Senaste nytt från IASB och EFRAG

668 views

Published on

Stig Enevoldsen, Deloitte Danmark och f.d. ordförande EFRAG, European Financial Reporting Advisory Group.


Att följa med i normgivarnas arbete kan vara en såväl utmanande som tidskrävande uppgift. Få personer är bättre skickade att förklara hur föreslagna och antagna standarder påverkar kraven på ditt företags finansiella rapportering än Stig Enevoldsen. På sitt engagerade och synnerliga pålästa sätt presenterar han här allt som är värt att veta om IASB´s och EFRAG´s arbete just nu. Fokus i presentationen ligger på de omfattande förändringar som aviserats i IFRS standarden med början i januari 2012.

Published in: Travel, Entertainment & Humor
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
668
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
109
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Joint proposals : 16 page document Clear distinction is always made in publications between pro-active work and endorsement advise. EFRAG aims to reach a tentative view on endorsement no later than the publication date of an IASB pronouncement. In general, a period of one month is allowed for comments to be given to EFRAG. In the case of a negative advice of the TEG, this advice will be directly submitted to the Commission. The Supervisory Board will submit a separate statement directly to the Commission to provide its commentary. A decision to give negative endorsement advice requires the minimum consent of two thirds of the members of the TEG (an abstention will be counted as a vote in favour of the endorsement). Endorsement: a) not contrary to the true and fair view principle (4 th and 7 th Directives) b) meet the criteria of understandability, relevance, reliability and comparability Status Endorsement by the Commission of IFRS standards extant on September 14 2002 (effective date IAS Regulation): ARC meeting of July 16 is expected to vote on the split endorsement : all but financial instruments standards (IAS 32/39 and 3 related SICs). Reason is that the amendments currently being considered may be so considerable. It is acknowledged that the existence of high quality standards dealing with financial instruments, including derivatives, is important to the Community capital market.
  • Joint proposals : 16 page document Clear distinction is always made in publications between pro-active work and endorsement advise. EFRAG aims to reach a tentative view on endorsement no later than the publication date of an IASB pronouncement. In general, a period of one month is allowed for comments to be given to EFRAG. In the case of a negative advice of the TEG, this advice will be directly submitted to the Commission. The Supervisory Board will submit a separate statement directly to the Commission to provide its commentary. A decision to give negative endorsement advice requires the minimum consent of two thirds of the members of the TEG (an abstention will be counted as a vote in favour of the endorsement). Endorsement: a) not contrary to the true and fair view principle (4 th and 7 th Directives) b) meet the criteria of understandability, relevance, reliability and comparability Status Endorsement by the Commission of IFRS standards extant on September 14 2002 (effective date IAS Regulation): ARC meeting of July 16 is expected to vote on the split endorsement : all but financial instruments standards (IAS 32/39 and 3 related SICs). Reason is that the amendments currently being considered may be so considerable. It is acknowledged that the existence of high quality standards dealing with financial instruments, including derivatives, is important to the Community capital market.
  • Joint proposals : 16 page document Clear distinction is always made in publications between pro-active work and endorsement advise. EFRAG aims to reach a tentative view on endorsement no later than the publication date of an IASB pronouncement. In general, a period of one month is allowed for comments to be given to EFRAG. In the case of a negative advice of the TEG, this advice will be directly submitted to the Commission. The Supervisory Board will submit a separate statement directly to the Commission to provide its commentary. A decision to give negative endorsement advice requires the minimum consent of two thirds of the members of the TEG (an abstention will be counted as a vote in favour of the endorsement). Endorsement: a) not contrary to the true and fair view principle (4 th and 7 th Directives) b) meet the criteria of understandability, relevance, reliability and comparability Status Endorsement by the Commission of IFRS standards extant on September 14 2002 (effective date IAS Regulation): ARC meeting of July 16 is expected to vote on the split endorsement : all but financial instruments standards (IAS 32/39 and 3 related SICs). Reason is that the amendments currently being considered may be so considerable. It is acknowledged that the existence of high quality standards dealing with financial instruments, including derivatives, is important to the Community capital market.
  • Joint proposals : 16 page document Clear distinction is always made in publications between pro-active work and endorsement advise. EFRAG aims to reach a tentative view on endorsement no later than the publication date of an IASB pronouncement. In general, a period of one month is allowed for comments to be given to EFRAG. In the case of a negative advice of the TEG, this advice will be directly submitted to the Commission. The Supervisory Board will submit a separate statement directly to the Commission to provide its commentary. A decision to give negative endorsement advice requires the minimum consent of two thirds of the members of the TEG (an abstention will be counted as a vote in favour of the endorsement). Endorsement: a) not contrary to the true and fair view principle (4 th and 7 th Directives) b) meet the criteria of understandability, relevance, reliability and comparability Status Endorsement by the Commission of IFRS standards extant on September 14 2002 (effective date IAS Regulation): ARC meeting of July 16 is expected to vote on the split endorsement : all but financial instruments standards (IAS 32/39 and 3 related SICs). Reason is that the amendments currently being considered may be so considerable. It is acknowledged that the existence of high quality standards dealing with financial instruments, including derivatives, is important to the Community capital market.
  • Senaste nytt från IASB och EFRAG

    1. 1. FINANCIAL REPORTING Stig Enevoldsen Former chairman of EFRAG Stockholm – 27 September 2011
    2. 2. IASB chairman Stockholm 27 September 2011
    3. 3. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    4. 4. IASB Chairman Stockholm 27 September 2011 <ul><li>Hans H: </li></ul><ul><li>Former politician </li></ul><ul><li>Chairman of the Dutch regulator </li></ul><ul><li>Chairman Monitoring Board </li></ul><ul><li>Co – chair F. I. Advisory Group </li></ul>
    5. 5. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    6. 6. Stockholm 27 September 2011 IASB Chairman He also said: “ Without proper transparency about risks, stability is bound to collapse in the end. Stability is not the same as transparency, but there can be no durable stability without transparency
    7. 7. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    8. 8. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    9. 9. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    10. 10. IFRS Foundation Trustee chairman Stockholm 27 September 2011 Been vacant for almost a year
    11. 11. The IASB Work programme Stockholm 27 September 2011
    12. 12. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Recent standards issued <ul><li>Many standards issued </li></ul><ul><li>IFRS 10 Consolidation </li></ul><ul><li>IFRS 11 Joint Arrangements </li></ul><ul><li>IFRS 12 Disclosures of interest in other entities </li></ul><ul><li>IFRS 13 Fair Value Measurement </li></ul><ul><li>IAS 19 (R) Pensions </li></ul>
    13. 13. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Recent standards issued <ul><li>Some standards amended </li></ul><ul><li>IAS 12 Tax (recovery of assets at FV) </li></ul><ul><li>IAS 1 Presentation of OCI </li></ul><ul><li>IAS 27 (R) Separate </li></ul><ul><li>IAS 28 (R) Associates </li></ul><ul><li>Annual improvements </li></ul>
    14. 14. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Re-exposure? Reopened?
    15. 15. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    16. 16. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    17. 17. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    18. 18. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    19. 19. Agenda Consultation Stockholm 27 September 2011 Five strategic areas
    20. 20. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Strategic areac
    21. 21. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Agenda Consultation
    22. 22. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Agenda Consultation
    23. 23. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Agenda Consultation
    24. 24. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Agenda Consultation
    25. 25. The present active IASB agenda to be reconsidered and project sugesstions Stockholm 27 September 2011 Agenda Consultation
    26. 26. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    27. 27. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    28. 28. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    29. 29. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    30. 30. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    31. 31. Stockholm 27 September 2011 EFRAG views <ul><li>Period of calm </li></ul><ul><li>Need for evidence based agenda process </li></ul><ul><li>Convergence should not rule agenda </li></ul><ul><li>Limit the number of projects </li></ul><ul><li>Framework and Disclosure FW </li></ul><ul><li>Use research but not use many resources </li></ul><ul><li>No proposal on specific projects </li></ul>Please respond to EFRAG re specific projects
    32. 32. Countries on IFRS Stockholm 27 September 2011
    33. 33. FRANCE IASB UK US/FASB JAPAN GERMANY AUS CANADA SPAIN Accounting languages ? INDIA China Stockholm 27 September 2011 BRAZIL ? ? ?
    34. 34. Roadmaps issued by Japanese FSA and US SEC on whether to allow or require US and Japanese companies to use IFRS IFRS – USA and JAPAN Stockholm 27 September 2011
    35. 35. <ul><li>Japanese roadmap </li></ul><ul><li>Issued by Japanese FSA and allowed use as per 31 March 2010 </li></ul><ul><li>Decision in 2012 whether to require Japanese companies to use IFRS </li></ul>IFRS – JAPAN Stockholm 27 September 2011
    36. 36. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Designation = endorsement
    37. 37. <ul><li>Other major economies committed </li></ul><ul><li>Canada, Brazil and South Korea </li></ul><ul><li>China, Mexico and Argentina </li></ul>IFRS – Other countries Stockholm 27 September 2011 Leaving USA outside
    38. 38. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    39. 39. <ul><li>IFRS best positioned as global standards </li></ul><ul><li>Work plan to perform due diligence </li></ul><ul><li>Convergence to be achieved </li></ul><ul><li>IASB/FASB convergence project and work plan to be successfully completed </li></ul><ul><li>FASB future role </li></ul><ul><li>Decision in 2011 </li></ul>US – ROADMAP Stockholm 27 September 2011
    40. 40. US SEC is doing a lot of activities to create a basis to conclude on whether to allow or require US companies to use IFRS IFRS – USA Stockholm 27 September 2011
    41. 41. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    42. 42. Stockholm 27 September 2011 SEC exploring possible way SEC NOT
    43. 43. Stockholm 27 September 2011 SEC exploring possible way
    44. 44. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    45. 45. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    46. 46. Will the US (+Japan) go to IFRS? To be decided in autumn 2011 (12) IFRS – USA Stockholm 27 September 2011 What will it mean if they do? And if they do not?
    47. 47. EUROPE AND ACCOUNTING Stockholm 27 September 2011
    48. 48. EU has opted for IAS/IFRS and Same accounting in Europe European Regulation Stockholm 27 September 2011
    49. 49. We have a global standard setter EU and IFRS IFRS has improved the quality and the credibility of European financial reporting Stockholm 27 September 2011
    50. 50. EU companies, auditors and regulators have spent the money to implement IFRS EU and IFRS EU has a competitive advantage!! Stockholm 27 September 2011
    51. 51. Trustees IASB Governance Monitoring Board Stockholm 27 September 2011
    52. 52. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    53. 53. IFRSC Trustees EU and IFRS The response analysis reported not really surprises Stockholm 27 September 2011 Strategy Review for consultation in November 2010
    54. 54. Monitoring Board EU and IFRS MB issued Consultative Report with many questions MB wanted more influence Stockholm 27 September 2011 How much influence should the monitoring board have?
    55. 55. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    56. 56. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    57. 57. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    58. 58. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    59. 59. IASB governance IASB and GOVERNANCE How much influence should each part of the world have?? And each constituents group Stockholm 27 September 2011
    60. 60. Global Accounting EU - influence US influence ?!? IASB Japan Others Stockholm 27 September 2011
    61. 61. Convergence Stockholm 27 September 2011
    62. 62. US GAAP IAS/IFRS GAAP GLOBAL GAAP CONVERGENCE Convergence Stockholm 27 September 2011 Japan? Europe ?
    63. 63. EFRAG comments: Convergence <ul><li>Supports convergence but not at all costs </li></ul><ul><li>Keep focus on the agenda important to those regions (EU) already using IFRS, i.e insurance </li></ul><ul><li>Not only focus on the needs of the US </li></ul>Stockholm 27 September 2011
    64. 64. Stockholm 27 September 2011 FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS <ul><li>FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The most controversial issue in Europe </li></ul></ul>
    65. 65. Stockholm 27 September 2011 EUROPE AND EFRAG Financial instruments: <ul><li>Impairment </li></ul><ul><li>Financial liabilities (ocr) </li></ul><ul><li>Derecognition </li></ul><ul><li>Hedging (limitations and portfolio) </li></ul><ul><li>Off setting </li></ul><ul><li>(IFRS 9 Classification and Measurement) </li></ul>
    66. 66. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    67. 67. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    68. 68. Stockholm 27 September 2011 EUROPE AND EFRAG But all projects are controversial <ul><li>Leases </li></ul><ul><li>Revenue from contracts </li></ul><ul><li>Insurance </li></ul><ul><li>Expected value model </li></ul><ul><li>Page break (IAS 1) </li></ul>
    69. 69. IFRS 9 in EUROPE Stockholm 27 September 2011
    70. 70. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    71. 71. Stockholm 27 September 2011 IFRS 9 C & M Will the standard be endorsed? <ul><li>Situation right now: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Endorsement procedure stopped </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Time for reflection </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Next steps to be considered </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Timing to be considered </li></ul></ul>
    72. 72. EU and IFRS EU has adopted IFRS Might be blocking minority for endorsing new standards on F.I. But most likely also blocking minority for any other solution No other infrastructure Stockholm 27 September 2011
    73. 73. THE EUROPEAN VOICE www.EFRAG.org
    74. 74. EFRAG <ul><li>We must have a strong and credible European voice on accounting issues </li></ul><ul><li>To match US and Japan </li></ul>WWW .EFRAG. ORG Stockholm 27 September 2011 EFRAG
    75. 75. EFRAG <ul><li>Main objectives: </li></ul><ul><li>Proactive contribution to the IASB and IFRIC </li></ul><ul><li>E ndorsement advice - EU Commission </li></ul><ul><li>Co-ordinate proactive EU activities </li></ul><ul><li>Stimulate thought leadership </li></ul>WWW .EFRAG. ORG Stockholm 27 September 2011
    76. 76. <ul><li>Working Arrangement: </li></ul><ul><li>EFRAG advisor to the EU Commission on all issues on application of IFRS in EU </li></ul><ul><li>Specifically on </li></ul><ul><li>E ndorsement advice </li></ul><ul><li>Proactive input to IASB/IFRIC </li></ul>EFRAG WWW .EFRAG. ORG Stockholm 27 September 2011
    77. 77. <ul><li>Co-Funded by the EU Commission </li></ul><ul><li>From 2010 EC will fund 50% of EFRAG expenses up to a maximum </li></ul><ul><li>Supported by </li></ul><ul><li>EU Parliament </li></ul><ul><li>Council of Ministers </li></ul>EFRAG WWW .EFRAG. ORG Stockholm 27 September 2011
    78. 78. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    79. 79. Stockholm 27 September 2011 FIELD TESTING
    80. 80. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    81. 81. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    82. 82. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    83. 83. ACCOUNTING REGULATORY COMMITTEE -ARC EU COMMISSION Advice Vote / Approval EU PARLIAMENT COUNCIL OF MINISTERS EU Structure IFRS/IFRIC Performs scrutiny Stockholm 27 September 2011
    84. 84. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Invite for field testing EFRAG Update Proactive Invitation to comment Endorsement status report
    85. 85. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    86. 86. DRAFT COMMENT LETTERS WWW .EFRAG. ORG Read all over the world as basis for input to IASB
    87. 87. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Draft Comment Letter
    88. 88. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    89. 89. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    90. 90. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    91. 91. Stockholm 27 September 2011 EU and ENDORSEMENT It still takes too long Francoise Flores, Chairman of EFRAG: “ Only IFRS as issued by the IASB make sense for Europe”
    92. 92. Proactive Accounting Activities in Europe Stockholm 27 September 2011
    93. 93. <ul><li>OBJECTIVES: </li></ul><ul><li>Partnership with National standard setters </li></ul><ul><li>High quality proactive input to IASB(+FASB) </li></ul><ul><li>Create debates in Europe </li></ul><ul><li>Thought leadership </li></ul>Proactive activities Stockholm 27 September 2011 Output: Discussion papers & position papers
    94. 94. Stockholm 27 September 2011 Proactive projects
    95. 95. Stockholm 27 September 2011
    96. 97. WWW . IASPLUS . COM Stockholm 27 September 2011
    97. 98. Stockholm 27 September 2011 www.IASPLUS.com
    98. 99. <ul><li>EFRAG </li></ul><ul><li>35 Square de Meeus </li></ul><ul><li>1000 Brussels </li></ul><ul><li>Belgium </li></ul><ul><li>WWW. EFRAG .ORG </li></ul>Stockholm 27 September 2011
    99. 100. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Deloitte er en betegnelse for Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, der er en schweizisk organisation (Verein), og dets netværk af medlemsfirmaer. Hvert medlemsfirma udgør en separat og uafhængig juridisk enhed. Vi henviser til www.deloitte.com/about for en udførlig beskrivelse af den juridiske struktur i Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu og dets medlemsfirmaer. © 2010 Deloitte Statsautoriseret Revisionsaktieselskab. Medlem af Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

    ×