC 470-50, the debtor should
consider whether the redemption of the old debt and issuance of the new debt
were negotiated together or in contemplation of one another (i.e., contingent
upon one another). While this evaluation can be complex because it involves debt
issued to multiple investors, if the facts suggest that the new debt offering
was an arm’s-length market offering that was independent of the redemption of
the old debt, it is acceptable to treat the redemption of the old debt and
issuance of new debt as separate transactions. Example 10-2 illustrates the conditions that must be met for an
entity to conclude that the repayment of existing debt and issuance of new debt
are separate transactions.
If a conclusion is reached that the repayment of the old debt is
a transaction that is separate from the issuance of the new debt, the old debt
would be considered extinguished if any of the conditions in ASC 405-20-40-1 are
met (see Section 9.2). If none of the
conditions in ASC 405-20-40-1 are met, accounting for the repayment of the old
debt and issuance of the new debt as separate transactions is unlikely to be
appropriate (i.e., an entity should apply the guidance in ASC 470-50 to
determine the appropriate accounting).
Connecting the Dots
It is always acceptable to apply ASC 470-50 on a creditor-by-creditor
basis to the extent that the same investor(s) held old debt and
purchased new debt (see Section
10.3.2). An entity’s decision to apply extinguishment
accounting to all of the old debt (when the issuance and repayment
transactions may be considered separate) as opposed to applying ASC
470-50 on a creditor-by-credit basis is an accounting policy election
that must be consistently applied.
If the redemption of old debt and the issuance of new debt were
negotiated together or in contemplation of one another (i.e., contingent
on one another), they would not be considered separate transactions.
Accordingly, an entity would apply the guidance on debt exchanges in ASC
470-50 on a creditor-by-creditor basis. Note that the mere fact that the
old debt is legally extinguished is not sufficient evidence by itself to
support a conclusion that the redemption of the old debt and issuance of
the new debt are separate transactions.
Example 10-2
Market Issuance of New Debt to Repay Outstanding
Debt
On March 1, 20X4, Entity C engages a
bank to place $300 million of new debt into the market.
Entity C plans to use the proceeds to repurchase some of
its old debt. Given the interest rate environment and
the company’s financial condition, C believes that it
can obtain a lower long-term financing cost by
undertaking these transactions. Also assume that the
following conditions exist:
-
The old debt was redeemed in accordance with either (1) a preexisting early-redemption option in the original debt agreement or (2) a tender offer to all debt holders as opposed to a separately negotiated early redemption with one or more investors in the old debt.
-
The issuance of new debt was facilitated by an agent (e.g., an underwriter) that offered the new debt to qualified investors in the marketplace, which may include (but would not be limited to) investors that held the old debt. None of the investors in the old debt were required to participate in the issuance of the new debt. In addition, the holders of the old debt were not involved in the negotiations of the terms and conditions of the new debt (unless one of the debt holders acted in a placement-agent capacity for the new debt).
-
The purchase of new debt by investors that held the old debt was an investment decision that is separate from the redemption of the old debt.
-
No preferential treatment was given to investors in the old debt (i.e., old and new investors were offered the same terms in the new debt offering).
-
There was inherently going to be overlap between the investors in the old and new debt because a large number of investors in the marketplace held the old debt.
-
New investors purchased more than an insignificant portion of the new debt.
-
The cash inflows from the issuance of the new debt and the cash outflows from the repayment of the old debt occurred on a gross, as opposed to a net, basis.
-
Entity C was not experiencing financial difficulties.
Given the above conditions, C is not
required to apply ASC 470-50 to the portion of the old
debt that has been redeemed and is held by investors in
the new debt. Instead, it may apply extinguishment
accounting to all of the old debt in accordance with ASC
405-20. It is also acceptable for C to apply ASC 470-50
on a creditor-by-creditor basis to the extent that the
same investor(s) held old debt and purchased new debt.
An entity’s decision to apply extinguishment accounting
to all of the old debt as opposed to applying ASC 470-50
on a creditor-by-creditor basis is an accounting policy
election that must be consistently applied.
Note the following about this example:
-
If any of the above conditions are not met, C should apply the guidance on modifications and exchanges of debt in ASC 470-50. In other words, market issuances of debt that are treated separately from repayments of existing debt are limited to transactions that involve either the public issuance of debt or the private issuance of debt to qualified institutional investors in accordance with an exemption from registration with the SEC. Debt syndication transactions are not expected to qualify as market issuances of debt that are separate from repayments of existing debt.
-
The above conditions focus only on whether it is acceptable to view the repayment of the old debt and issuance of new debt as separate transactions for accounting purposes. If the two transactions are treated separately, C must still conclude that one of the conditions for extinguishment accounting in ASC 405-20-40-1 is met before it can derecognize the old debt. (The same is not true if the two transactions are treated as a modification or exchange, because a legal extinguishment of the modified or exchanged debt is not required in the application of debt extinguishment accounting under ASC 470-50.)