SUMMARY OF BOARD DECISIONS
Summary of Board decisions are provided for the information and
convenience of constituents who want to follow the Board’s deliberations. All of
the conclusions reported are tentative and may be changed at future Board
meetings. Decisions are included in an Exposure Draft for formal comment only
after a formal written ballot. Decisions in an Exposure Draft may be (and often
are) changed in redeliberations based on information provided to the Board in
comment letters, at public roundtable discussions, and through other
communication channels. Decisions become final only after a formal written
ballot to issue an Accounting Standards Update.
October 19, 2011 FASB/IASB Joint Board Meeting
Fair
value measurement. Based on suggestions made during the deliberations of
IFRS 13, Fair Value Measurement, and FASB Accounting Standards Update
No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve
Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and
IFRSs, the FASB and the IASB discussed the IASB’s consideration of the
formation of a fair value advisory committee to create educational material
about the implementation and application of IFRS 13, specifically for developing
economies.
Leases.
Lessor
Accounting
The FASB and the IASB tentatively decided that a lessor’s
lease of investment property would not be within the scope of the receivable and
residual approach. Instead, for such leases the lessor should continue to
recognize the underlying asset and recognize lease income over the lease term.
The Boards discussed the receivable and residual approach and
tentatively decided that for all lease contracts within the scope of that
approach, a lessor should:
- Initially measure the right to receive lease payments at the present value
of the lease payments, discounted using the rate the lessor charges the
lessee, and subsequently measure at amortized cost applying an effective
interest method.
- Initially measure the residual asset as an allocation of the carrying
amount of the underlying asset. The initial measurement of the residual asset
comprises two amounts: (a) the gross residual asset, measured at the present
value of the estimated residual value at the end of the lease term discounted
using the rate the lessor charges the lessee, and (b) the deferred profit,
measured as the difference between the gross residual asset and the allocation
of the carrying amount of the underlying asset.
- Subsequently measure the gross residual asset by accreting to the
estimated residual value at the end of the lease term using the rate the
lessor charges the lessee. The lessor would not recognize any of the deferred
profit in profit or loss until the residual asset is sold or re-leased.
- Present the gross residual asset and the deferred profit together as a net
residual asset.
The Boards also tentatively decided that there should
be no distinction between when profit is or is not reasonably assured in
accounting for a lease contract by a lessor.
Variable Lease
Payments
The Boards discussed the subsequent measurement of a
lessor’s residual asset when the lease contract includes variable lease payments
that are not recognized as a part of the lease receivable at lease
commencement.
The Boards tentatively decided that:
- If the rate the lessor charges the lessee does not reflect an expectation
of variable lease payments, the lessor would not make any adjustments to the
residual asset with respect to variable lease payments.
- If the rate the lessor charges the lessee reflects an expectation of
variable lease payments, the lessor would adjust the residual asset on the
basis of its expectation of variable lease payments by recognizing a portion
of the cost of the residual asset as an expense when variable lease payments
are recognized in profit or loss. Any difference between actual and expected
variable lease payments would not result in any further adjustment to the
residual asset with respect to variable lease
payments.
Transfer/Securitization of Lease
Receivables
The Boards discussed the measurement of lease
receivables held for the purpose of sale and the derecognition guidance to be
applied when lease receivables are transferred or sold.
The Boards
tentatively decided that a lessor:
- Should not measure a lease receivable at fair value, even if part or all
of that receivable is held for the purpose of sale.
- Should apply existing derecognition requirements (in IFRS 9, Financial
Instruments, or FASB Accounting Standards Codification® Topic
860, Transfers and Servicing) to lease receivables, but allocate the carrying
amount of a lease receivable on the basis of its fair value excluding any
option elements and variable lease payments that are not transferred.
- Should apply the disclosure requirements in IFRS 7, Financial
Instruments: Disclosures, and Topic 860 for transferred lease
receivables.
Lessor Presentation
The Boards discussed
presentation requirements for lessors in the statement of comprehensive income.
The Boards tentatively decided that a lessor should present:
- The accretion of the residual asset as interest income.
- The amortization of initial direct costs as an offset to interest income.
- Lease income and lease expense (for example, revenue and cost of sales) in
the statement of comprehensive income either in separate line items (gross) or
in a single line item (net), on the basis of which presentation best reflects
the lessor’s business model.
The Boards also tentatively decided that a
lessor should separately identify income and expenses arising from leases by
either separate presentation in the statement of comprehensive income or
disclosure in the notes to the financial statements. If disclosed, the notes
should reference the line item in which the income is presented.
Transition
The Boards discussed transition requirements
and transition disclosures for lessees and lessors.
Lessees
The Boards tentatively decided that for
capital/finance leases existing at the beginning of the earliest comparative
period presented, a lessee would not be required to make any adjustments to the
carrying amount of lease assets and lease liabilities and should reclassify
those lease assets and lease liabilities as right-of-use assets and liabilities
to make lease payments.
The Boards tentatively decided that for
operating leases existing at the beginning of the earliest comparative period
presented, a lessee should:
- Recognize liabilities to make lease payments at transition measured at the
present value of the remaining lease payments, discounted using the lessee’s
incremental borrowing rate as of the effective date for each portfolio of
leases with reasonably similar characteristics. The incremental borrowing rate
for each portfolio of leases should consider the lessee’s total leverage,
including leases in other portfolios.
- Recognize right-of-use assets equal to the proportion of the liability to
make lease payments at lease commencement calculated on the basis of the
remaining lease payments.
- Record to retained earnings any difference between the liabilities to make
lease payments and the right-of-use assets at transition.
The Boards
also tentatively decided that when lease payments are uneven over the lease
term, a lessee should adjust the right-of-use asset recognized at the beginning
of the earliest comparative period presented by the amount of any recognized
prepaid or accrued lease payments.
Lessors
The
Boards tentatively decided that for finance/sales-type and direct finance leases
existing at the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented, a lessor
would not be required to make adjustments to the carrying amount of the assets
associated with those leases.
For operating leases existing at the
beginning of the earliest comparative period presented, the Boards tentatively
decided that a lessor should:
- Recognize a right to receive lease payments, measured at the present value
of the remaining lease payments, discounted using the rate charged in the
lease determined at the date of commencement of the lease, subject to any
adjustments required to reflect impairment.
- Recognize a residual asset consistent with the initial measurement of the
residual asset under the receivable and residual approach, using information
available at the beginning of the earliest comparative period
presented.
- Derecognize the underlying asset.
The Boards also tentatively
decided that when lease payments are uneven over the lease term, a lessor should
adjust the cost basis in the underlying asset that is derecognized at the date
of the earliest comparative period presented by the amount of any recognized
prepaid or accrued lease payments.
Lessees and
Lessors
To ease the potential burden of applying the final
standard in the first year of application, the Boards tentatively decided that
lessees and lessors may elect the following reliefs:
- An entity is not required to evaluate initial direct costs for contracts
that began before the effective date.
- An entity may use hindsight in comparative reporting periods including the
determination of whether or not a contract is or contains a lease.
The
Boards also tentatively decided that lessees and lessors should provide
transition disclosures consistent with Topic 250, Accounting Changes and Error
Corrections, and IAS 8, Accounting Policies, Changes in Estimates and
Errors, without the disclosure of the effect of the change on income from
continuing operations, net income, any other affected financial statement line
item, and any affected per-share amounts for the current period and any prior
periods retrospectively adjusted. Additionally, if an entity elects any of the
available reliefs, the entity should disclose which reliefs it
elected.
Notwithstanding all of the above tentative decisions on
transition, the Boards tentatively decided that a lessee or lessor could choose
to apply the requirements in the new leases standard retrospectively in
accordance with Topic 250 or IAS 8.
Revenue
recognition. The FASB and the IASB discussed whether an entity
should apply the proposed disclosure requirements in the forthcoming revised
Exposure Draft, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, to interim
financial statements. The Boards decided tentatively to amend Topic 270 on
interim reporting and IAS 34, Interim Financial Reporting, to specify
that an entity that prepares interim financial statements should disclose in its
interim financial statements the following information (if material):
- A disaggregation of revenue
- A tabular reconciliation of the movements in the aggregate balance of
contract assets and contract liabilities for the current reporting
period
- A maturity analysis of remaining performance obligations
- Information on onerous performance obligations and a tabular
reconciliation of the movements in the corresponding onerous liability for the
current reporting period
- A tabular reconciliation of the movements of the assets recognized from
the costs to obtain or fulfill a contract with a customer.
The FASB
observed that the above decision would not be applicable to a nonpublic entity
because a nonpublic entity would not be required to disclose most of the
information above in its annual financial statements.
October
20, 2011 FASB/IASB Joint Board Meeting
Accounting
for financial instruments: impairment. The IASB and the FASB
continued to discuss a “three-bucket” expected loss approach to the impairment
of financial assets.
The Boards decided to pursue a model in which the
overall objective is to reflect the deterioration in the credit quality of
financial assets. Under this approach, recognition of impairment losses would
initially be based on the objective for Bucket 1. The Boards directed the staff
to develop a principle that underpins the measurement attribute of the credit
allowance for financial assets in Bucket 1. In addition, the Boards directed the
staff to develop a principle and indicators for when recognition of lifetime
expected losses becomes appropriate. The Boards emphasized that robust
disclosures will be critical to support the principle-based impairment model and
to ensure comparability between entities. Furthermore, the Boards emphasized
that the staff should consider the application of the model for various types of
financial assets, notably debt securities, and various types of entities,
notably nonfinancial institutions.
Insurance
contracts. The FASB and the IASB continued their discussions on
insurance contracts with the following topics: fixed-fee service contracts,
eligibility criteria for premium allocation approach, and presentation in the
statement of financial position and statement of comprehensive income. The staff
also reported on recent investor outreach activities.
Fixed-Fee
Service Contracts
The Boards tentatively decided to exclude from the
scope of the insurance contracts standard fixed-fee service contracts that
provide service as their primary purpose if they meet all the following
criteria:
- The contracts are not priced on the basis of an assessment of the risk
associated with an individual customer.
- The contracts compensate customers by providing a service, rather than
cash payment.
- The type of risk transferred by the contracts is primarily related to the
utilization (or frequency) of services relative to the overall risk
transferred.
Eligibility Criteria for the Premium Allocation
Approach
The Boards discussed when insurers should apply the premium
allocation approach. No decisions were made.
Presentation in the
Statement of Financial Position
The Boards tentatively decided that:
- An insurer should disaggregate the following components, either in the
statement of financial position or in the notes, in a way that reconciles to
the amounts included in the statement of financial position:
- Expected future cash flows
- Risk adjustment (for the IASB)
- Residual margin (for the IASB)
- The single margin, where relevant (for the FASB)
- The effect of discounting.
- For those contracts measured using the premium allocation approach, the
liability for remaining coverage should be presented separately from the
liability for incurred claims in the statement of financial
position.
- For those contracts measured using the building-block approach, any
unconditional right to any premiums or other consideration should be presented
in the statement of financial position as a receivable separately from the
insurance contract asset or liability and accounted for in accordance with
existing guidance for receivables. The remaining insurance contract rights and
obligations should be presented on a net basis in the statement of financial
position.
- For those contracts measured using the premium allocation approach, all
insurance contract rights and obligations should be presented on a gross basis
in the statement of financial position.
- Liabilities (or assets) for insurance contracts should be presented
separately for those measured using the building-block approach and those
measured using the premium allocation approach.
- Portfolios that are in an asset position should not be aggregated with
portfolios that are in a liability position in the statement of financial
position.
Presentation in the Statement of Comprehensive
Income
The Boards tentatively decided that an insurer should present
premiums, claims, benefits, and the gross underwriting margin in the statement
of comprehensive income. The Boards will consider at a future meeting whether
these items should be presented in the statement of comprehensive income
separately for contracts measured using the building-block approach and the
premium allocation approach.
Next Steps
Both Boards will
continue their discussions on insurance contracts in November
2011.
Accounting
for financial instruments: disclosures. The Boards summarized the
FASB’s decisions on liquidity and interest rate risk disclosures. The meeting
was informational; no decisions were reached.