title / divider screen title - ifrsmedia.ifrs.org/2015/iasb/april/itcg_meeting_21042015_am/full set...
TRANSCRIPT
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation.
International Financial Reporting Standards
ITCG Meeting Tuesday 21 April 2015
April 2015
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
* IFRS Taxonomy is a trade mark of the IFRS Foundation
October 2014
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation.
International Financial Reporting Standards
Update on activities Disclosure Initiative including the IFRS
Taxonomy
April 2015
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
Kristy Robinson – Technical Principal
* IFRS Taxonomy is a trade mark of the IFRS Foundation
October 2014
Agenda Paper 1
• To update members of the ITCG on the Disclosure
Initiative and IFRS Taxonomy developments
• Providing you with an opportunity to answer any
questions you may have
• Giving some background for our discussion today on the
IFRS Taxonomy roadmap and strategy
Aim of this agenda topic
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
3
• The Disclosure Initiative
• Upcoming IFRS Taxonomy releases
• IFRS Taxonomy due process
• Jurisdictional Profiles – access and filing requirements
Note: Appendix 1 lists other areas which may be of interest to you but
which are not discussed in detail today
Agenda
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
4
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
The Disclosure Initiative
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
Why a project? What is the disclosure problem?
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
6
Disclosure problem
Not enough relevant
information
Too much irrelevant
information (overload)
Poor communication
Disclosure Initiative:
improve the effectiveness of disclosures
Disclosure Initiative
Completed projects
Amendments to IAS 1
Ongoing activities
Digital reporting (incl.
the IFRS Taxonomy)
Implementation
project Research projects
Principles of Disclosure
Materiality
Review of existing
Standards/ Drafting guide
Proposed amendments to
IAS 7 ‘debt reconciliation’
Disclosure Initiative Activities
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
7
Our focus today
Why
•Requests for the IASB to develop presentation and disclosure principles that apply across IFRS
•A better ‘disclosure framework’ in IFRS will result in improved disclosures because it will help:
•the IASB set better disclosure requirements in IFRS; and
•entities to make better judgements about what information to disclose and how
Output
•Discussion Paper
•Overall principles and specific issues
•Ultimate goal is to produce a disclosure Standard (IFRS) dealing with the basic structure and content of financial statements
•Redevelop parts of IAS 1 Presentation of financial statements and IAS 8 Accounting policies, changes in accounting estimates and errors
•Education guidance – communication/formatting
Principles of Disclosure (POD) project
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
8
Specific issues
POD – Discussion Paper topics
Wider issues
Non-IFRS information
Disclosure of changes policies and estimates (IAS 8)
Implications for existing Standards Digital reporting
Disclosure objectives
Consistency/comparability of disclosures
Cross-referencing
Accounting policies
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
9
Proportionality
Overarching principles
Roles of ‘primary’ financial statements and the notes
Materiality and aggregation
Communication principles grouping, ordering and formatting
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Upcoming IFRS Taxonomy releases
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
IFRSs impacting the IFRS Taxonomy in 2015/2016
Topic IASB due
process stage
Expected publication
date
Impact on
the IFRS
Taxonomy
IFRS for SMEs review IFRS Q2 2015 significant
Leases IFRS H2 2015 significant
Insurance Contracts IFRS 2015/2016 significant
Amendments to IAS 7 Statement of
Cash Flows
ED Public consultation until
17 April 2015
limited
Macro Hedge Accounting Comment letter
analysis
TBC significant
Rate-regulated Activities Comment letter
analysis
TBC significant
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
11
IFRS Taxonomy common practice content
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
Project scope Due process stage Expected publication
date
Impact on the
IFRS Taxonomy
utilities
information technology
media
chemicals
Review by IASB Board
Member panel
Proposed TU Q2 2015
TU Q3 2015
significant
retail
Research Proposed TU Q4 2015 analysis in
progress
2015/2016 common
practice – TBC
Project evaluation TBC TBC
TU stands for Taxonomy Update
12
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
IFRS Taxonomy due process
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
• In summary, the proposed changes are: – review and approval by the IASB of updates to the Taxonomy
– a [Proposed] Taxonomy Update is the primary consultation
document that accompanies and is published at the same time
as the Exposure Draft of final Standard
• Staff Analysis of Comments on IAS 7 has just started
Content reflecting the Standards (trial 1)
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
14
• This trial incorporates two processes: – initiation of a new common practice project
– additions or amendments to common practice content
• At the December 2014 ITCG call, most of you agreed that a
clear definition of the scope of the IASB’s involvement is
needed to minimise IASB resource impact and to reduce
risks where common practice may be perceived as
authoritative
Common practice (trial 2)
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
15
• The IASB considers ‘peer review by a Board Member Panel’
as the optimal way to mitigate the above risks while at the
same time providing the required assurance that the content
of the IFRS Taxonomy is consistent with IFRSs – the common practice due process trial will proceed on that
basis and is expected to be completed at the end of May
• Appendix 2 describes the process in more depth
Common practice (trial 2) – cont’d
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
16
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Jurisdictional Profiles
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
• Developing 40 jurisdictional profiles: – Asia-Oceania:17, Europe:17, Americas: 4 and Africa: 2
– 30 jurisdictions indicate either using or having a concrete plan
to use XBRL as well as IFRS Taxonomy
• Extent of use of XBRL varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction – Solely for one purpose (eg Stock Exchange)
– Multi-purpose information centre
– Annual reports by listed companies are usually filed using IFRS
Taxonomy; tax return and filings by SMEs are filed using locally
developed taxonomy.
Progress to date
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
18
• First profiles will be released in the first week of June
• Available on website, in PDF as well as in a more interactive
digital format (tentative)
• Further actions – Develop profiles for other jurisdictions
– Update information of developed profiles
– European Transparency Directive
– Rapid development of electronic filing worldwide
Public launch
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
19
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Appendix 1 Other areas of interest
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
IFRS Taxonomy translations
• Optional translations • the IFRS documentation labels : so far no translations have
been received
• From 2015, an additional option for users to filter on the specific
IFRS Taxonomy module they require (ifrs-full, ifrs-smes, ifrs-
mc)
• Other user requirements we know of • Versioned IFRS Taxonomy Illustrated in foreign languages
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
21
Available translations – IFRS Taxonomy
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
WIP – work in progress (requests received and files have been sent out)
Language Latest before 2012 2012 2013 2014
Arabic 2011 X X X
Chinese, simplified 2009
Chinese, traditional 2010
Dutch 2009
French 2009
German 2009
Hungarian 2006 X Q2 2015
Italian 2011 WIP
Japanese 2011 X X X
Korean 2011 X X X
Portuguese (Portugal) 2006
Slovak NA
Spanish 2011 X X X
Ukrainian NA X X WIP
Turkish NA WIP
Total: 6 5 4
22
• At the October 2014 ITCG meeting, we told you that we are
planning to: – review and update the existing terms and conditions for using
the IFRS Taxonomy Materials and ask for explicit acceptance
• A draft has been prepared by the staff, and we will ask for
your review prior to finalising them
• We are hoping to publish the new terms and conditions
towards end Q2 2015
Terms and conditions
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
23
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Appendix 2 The proposed IFRS Taxonomy due
process for common practice
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation.
International Financial Reporting Standards
Update on adoption of the IFRS Taxonomy by regulators
April 2015
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
* IFRS Taxonomy is a trade mark of the IFRS Foundation
October 2014
Agenda Paper 2
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation.
International Financial Reporting Standards
The IFRS Taxonomy roadmap and strategy
April 2015
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
Rita Ogun-Clijmans
Senior Technical Manager
October 2014
Agenda Paper 3
• To inform you of the activities we are planning for the
next twelve months and to ask for your guidance on
specific issues
• To have some initial idea sharing on the broader
strategic vision of the IASBs digital reporting activities
Aims of this agenda topic
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
30
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
The roadmap for the next six months
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
Our focus for the next six months
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
IFRS Taxonomy
due process
IFRS Taxonomy
content
Management of entity-specific
disclosures
Supporting regulators
32
2015/2016
common
practice?
activities we
should
undertake?
• The staff is planning to propose to the Board Member Review
Panel that: i. a new common practice project should be initiated
ii. a combined approach is followed - review of disclosures for specific activities
- review of disclosures for which the IASB may undertake a Post-
Implementation Review in 2015/2016 (under review)
iii. the activities to be selected are ‘Agriculture and Consumer
Staples’ and ‘Hotels, Restaurants and Leisure’
Appendix 1 describes the criteria we have used to select the activities
Potential 2015/2016 common practice: activities to review
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
33
• responding to the needs of regulators will remain our primary
focus in 2015: – they are currently the key users of the IFRS Taxonomy
– they play an essential role in the setting up of electronic filing
systems
– preparers will only fully engage when they will be required to
produce an electronic filing using the IFRS Taxonomy
– investors will only fully engage when there is a critical mass of
data that they ‘trust’ and can ‘try out’
Supporting regulators
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
34
Outreach
Supporting best use of the IFRS Taxonomy
Supporting regulators: activities
Thought leadership
Regional IFRS Taxonomy events and workshops
Management of entity specific disclosures POD Digital reporting
ITCG
Encouraging regular updates (today)
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
35
Guidance for regulators
Adaptable IFRS Taxonomy
Documentation & supporting materials
Common practice participation
Terms and conditions of use
Public consultation Regular meetings
• At the February ITCG call, most of you agreed with the staff
proposal to follow a combined approach for a potential
2015/2016 common practice project. Today, we would like
your views on the activities we are proposing. Do you agree
with our proposals and the criteria we have applied?
• Do you think that our current or planned activities will provide
effective support to regulators? Are there any other general
areas we should concentrate on?
Questions to the ITCG
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
36
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Future focus areas for the IFRS Taxonomy team
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
Future focus areas
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
IFRS Taxonomy data structure Organisation • Examples of activities: abstract and logical data modelling, taxonomy
simplification (duplicate dimensions, elements, …) ...
Improvements Ease of use • Examples of activities: review of the taxonomy modularisation, flexible views,
new navigation codes for elements, review of element naming scheme ….
Investors and preparers Outreach • Examples of activities: educational workshops, implementation guides,
involvement of industry groups within common practice, demonstrate how the IFRS Taxonomy can facilitate investment analysis, ….
38
• What are your experiences using the IFRS Taxonomy? Are
there other areas or activities that you think we should
consider?
Question to the ITCG
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
39
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
IASB digital reporting strategy
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
• The IFRS Foundation recognises that technology is
influencing and changing the way IFRS disclosures are
disseminated by preparers and accessed by users.
• The upcoming Trustee’s review of the structure and
effectiveness of the IFRS Foundation may incorporate
specific questions on this topic.
Role of technology
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
41
As the body responsible for IFRS, our role is to develop a high quality IFRS Taxonomy
that jurisdictions such as Korea can incorporate into their own digital reporting
activities. The IFRS Taxonomy is critical to us achieving our goal of high quality
standards, applied on a globally consistent basis, and, importantly, regardless of
format.
We recently made the strategic decision to align the development of the IFRS
Taxonomy more closely with our standard-setting activities. As a consequence of this
change, digital reporting is considered by the IASB’s technical staff throughout the
project lifecycle, rather than only at the end as an alternative form of presentation. This
also means that Board members are more directly involved in the development of the
IFRS Taxonomy and we are encouraging our constituents to do the same.
http://www.ifrs.org/Alerts/Conference/Documents/2015/Speech-Hans-Mind-the-Gap-speech-Korea-
March-2015.pdf
Current activities and focus
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
42
• Can technology impact the relevance of the IFRS Taxonomy
and IFRSs? If so, how?
• Are these impacts risks or opportunities, and what can we do
to mitigate or exploit them?
Do you have any other ideas or views you would like to share
with us at this time?
And the future?
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
43
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Appendix 1 Criteria and process followed to select
2015/2016 CP activities
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
Overview
Empirical analysis of IFRS filers (listed companies)
• Number of companies
• Investor interest - market value of companies
• Size – revenue of companies
Other considerations
• Estimated impact of new IFRSs or IFRSs being
developed upon the disclosures for specific activities
• Do we anticipate significant common practice?
45
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
Activity Aggrega
te
ranking
Number
ranking
MV
ranking
Revenue
ranking
Agricultural products and consumer
staples
1 1 1 2
Machinery incl Heavy Trucks 2 2 3 6
Automobiles and Components 3 11 2 1
Construction and Engineering 4 3 9 3
Hotels, Restaurants and Leisure 5 4 6 8
Industrial Conglomerates 6 20 5 4
Empirical analysis
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
46
Other considerations
• IAS 41 describes the accounting treatment and disclosures
relating to agriculture activity (effective date 1 January 2003).
• The IFRS Taxonomy has an ELR for IAS 41 incorporating
elements for the ‘disclosures’ and ‘examples’ of this
Standard, but no common practice.
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
47
Other considerations : potential impact of new IFRS
• Construction and Engineering – IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers (effective 1
January 2017) is likely to affect common practice disclosed
• Automobiles and Components – Entities generally have an industrial and financing arm
– As such, the new Leases standard and IFRS 15 is likely to
affect common practice disclosed
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
48
Dow we anticipate significant common practice for this activity?
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
49
• Difficult to anticipate without empirical analysis
• Review of other taxonomies and templates used by data
aggregators – the US GAAP Taxonomy has specific disclosures for
franchisors and entertainment
– some data aggregators have elements to reflect disclosures
specifically to hotels
=> review of Hotels, Restaurants and Leisure may be of interest
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation.
International Financial Reporting Standards
Management of entity specific disclosures – next
steps Andromeda Wood – Senior Technical Manager
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015 Agenda Paper 4
Agenda
• Summary of the work we did during the last face-to-face
ITCG meeting.
• IFRS Taxonomy team actions and comments
• What we propose to do next
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
52
Summary of last meeting • During the October 2014 ITCG face to face meeting we looked at what
different users of the IFRS Taxonomy need to know about entity specific
disclosures (ESDs)
• We divided entity specific disclosures into classes:
– new line items (for standalone items or disaggregation)
– line items for combinations and subtotals
– categories and category values
• We asked you to split into groups and each group discussed a type of
disclosure
• Additionally one group looked at what we could do to help preparers
• A summary of these discussions can be found in an appendix to these
slides
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
53
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
IFRS Taxonomy team actions and comments
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015
IFRS Taxonomy
• Improve IFRS taxonomy
navigation to reduce
unnecessary creation of new
line items
• Analyse IFRS taxonomy to
ensure that entity specific items
will always have some relation
to an existing taxonomy item
(no orphaned items)
Elsewhere
• More detailed analysis of the kind
of links between new items and
existing items required for optimal
use of ESDs
• Examination of XBRL (and other
mechanisms) for providing
linking/grouping information
• Documentation for preparers on
when to use entity specific items.
New line items
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
55
IFRS Taxonomy
• Analyse IFRS taxonomy to
ensure that common
combinations are covered
(within existing common
practice)
• Ideally a long term action
reduces the requirement to
have these directly in the
IFRS Taxonomy
Elsewhere
• Examination of XBRL (and
other) mechanisms for
providing – Linking/grouping information
– indicating a combination of
existing items
– flagging items as of a
certain type of total or
combination
Combinations and subtotals
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
56
IFRS Taxonomy
• Look at the use of generic
(product 1) category values – Where might these be of use in
the IFRS Taxonomy?
– If introduced would they be as
alternatives or replacement?
• A rationalisation of the existing
categories (and line items)
provided in the IFRS
Taxonomy (‘simplification’)
Elsewhere
• Preparer’s guides to
navigating the IFRS
Taxonomy and deciding on
appropriate items including
correct use of IFRS
dimensions and members
Categories and category values
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
57
IFRS Taxonomy
• Investigate IFRS Taxonomy
code based navigation – what kind of code system could
help?
– would codes be appropriate
given no overall IFRS
codification?
• Investigate useful alternative
‘presentation’ views
Elsewhere
• Implementation guides – how
to work with certain kinds of
disclosure when using the
IFRS Taxonomy
• Preparer’s guides to
navigating the IFRS
Taxonomy and deciding on
appropriate items
Helping preparers
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
58
Overall conclusions
• Many of the requirements, and solutions identified, for
improving the use and handling of ESDs are related to
regulatory (or other filing) rules
• Some areas could potentially be supported with changes or
additions to the current IFRS Taxonomy
• Supporting regulators as they set up and update an IFRS
filing environment is essential
• Providing some assistance to preparers may help improve
their filings but also indirectly help regulators if done carefully
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
59
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Proposed actions
April 2015
Proposed overall actions
• IFRS Taxonomy analysis focussing on: – taxonomy items relating to entity specific items
– existing modelling of categories (as domains and otherwise)
– common combinations and subtotals (already included in
common practice projects)
• An investigation into IFRS Taxonomy navigation schemes: – is there a coding system that would consistent and useful?
– which alternative presentation views would be of most use?
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
61
Proposed overall actions
• A published investigation into using entity specific disclosures
with the IFRS Taxonomy. Probably including a look at
possible XBRL (and other) technical mechanisms
• Additions to the new documentation for regulators
• New documentation for preparers including: – implementation guides
– help navigating the taxonomy and choosing appropriate items
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
62
Questions
• Do you see any other areas we could make improvements?
• After some time to reflect are there any additional comments
you would like to make on entity specific disclosures? – are there any additional organisations or individuals working in
this area we should talk to?
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
63
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Appendix A: October group discussions
April 2015
New line items
• Preparers require – solutions that handle their material items properly
– provide consistency between paper filing and structured
electronic filing
• Investors are looking for – comparability
– the ability to dive deeper into the information to understand
entity-specific variability.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
65
New line items
• For disclosures representing entity-specific disaggregation of
existing IFRS Taxonomy elements – the use of linked extensions e.g. extension elements are created for entity-
specific disclosures but associated with existing IFRS Taxonomy
elements.
– the use of ‘negative tag flagging’, i.e. an IFRS Taxonomy element tag is
used to tag an entity-specific disclosure but with a negative tag flag to
indicate that the entity-specific disclosure is akin to, but not necessarily
identical with, the IFRS Taxonomy element.
• a base taxonomy could include some specific features to
cater for the use of linked extensions.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
66
Combinations and subtotals
• Efficient data relationship management is the optimal way to
handle entity specific combinations and subtotals that are
disaggregated in the notes.
• Tagging of combinations and subtotals may not be necessary
to meet the needs of investors
• Custom combinations and subtotals could be viewed as ‘not
extension’ as they are not wholly new reporting items
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
67
Combinations and subtotals
• ‘Double tag’ rather than creating an extension element. – double tagging means that a disclosure can be tagged with two (or more)
elements of the IFRS Taxonomy or extension and IFRS Taxonomy.
– a relationship could then be specified between the two tags applied (e.g.
this item is a combination of…)
– double tagging and better data relationship management may, however,
require changes to the XBRL technical standards.
• An alternative option to non-tagging or double tagging is to
flag these combinations and subtotals as entity-specific
aggregation points.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
68
Categories and category values
• Handling entity-specific disclosures depends on the number of
disclosures expected to be reported within a particular IFRS
Taxonomy category.
– for categories in which the potential number of entity-specific
disclosures is expected to be large, it is not clear whether
meaningful analysis can be obtained from tagging entity-
specific disclosures through the use of entity specific extension
elements.
– the use of generic IFRS Taxonomy category elements (for
example, product line 1, product line 2) could be considered in
this case.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
69
Categories and category values
• For generic IFRS Taxonomy category elements to be useful
for all types of investors, the following two conditions are
required: – entity specific labels are provided; and
– a specific generic category element to depict a disclosure is
consistently used over time by an entity.
• For categories in which the potential data set of entity-
specific disclosures is expected to be relatively small, tagging
of entity-specific disclosures through the use of entity-specific
extension elements could still be useful.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
70
Helping preparers
• Searching is difficult
• First time for individual is hard
• Regulatory rules are diverse
• Taxonomy changes annually
• Diverse disclosures – disaggregation
– subtotals
– stand alone items
– immaterial items reported
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
71
Helping preparers
• Essential activities
– the development of implementation guides and the integration of
the [Proposed] IFRS Taxonomy Updates within the Standards
– the integration of the [Proposed] IFRS Taxonomy Updates within
the Standards will allow preparers to become familiar with the
taxonomy at an early stage
• Activities that were rated as important were
– improved taxonomy navigation;
– continuation of common practice projects; and
– better collaboration with industry groups.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
72
Thank you
Expressions of individual views
by members of
the IASB and its staff
are encouraged.
The views expressed in this presentation are those
of the presenter. Official positions of the IASB on
accounting matters are determined only after extensive due
process and deliberation.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
73
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation.
International Financial Reporting Standards
Encouraging external taxonomy updates Andromeda Wood – Senior Technical Manager
April 2015 Agenda Paper 5
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
Agenda
• What we mean when we talk about ‘taxonomy updates’
• Why we care about IFRS Taxonomy versions and
update frequency
• Some factors we think may affect updates
• Breakout sessions – What are the factors affecting update to newer taxonomy
versions? How do they vary by circumstance?
– Are there any actions we should take to encourage regular
external taxonomy updates?
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
75
IFRS Taxonomy update
• An IFRS Taxonomy update is:
• An update might include changes resulting from: – A new or amended standard
– Common practice items
– Corrections and improvements
– Architectural updates
A change to the IFRS Taxonomy resulting in a new Interim Release or
the annual IFRS Taxonomy (a compilation of all previous Interim
Releases).
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
76
External taxonomy update
• An external taxonomy update is:
• This newer version could be: – the latest annual taxonomy
– the latest final interim release
– any other more recent taxonomy than the version currently in use
– an addition to an allowed set of IFRS Taxonomies in use
The move from an older version of the IFRS Taxonomy in a system or
extension taxonomy to a newer version of the IFRS Taxonomy
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
77
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the
presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Why we care about external taxonomy
updates
April 2015
Advantages of updating
• The latest disclosures for new standards will be available
supporting early application.
• Expiring disclosures are identified
• References and documentation across the IFRS Taxonomy
(not just with new items) are updated with new and amended
standards
• Common practice additions improve coverage
• Corrections may be made to existing taxonomy items and
other improvements may be beneficial (for example
separation of SMEs)
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
79
Advantages of updating – cont’d
• To aid comparability: – Is an item from 2009 comparable with one from
2015?
– Is an extension from 2011 the same as the new
common practice item from 2015?
• To reduce the number of old versions of the IFRS
Taxonomy we continue to support
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
80
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the
presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Examples of factors affecting updates
April 2015
IFRS Taxonomy
• The IFRS Taxonomy update schedule
• The IFRS Taxonomy design
– navigation
– identification of new items and other changes
– access to elements
– identification of element/taxonomy version
• The materials provided with the IFRS Taxonomy
• For more detail on the IFRS Taxonomy see Appendix A
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
82
External factors
• Endorsement processes for IFRS
• Endorsement/approval processes for the IFRS
Taxonomy
• Changes in local law and regulation e.g. new local
company law
• Existing update schedules for filing systems
• The size and complexity of filing systems, software and
extension taxonomies
• Impact on system users © IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
83
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the
presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Breakout sessions
April 2015
What we want to look at today
• The aim of the following breakout sessions is to
identify the factors (including business
requirements) affecting external updates of the
IFRS Taxonomy in different filing environments.
• We will look at: – systems with a regulator/owner extension
– filing environments with some kind of preparer
extension/entity specific disclosures
– systems using the IFRS Taxonomy directly
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
85
Breakout group discussion topics Regulator extension
• Regulator has created an extension taxonomy based on the IFRS Taxonomy
• This extension includes any number of IFRS Taxonomy items
• It may include use of IFRS labels, references and other linkbases
• System specific items may also be added via parallel taxonomies rather than direct extension
Preparer extension
• The IFRS Taxonomy is used within a filing system expecting preparers to add entity specific items in some fashion
• The system may require preparers to create US style taxonomy extensions or may use another mechanism
• This may be to the IFRS Taxonomy directly or to a regulator extension of the IFRS Taxonomy
As published
• The IFRS Taxonomy is used as published with no extension provided or allowed.
• It may have accompanying documentation specific to the filing system however.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
86
Features in common
• Documentation
• A taxonomy used: – solely for that system or
– shared with other organisations
• A filing that is: – used internally
– published for external users
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
87
Breakout group members Regulator extension Preparer extension As published
Board room Victoria room (downstairs – GFW)
Cannon room (downstairs – GFE)
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
88
Binh La/Doug Niven
Jinguang Zhao
Joanne Locke
John Dill
Lou Rohman
Marshall Matthews
Michal Piechocki
Ying Wei
Anna Beck
Krishnan
Balachandran
Louis Matherne
Masatomo Goto
Patricia Myles
Roxana Damianov
Thomas Egan
Carlo Alzati
Chie Mitsui
Indrit Troshani
Jim Truscott
Kimberly Earle
Koichi Kikuchi
Kyle Lamb
Maciej Piechocki
William Gee
Questions to consider • Reasons to update – are they compelling? What other
reasons might there be?
• What are the different factors affecting update for your
type of filing system? Rate these by importance.
• Do any of the features of the IFRS Taxonomy at the
moment affect update?
• Are there external factors affecting update?
• What could the IFRS Taxonomy team do to improve the
update frequency?
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
89
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the
presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Appendix A: IFRS Taxonomy updates and
structure
April 2015
IFRS Taxonomy update process
MARCH MARCH
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
91
Which files are available when?
Typ
e o
f rele
ase
XB
RL
files
Up
da
te
do
cu
me
nt
IFR
S
Taxo
no
my
Illustra
ted
ITI +
track
ch
an
ges
XB
RL
vers
ion
ing
rep
ort
Do
cu
me
nta
tion
lab
els
xIF
RS
Illustra
tive
exam
ple
s
Proposed
interim
release O O O O O X
Final interim
release O O Annual IFRS
Taxonomy X
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
92
New element availability
• New elements are added to the IFRS Taxonomy when: – A new standard is issued
– A standard is amended
– A common practice project has been completed
– We receive feedback that an element is missing
• These elements are added during the year and are available
from the final version of the appropriate interim release.
• Each interim release is based on previous interim release (or
annual taxonomy)
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
93
Use of new elements
• New elements may be – immediately effective or
– more commonly, they may have an associated date when the
standard (or amendments to a standard) become effective.
• They may also be applied early if specified by the standard
or amendment. – The effective date can be found with the reference.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
94
Expiring element availability
• Elements expire (are deprecated) from the annual
taxonomy after they reach the expiry date for the
relevant standard (or pre-amendment version of a
standard)
• In the case of a correction or immediate
replacement they are expired during the
appropriate interim or annual release
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
95
Accessing elements
• The IFRS Taxonomy has a partially modular file
structure*
• The presentation, definition and calculation linkbases
are split by standard (or section in IFRS for SMEs)
• Labels are split by element schema
• Element schemas are split into Full IFRS, Management
commentary, IFRS for SMEs and deprecated elements
*The file structure is the way the XBRL schemas and linkbases are
broken down into individual files and folders (modules)
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
96
The version of an IFRS Taxonomy release is indicated by:
Identifying IFRS Taxonomy updates
Version information Where Example
Date File names (not folder names)
full_ifrs-cor_2015-03-11.xsd
Date Namespace (IFRS identifier
associated with elements)
http://xbrl.ifrs.org/taxonomy/20
15-03-11/ifrs-full
Status of release Documentation only Interim, annual
Type of change (standard, CP, architecture)
Documentation only New standard, amended
standard, common practice,
architecture
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
98
How we identify updated elements
• An issue date is provided with each reference (set to the
release date for all elements on annual release)
• An XBRL versioning report is produced with each release
• Changes to the IFRS Taxonomy are highlighted using red &
green line formatting in the IFRS Taxonomy illustrated with
versioning information
• New and amended items are identified with each release in
the IFRS Taxonomy update document
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
99
Examples – versioning reports
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
100
Thank you
Expressions of individual views
by members of
the IASB and its staff
are encouraged.
The views expressed in this presentation are those
of the presenter. Official positions of the IASB on
accounting matters are determined only after extensive due
process and deliberation.
© IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
101
XII UPDATE Updating the ITCG on XBRL
International Developments
John Dill
Member of the XII Board of Directors
April 21, 2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The XII Board holds the view that there continues to be significant work to do
at a technical and implementation guidance perspective in order to further
improve regulatory reporting. It is also time for the XBRL community to turn its
attention towards discovering the value associated with standardization in the
context of enterprise reporting.
XII is working on a number of fronts to expand the capabilities of the standard,
enhance the XBRL brand, explore new areas for adoption, provide guidance
to implementers and enhance the membership and funding base of the XBRL
consortium.
The XBRL community and staff stand ready to assist the ITCG in its efforts in
this field.
Our purpose is to improve the accountability and transparency of
business performance everywhere, by being the open data exchange standard
for business reporting.
Improve accountability and
transparency – purpose of any
act of record keeping.
Business
performance itself –
not just reporting
(“Business” meaning every kind of
organization, including government,
regulators, corporations, not-for-
profits and supply chains) We are the open data exchange standard for
business reporting – that’s how we improve
business performance.
What is the XBRL consortium for?
(“Open” in the
sense that the
standard is freely
licensed. It does
not necessarily
mean that data
collected is openly
available, even
though this is a
trend. Much will
always remain
private.)
Regulatory Reporting
The “First Chapter” in XBRL
• Regulatory reporting, including regulatory reporting to
securities regulators and business registrars via XBRL is
extremely well established world wide.
• 90-100* projects across more than 45 countries.
• > ~10M companies use XBRL at least annually around the
world and this continues to grow.
• XBRL is the embedded standard, but XII is keenly aware that
the community needs to continue to improve and simplify
what has been achieved to date in order to enhance
outcomes and further expand adoption.
XII develops and maintains the specifications and promotes adoption, including via jurisdictions.
10 million + businesses use XBRL for reporting today.
15 years in XBRL is an important part of the reporting landscape, but we are still at the beginning of the process of moving to structured data exchange in this field.
* XII has not had the resources to collaborate effectively with the IFRS team on its current Jurisdictional survey. However staff are currently working to carry out a survey and interviews via an intern, which should improve the accuracy of these estimates.
The Next Chapter
Enterprise Reporting – the “Second Chapter” in XBRL
• Developments in “Big Data” technology now make it practical to leverage the benefits of data standardization at a
transactional or ledger level.
• Standardized transactional data streams allow preparation of reports in near real time.
• We are at the very earliest implementations in this field but this is likely the area that XBRL will next focus on.
• Likely to be a 10 year effort.
• IFRS and other primary taxonomies a key part of the puzzle.
Big Data capabilities mean that the entire enterprise can benefit from XBRL-based standardization of transactional and ledger level data.
Requires additional standardization and lengthy ecosystem development period.
Some Current Initiatives Open Information Model, or OIM
• Simplify representation of XBRL. • Initially, provide way of republishing data in
alternative formats to assist analytics.
Body of Knowledge • Develop formal framework providing
implementation and technical guidance. • Supports training and certification.
Other guidance • Detailed dimensions guidance via WG note. • Ongoing taxonomy architecture guidance. • Detailed extensible enumerations guidance.
OIM to make XBRL more accessible for developers, initially for analysis.
Body of Knowledge designed to expand skills
Detailed guidance to support projects
Taxonomy Registry Taxonomy Registry
• Provide central index of XBRL taxonomies • Encourage reuse and discovery
Taxonomy registry to supersede taxonomy recognition.
Might be an area for IFRS collaboration.
XBRL International Taxonomy Architecture Guidance continues to expand and we expect Taxonomy Recognition to resume in the future.
• XII has long run a “Taxonomy Recognition” program, but the
mechanics and supporting guidance are now outdated.
• XII is replacing Recognition with a Taxonomy Registry, which will provide a central index of taxonomies (and where relevant, links to data repositories that conform to those taxonomies).
• This might be an area that the ITCG could get involved in – National IFRS extensions might be of specific interest to the IASB
and we could work towards an index or view for these purposes.
Funding Initiative
• In order to expand the capabilities of the standard and
in order to make the consortium’s financial position more
resilient, the XBRL Board will shortly commence a
fundraising program.
• Funding will accelerate a number of initiatives, including
the “Body of Knowledge”.
• Further updates will be provided as we move forward.
XII will embark on
a fundraising
effort in H2 2015.
Funding initiative • Expand the capabilities of XBRL. • Increased financial resilience.
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation.
International Financial Reporting Standards
IFRS Taxonomy (IFRST) Technology
Wladek Krawiec – IT project manager (IFRS Taxonomy)
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015 Agenda Paper 7
Agenda
• Extensible enumerations
• IFRS Taxonomy Versioning information – update
• Interactive IFRS Taxonomy Illustrated with
documentation labels
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
112
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Extensible enumerations
April 2015
Enumerations
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
114
• Introduction
– The XBRL 2.1 Specification supports basic enumerations through
XML Schema datatypes
– The new XBRL Specification regarding Extensible enumerations
has been released with the status of Recommendation in
October 2014 by XBRL International (XII)
• What are Enumerations? – A predefined and complete list of values. Usually used for a fact
reported in an XBRL document to give a predefined set of
options to an XBRL Instance preparer.
Enumerations
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
115
• At the moment, the IFRS Taxonomy does not use
enumerations and does not contain many elements for which
enumerations would be significantly beneficial.
• Proposed use of Enumerations – Example
Description of inventory cost formulas:
Extensible enumerations - characteristics
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
116
• The key benefit of the extensible enumerations is that they
allow a preparer to customise predefined set of options in a
published Taxonomy in order to meet their requirements.
• The customisation is based on defining the additional items for
enumeration as part of the extension Taxonomy. The core
schema of the base taxonomy remains unaffected.
Extensible enumeration – Our view
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
117
• We have reviewed the new features offered by
extensible enumerations, but we do not expect to
use them in the short term. We will, however, take
new possibilities into account when further
developing the IFRS Taxonomy.
Enumerations – Questions
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
118
• Should we consider using enumerations in the IFRS
Taxonomy?
• Do you see any cases where including extensible
enumerations in the existing IFRS Taxonomy would
be useful?
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
The IFRST Versioning Information
April 2015
IFRST Versioning information
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
120
A set of two files describing the differences between two IFRS
Taxonomies.
• The set consists of:
– Versioning Report (xml file) - usually utilised by an XBRL
processor.
– IFRS Taxonomy Versioning Visualisation (html file).
• Based on ITCG feedback the IFRS Taxonomy Versioning
Report (xml file) has been aligned to the newest XII
Specification (excluding the Versioning Dimension
specification)
IFRST Versioning Information – update
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
121
• Previously the IFRS Taxonomy Versioning Information was
only available in the English language
• Since April 2015 Versioning Information is available in multiple
languages
– Currently available for the 2013 and 2014 IFRS Taxonomy
translations (Arabic, Japanese, Korean and Spanish).
– We will now be adding translated versioning information between
annual taxonomy releases as translations become available.
Example of the IFRS Taxonomy versioning visualisation in Japanese
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
122
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Interactive IFRST Illustrated
April 2015
Interactive IFRST Illustrated
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
124
The IFRST Illustrated (ITI) is a document that present the
structure of the IFRST in a simplified, visual format that does not
require knowledge of XBRL.
The purpose of making it interactive is:
• to leverage the use of the IFRS Taxonomy documentation
labels
• to ease navigating through the IFRS Taxonomy elements and
its definitions
• additional supporting material for the IFRS Taxonomy
Interactive IFRST Illustrated - example
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
125
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation.
International Financial Reporting Standards
IFRS Taxonomy content ITCG meeting
Bartek Czajka – Senior Technical Manager
Richard Fraser – Assistant Technical Manager
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
April 2015 Agenda Paper 8
Agenda
• Update on common practice (CP) project
– Discussions with the Technical Staff
– Considerations for future CP projects
– Meeting with the Board Review Panel
• IFRS for SMEs amendments
• Early application – ’disclosure of fact’
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
128
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Update on common practice project
April 2015
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Discussions with the Technical Staff
April 2015
Discussions with the Technical Staff (TS)
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
131
We have discussed the proposed list of elements internally with
the TS. As a result of this, areas for further analysis have been
proposed. These included:
• Technology
• Programming assets (including current and non-current
breakdowns)
• Combinations of classes of property, plant and equipment
We have performed the requested analysis.
Discussions with the TS – technology
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
132
• The Technical Staff questioned whether “Technology” should be
a separate class of intangible assets or whether it is synonymous
with existing classes such as “computer software”, “recipes,
designs and prototypes”, “copyrights, patents and other rights”
• Reporting practice indicates that companies disclose technology
as a separate class of intangible assets and they do not explain
what is included in it
• Illustrative examples to IFRS 3 use and describe the term
“technology-based intangible assets”
Discussions with the TS – technology
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
133
• The following has been proposed:
– Adjust the label of the proposed element from “Technology”
to “Technology-based intangible assets” and propose this
element as a separate class of intangible assets
– Adjust the definition of the proposed element from “a class of
intangible assets representing technology” to “a class of
intangible assets representing assets based on technology.
Such assets may include patented and unpatented
technology, databases as well as trade secrets”
Discussions with the TS – programming assets
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
134
• Programming assets is a concept common to media related
activities, in particular to the broadcasting sector.
• Programming assets are often presented separately on the face
of the financial statements (including the breakdown into current
and non-current)
• The TS raised concerns regarding the classification of
programming assets. They asked whether programming assets
were not a class of intangible assets that was reported
separately due to its significance.
Discussions with the TS – programming assets
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
135
• Having analysed the classification of programming assets in
various financial statements, we have found out that
programming assets are defined and classified differently by
companies, either as intangible assets, inventories or both.
• The following has been proposed:
– Retain the proposed positioning of “Programming assets” in
the IFRS Taxonomy under the “Miscellaneous assets”
heading (therefore avoiding the classification as either
intangible assets or inventories)
– Seek feedback on this during public consultation
Discussions with the TS – classes of PPE
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
136
• Our 2014 common practice analysis identified various combinations of
PPE, specifically:
– Plant and machinery
– Plant and equipment
– Machinery and equipment
• The TS pointed out that:
– None of these combinations are defined in IFRS
– These combinations may have a conceptually equivalent meaning
– IFRS Taxonomy elements such as “Machinery”, “Fixtures and
fittings” or “Office equipment” could potentially be used
Discussions with the TS – classes of PPE
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
137
– Including these items may imply that preparers should only
apply tags with precisely matching labels and therefore
create extensions for every slight difference in labelling,
regardless of the actual accounting meaning
• The TS noted that it might be more useful to provide a top
down structured breakdown of classes of ‘property, plant and
equipment’ within the taxonomy rather than provide a flat list
which includes many potential combinations
Discussions with the TS – classes of PPE
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
138
• The following has been proposed:
– Consider analysing reported combinations of classes of
assets and liabilities in more detail as a part of the Disclosure
Initiative project
– Defer the proposals for additional combinations of classes of
PPE until a general analysis is performed
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Considerations for future CP projects
April 2015
Suggestions from the TS
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
140
For future common practice projects, the TS have suggested the following:
• Further investigate (for example, by analysing accounting policies and
related notes) each potential CP element before proposing it:
– Ensures that the accounting meaning of proposed elements is
captured; and not just the label
– Helps to avoid unwarranted interpretation of the accounting meaning
of potential elements
– Allows for clearer understanding of how an element is classified and
hence better positioning in the Taxonomy.
Suggestions from the TS
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
141
• Reconsider our approach to creating documentation labels –
investigate the potential for clarifying the accounting content of
proposed elements, for instance by means of additional
examples or guidance
(If undertaken, this is likely to become a separate project, due to its
extensive scope and significance. Other functions of the Organisation may
need to be included - Board Members, Education)
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Meeting with the Board Review Panel
April 2015
Meeting with the Board Review Panel
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
143
• The Staff will present a paper to the BRP on April 8, 2015*
• The aim of this paper is to:
– Present the findings of the 2014 Common Practice Project
– Highlight two specific issues for which we seek the feedback
by the BRP
1) The use of alternative performance measures such as
EBIT, EBITDA and net debt
2) The use of ‘Profit (loss)’ as a part of the equity section of
the statement of financial position in the IFRS Taxonomy
* We will update you on the outcome of this meeting during the ITCG meeting
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
IFRS for SMEs – amendments
April 2015
IFRS for SMEs - timeline
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
145
• The IFRS for SMEs standard was published in July 2009, with
the intention to undertake a review of its implementation after
two years of its use.
• Consequently, in June 2012 the IASB decided to seek public
views on whether there is a need to make any amendments to
the IFRS for SMEs and, if so, what amendments should be
made (Request for Information).
• Based on the feedback received, the IASB published an
Exposure Draft of the proposed amendments in October 2013
(comment period ended in March 2014)
IFRS for SMEs - timeline
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
146
• In October 2014, the SME Implementation Group report was
made available. The report contained recommendations of the
Group on proposals included in the Exposure Draft.
• The IASB finalised its technical discussions on the amendments
(including analysis of public comments on the Exposure Draft) in
December 2014.
• The final amendments to the IFRS for SMEs will be published in
Q2 2015.
IFRS for SMEs – impact on the IFRST
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
147
The projected impact of the changes on the IFRS Taxonomy for
SMEs:
• Significant – remodelling, new elements, elements deprecated,
documentation label changes
• Non-controversial – changes mostly align IFRS for SMEs to full
IFRS
The changes will be effective 1 January 2017.
IFRS for SMEs - amendments
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
148
The main amendments to the IFRS for SMEs (from the IFRS Taxonomy
perspective):
• Separation of investment property accounted for under the cost model
from property, plant and equipment
• Addition of an option to use the revaluation model for property, plant
and equipment (similarly to full IFRS)
• Separation of items within OCI that may and may not be reclassified to
profit or loss (similarly to full IFRS)
• Alignment of income tax section to IAS 12 Income taxes
IFRS for SMEs - amendments
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
149
Other amendments to the IFRS for SMEs:
• Clarification of “undue cost or effort” exemption (and a related
disclosure) in various sections of the Standard
• Addition of option to account for investees using the equity method in
separate financial statements
• Alignment to IFRS 1 to permit multiple applications of Section 35
(Transition to the IFRS for SMEs)
• Some amendments to definitions of terms (eg combined and separate
financial statements, related party) and new definitions (eg active
market, transaction costs)
IFRS for SMEs – modularisation benefits
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
150
• Until and including IFRS Taxonomy 2013, IFRS for SMEs and
full IFRS constituted one core schema.
• In 2014, after long deliberations, we split the Taxonomy into
separate core schemas.
• Having separate core schemas enables independent
management of elements (including names, labels,
documentation labels and references). There is no pressure to
re-use the full IFRS elements for IFRS for SMEs purposes.
• The following slides present benefits of the current solution.
IFRS for SMEs – modularisation benefits
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
151
• Different labels:
Element name EffectOfTransitionToIFRSsMember
Full IFRS label Effect of transition to IFRSs [member]
SMEs label Effect of transition to IFRS for SMEs [member]
Element name StatementOfIFRSCompliance
Full IFRS label Statement of IFRS compliance [text block]
SMEs label Statement of compliance with IFRS for SMEs [text block]
IFRS for SMEs – modularisation benefits
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
152
• Different documentation labels:
Element name BusinessCombinationsMember
Full IFRS label This member stands for transactions or other events in which an acquirer obtains control of one or more businesses.
SMEs label This member stands for the bringing together of separate entities or businesses into one reporting entity.
Element name InvestmentsInJointVentures
Full IFRS label A joint venture is a joint arrangement whereby the parties that have joint control of the arrangement have rights to the net assets of the arrangement.
SMEs label A joint venture is a contractual arrangement whereby two or more parties undertake an economic activity that is subject to joint control.
International Financial Reporting Standards
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter,
not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation
Early application – disclosure of fact
April 2015
Early application – disclosure of fact
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
154
• Most new IASB publications (new IFRSs and amendments to
existing IFRSs) include in the ’Effective date and transition’ the
following requirement (highlighted):
• In the IFRS Taxonomy, the above disclosure requirement has
so far remained intentionally untagged.
• We have received a comment that it might be beneficial to
have separate ’early application’ elements for each occurence
Early application – example disclosure
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
155
Early application
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
156
We believe such disclosure is initially covered by the general
requirements of:
IAS 8.28
Early application
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
157
These requirements are represented by the following table in the
IFRS Taxonomy:
Early application
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
158
After initial application, we believe the disclosure should be part of
the accounting policies disclosure, as required by IAS 1:
The IFRS Taxonomy includes text block elements for each
significant accounting policy applied by an entity.
Early application
© 2015 IFRS Foundation. 30 Cannon Street | London EC4M 6XH | UK. www.ifrs.org
159
QUESTIONS:
Do you think the current representation is sufficient for the
disclosure of the fact of early application of an IFRS or an
amendment to an IFRS? Or should we consider separate text
elements?
If you prefer separate elements, should those elements:
• have any effective date?
• have any expiry date (eg. application date of a Standard)?