5.7 Leases
IFRS 16 and ASC 842 address the accounting for leases, and both require
lessees to recognize right-of-use assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet for
most lease contracts. While the two standards are converged with respect to the need for
a lessee to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease obligation, differences remain.
The table below outlines some of the differences between IFRS 16 and ASC 842. Other
differences may arise as a result of differences between IFRS Accounting Standards and
U.S. GAAP in other standards, including those related to (1) impairment of financial
instruments and long-lived assets other than goodwill and (2) the accounting for
investment properties.
Topic
|
IFRS Accounting Standards (IFRS 16)
|
U.S. GAAP (ASC 842)
|
---|---|---|
Scope
|
Scope includes leases of all assets (not limited
to PP&E). Exceptions are similar to those in ASC 842.
Lessees can elect to apply the guidance to rights to use certain
intangible assets.
|
Scope includes leases of all PP&E and excludes:
|
Short-term lease definition
|
A short-term lease is defined as a lease that
has a lease term of 12 months or less and does not include a
purchase option (i.e., the likelihood that the purchase option
will be exercised is not considered).
|
A short-term lease is defined as a lease that
has a lease term of 12 months or less and does not include a
purchase option that the lessee is reasonably certain to
exercise.
|
Leases of low-value assets
| A lessee may elect to
recognize the payments for a lease of a low-value asset on a
straight-line basis over the lease term (in a manner similar to
its recognition of an operating lease under IAS 17). Such a
lease would not be reflected on the lessee’s balance sheet. IFRS
16 does not define “low value”; however, the Basis for
Conclusions refers to assets individually with a value, when
new, of $5,000 or less. In addition, an entity may adopt a
reasonable capitalization policy based on materiality. |
There is no exemption for leases of low-value
assets under U.S. GAAP. However, the FASB believes that an
entity may adopt a reasonable capitalization policy based on
materiality.
|
Lease classification
|
Lessee — There is only a single accounting model for
leases (i.e., all leases are effectively equivalent to finance
leases under ASC 842), so classification of leases is
unnecessary.
Lessor — A lessor must perform a lease
classification assessment as of the inception date.
A lease is classified as a finance lease if it transfers
substantially all of the risks and rewards related to ownership;
otherwise, it is classified as an operating lease. This
determination is not based on meeting any criterion. However,
examples of situations that individually or in combination would
indicate a finance lease include:
Other situations in which a lease could be a finance lease
include:
The lessee can renew the lease for rent at a rate that is
substantially lower than the market rate.
|
Lessee — There are two accounting models
for leases, and the model will dictate the pattern of expense
recognition associated with the lease. Therefore, a lessee must
perform a lease classification assessment as of the commencement
date.
Under ASC 842-10-25-2, a lessee must classify a lease as a
finance lease if any of the following criteria are met:
If none of these criteria are met, the lease would be classified
as an operating lease.
Lessor — A lessor must perform a lease
classification assessment as of the commencement date.
The criteria governing when a lessor must
classify a lease as a sales-type lease are the same as those
that govern when a lessee must classify a lease as a finance
lease; therefore, if any of the criteria noted above apply, the
lessor would classify the lease as a sales-type lease.
If none of those criteria are met, the lessor
would classify the lease as a direct financing lease in
accordance with ASC 842-10-25-3 if (1) the present value of the
sum of the lease payments and any third-party guarantee of the
residual value “equals or exceeds substantially all of the fair
value of the underlying asset” and (2) “[i]t is probable that
the lessor will collect the lease payments plus any amount
necessary to satisfy a residual value guarantee.” Otherwise, the
lease would be classified as an operating lease.
In addition, ASC 842-10-25-3A requires a lessor
to classify a new or amended lease with variable lease payments
that do not depend on an index or rate as an operating lease if
(1) the lease would have been classified as a sales-type or
direct financing lease in accordance with the classification
criteria in ASC 842-10-25-2 and 25-3, respectively, and (2) the
lessor would have recognized a selling loss on the lease
commencement date. For new leases, such classification should be
made at lease commencement; amended leases should be classified
as of the effective date of the modification.
|
Lessee’s subsequent accounting for right-of-use
(ROU) asset and lease expense
|
A single accounting model is used. The ROU asset
is generally amortized on a straight-line basis. This
amortization, when combined with the interest on the lease
liability, results in a front-loaded expense profile. That is,
the single lessee accounting model under IFRS 16 is similar to
that of a finance lease under ASC 842. Interest expense on the
lease liability and amortization of the ROU asset are presented
separately in the income statement.
|
The accounting depends on the lease classification:
Finance leases — The ROU asset is
generally amortized on a straight-line basis. This amortization,
when combined with the interest on the lease liability, results
in a front-loaded expense profile. Interest and amortization are
presented separately in the income statement.
Operating leases — Lease expense generally results in a
straight-line expense profile that is presented as a single line
in the income statement. As interest on the lease liability is
generally declining over the lease term, amortization of the ROU
asset is increasing over the lease term to provide a constant
expense profile.
|
Lessor accounting
|
Core model — The core model is based on a
lessor measurement approach for operating and finance
leases.
Selling profit for a finance lease is recognized at lease
commencement.
Separating lease and nonlease components
— A similar practical expedient is not available.
Sales tax and lessor costs — A similar practical expedient
is not available. In addition, there are no similar provisions
related to lessor costs paid directly to a third party by a
lessee.
Fair value of the underlying asset — A similar amendment
to the definition of fair value has not been made.
|
Core model — The core model is based on a
lessor measurement approach for operating, direct financing, and
sales-type leases.
Selling profit for a sales-type lease is recognized at lease
commencement. Selling profit on a direct financing lease, if
any, is deferred and recognized as interest income over the
lease term.
Separating lease and nonlease components
— ASC 842-10-15-42A offers lessors a practical expedient under
which they can elect not to separate lease and nonlease
components when certain conditions are met.
Sales tax and lessor costs — ASC
842-10-15-39A offers lessors a practical expedient under which
they can present sales taxes collected from lessees on a net
basis. In addition, lessor costs paid directly to a third party
by a lessee should be excluded from variable payments.
Fair value of the underlying asset — ASC
842-30-55-17A provides specific fair value considerations for
lessors that are not manufacturers or dealers in such a way that
the fair value of the underlying asset is its cost unless a
significant lapse of time has occurred.
|
Recognition of variable lease payments that do
not depend on an index or rate
|
A lessee recognizes variable lease payments not
included in its lease liability (e.g., payments based on the
achievement of a target) in the period in which the target is
achieved.
|
A lessee recognizes variable lease payments not
included in its lease liability (e.g., payments based on the
achievement of a target) in the period in which achievement of
the target that triggers the variable lease payments becomes
probable.
|
Reassessment of variable lease payments that
depend on an index or rate
|
A lessee reassesses variable payments based on
an index or rate whenever there is a change in contractual cash
flows (e.g., the lease payments are adjusted for a change in the
CPI) or when the lease obligation is remeasured for other
reasons.
|
A lessee reassesses variable payments based on
an index or rate only when the lease obligation is remeasured
for other reasons (e.g., a change in lease term or
modification).
|
Lessee’s incremental borrowing rate
|
The lessee’s incremental borrowing rate is the
rate a lessee would pay to borrow over a similar term, and with
a similar security, the funds necessary to obtain an asset
with a value similar to the ROU asset in a similar
economic environment.
|
The lessee’s incremental borrowing rate is the
rate a lessee would pay to borrow, on a collateralized basis
over a similar term, an amount equal to the lease
payments in a similar economic environment.
|
Discount rate for private companies
|
No exemptions are provided for private-company lessees.
|
Private-company lessees may, as an accounting policy election by
asset class, choose to use a risk-free rate.
|
Modifications of operating leases for
lessors
|
If an operating lease is modified and not
accounted for as a separate contract, the lessor accounts for
the modified lease as a new lease from the date of the
modification. The lessor should include any prepaid or accrued
lease payments related to the original lease in the lease
payments associated with the new lease.
|
If an operating lease is modified and not accounted for as a
separate contract, the treatment depends on how the modified
lease is classified:
|
Modifications that reduce the lease term for
lessees
|
A reduction in the lease term is considered a
decrease in the scope of the lease. A lessee should thus
remeasure the lease liability, with a proportionate reduction in
the ROU asset, and recognize a gain or loss for any difference
as of the effective date of the modification.
|
A reduction in the lease term is not
considered a decrease in the scope of the lease. A lessee should
thus remeasure the lease liability, with a corresponding
reduction in the ROU asset, but should not recognize any
gain or loss as of the effective date of the modification unless
the ROU asset is reduced to zero.
|
Collectibility of lease payments
|
There is no explicit guidance on considering the
collectibility of lease payments within IFRS 16.
|
A lessor considers the collectibility of lease
payments when determining whether a lease should be classified
as a direct financing lease or an operating lease. A lessor does
not assess the collectibility of lease payments when
determining whether a lease should be classified as a sales-type
lease.
As a result of changes in the collectibility of
lease payments, lease income may be recognized on a cash basis.
The collectibility of lease payments for a direct financing or
sales-type lease is assessed under the CECL guidance in ASC
326.
|
Modifications of sales-type or direct financing
leases for lessors
|
A lessor’s accounting for a modification to a finance lease (that
is not accounted for as a separate contract) depends on whether
the lease would have been classified as an operating lease had
the modification been in effect at lease inception:
|
A lessor’s accounting for a modification to a sales-type or
direct financing lease depends on how the original and modified
leases are classified:
|
Sublease
|
The intermediate lessor would classify a sublease by considering
the ROU asset of the head lease as the leased asset in
the sublease.
|
The intermediate lessor would classify a sublease by considering
the underlying asset of the head lease (instead of the
ROU asset) as the leased asset in the sublease.
|
Sale-and-leaseback arrangements
|
The transaction would not be considered a sale if it does not
qualify as a sale under IFRS 15.
A repurchase option would always result in a failed sale.
For transactions that qualify as a sale, the
gain would be limited to the amount related to the residual
portion of the asset sold. The amount of the gain related to the
underlying asset leased back to the lessee would be offset
against the lessee’s ROU asset.
Effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1,
2024, IFRS 16 has been amended to require that a seller-lessee
determine lease payments or “revised lease payments” such that
the seller-lessee does not recognize a gain or loss related to
the right of use it retains.
|
The transaction would not be considered a sale if (1) it does not
qualify as a sale under ASC 606 or (2) the leaseback is a
finance lease.
A repurchase option would result in a failed sale unless (1) the
exercise price of the option is at fair value and (2)
alternative assets are readily available in the marketplace.
If the transaction qualifies as a sale, the entire gain on the
transaction would be recognized.
|
Related-party leases (leases between entities under common
control)
|
There is no explicit guidance on the accounting for related-party
leases under IFRS 16.
|
Before the adoption of ASU 2023-01, entities are required to
determine whether related-party arrangements between entities
under common control contain a lease. If the arrangement is
deemed to be or contain a lease, an entity is required to
classify and account for the lease in a manner consistent with
an arrangement with an unrelated party (i.e., “on the basis of
the legally enforceable terms and conditions of the
lease” [emphasis added]).
After the adoption of ASU 2023-01, private companies and
not-for-profit entities that are not conduit bond obligors can
elect, as a practical expedient that can be applied on an
arrangement-by-arrangement basis, to use the written terms
and conditions of a common control arrangement to
determine whether a lease exists and, if so, the classification
of and accounting for that lease.
|