3.1 Revenue Recognition
In May 2014, the IASB and the FASB issued their final standards on revenue from
contracts with customers. The standards outline a single comprehensive model for
entities to use in accounting for revenue from contracts with customers and
supersede most legacy revenue recognition guidance, including industry-specific
guidance.
The revenue recognition project aimed to (1) clarify and converge
the revenue recognition principles under IFRS Accounting Standards and U.S. GAAP and
(2) develop guidance that would streamline and enhance revenue recognition
requirements while also providing “a more robust framework for addressing revenue
issues.”
As a result, IFRS Accounting Standards and U.S. GAAP are largely
converged in this area. The table below outlines some of the key remaining
differences, including a lower collectibility threshold under IFRS Accounting
Standards and additional accounting policy elections available only under U.S. GAAP
that permit entities to exclude shipping and handling activities and sales (and
other similar) taxes from their assessment of performance obligations and
transaction price, respectively. However, the table excludes differences in interim
disclosure requirements and disclosure requirements related to remaining performance
obligations.
Topic
|
IFRS Accounting Standards (IFRS 15)
|
U.S. GAAP (ASC 606)
|
---|---|---|
The collectibility threshold for contracts (step 1 —
qualification of a contract for revenue recognition)
|
IFRS 15 establishes a probable
collectibility threshold, which means that collection is
“more likely than not.” In practice, “more likely than not”
refers to a probability of greater than 50 percent.
|
ASC 606 establishes a probable
collectibility threshold, which means that collection is
“likely to occur.” In practice, “probable” is interpreted as
signifying a higher percentage (e.g., 70 percent or higher)
than that under IFRS Accounting Standards.
|
Reversal of impairment losses
|
An entity is required to reverse an
impairment loss on capitalized costs to obtain or fulfill a
contract if the impairment conditions no longer exist or
have improved.
|
An entity cannot reverse an impairment loss
on capitalized costs to obtain or fulfill a contract.
|
Licensing — determining the nature of an
entity’s promise
|
An entity’s determination of whether a
license is a right to use (for which revenue is recognized
at a point in time) versus a right to access (for which
revenue is recognized over time) is based on whether the
customer can direct the use of, and obtain substantially all
of the benefits from, the license at the point in time the
license is granted. The customer can direct the use of, and
obtain substantially all of the benefits from, the license
(and thus has a right to use) if the underlying intellectual
property (IP) is not significantly affected by the entity’s
ongoing activities.
|
An entity’s determination of whether a
license is a right to use (for which revenue is recognized
at a point in time) versus a right to access (for which
revenue is recognized over time) is based on its
classification of the IP underlying the license as either
functional or symbolic.
|
Licensing — renewals
|
The “use and benefit” guidance does not
explicitly refer to renewals; as a result, revenue may be
recognized earlier than it would be under U.S. GAAP.
|
A renewal or extension is subject to the
“use and benefit” guidance in ASC 606-10-55-58C, the
application of which will generally result in revenue
recognition at the beginning of the renewal period.
|
Shipping and handling activities
|
IFRS 15 does not provide an accounting
policy election. If an entity performs shipping and handling
services after the customer has obtained control of the
related good, the shipping and handling activities will
typically be accounted for as a separate performance
obligation.
|
ASC 606 provides an accounting policy
election that permits an entity to account for shipping and
handling activities that occur after the customer has
obtained control of the related good as a fulfillment
expense.
|
Noncash consideration
|
IFRS 15 does not prescribe a measurement
date or clarify when the variable consideration guidance
applies.
|
ASC 606 requires measurement at contract
inception. The guidance on variable consideration applies
only to variability resulting from reasons other than the
form of the noncash consideration.
|
Consideration paid or payable to a customer
— equity instruments (i.e., share-based payments to
customers)
|
IFRS 15 does not specify whether equity
instruments granted by an entity to a customer are a type of
consideration paid or payable to a customer. Further, IFRS
15 does not address how equity instruments granted to a
customer in a revenue arrangement should be accounted for
with regard to initial and subsequent measurement.
Therefore, an entity should consider which standard (e.g.,
IFRS 2, IFRS 9, IFRS 15, IAS 32), or combination of
standards, could be applicable.
| Equity instruments granted by an entity in
conjunction with selling goods or services as a form of
consideration paid or payable to a customer are measured and
classified in accordance with ASC 718. Share-based
consideration payable to a customer is calculated by using a
fair-value-based measure of the equity instrument as of the
grant date. |
Presentation of sales (and other similar)
taxes
|
IFRS 15 does not provide an accounting
policy election. An entity is required to identify whether
it has a primary responsibility to pay the taxes or is
acting only as a collection agent. If it is the primary
obligor, it must include those taxes in the transaction
price.
|
ASC 606 provides an accounting policy
election that permits an entity to exclude all sales (and
other similar) taxes from the measurement of the transaction
price.
|
Provisions for losses on construction-type
and production-type contracts
|
In accordance with IAS 37, the onerous test
should be performed at the contract level.
|
ASC 605-35-25 (which was not superseded by
ASC 606) clarifies that provisions for losses on
construction-type and production-type contracts may be
determined at either the contract or performance obligation
level.
|
Onerous contracts
|
In accordance with IAS 37, losses are recognized for all
onerous contracts with customers, and the onerous test
should be performed at the contract level.
|
Although the guidance is silent on the topic of onerous
contracts, it does not supersede existing provisions in
other ASC subtopics that require the recognition of losses
for certain types of contracts with customers, such as ASC
605-20, ASC 605-35, and ASC 985-20. ASC 605-35-25 clarifies
that provisions for losses on construction-type and
production-type contracts may be determined at either the
contract or performance obligation level.
|