This document provides background information for developing an ACLI position on adding a cost option for measuring certain insurance contracts. The IASB and FASB are developing an accounting standard for insurance contracts that proposes a "current fulfillment" model, unlike IFRS 9 which allows fair value or amortized cost. There is concern this could disadvantage insurers compared to other financial institutions. Extracts from IFRS 9 are provided as a starting point for a cost option proposal, focusing on classification based on business model and contractual cash flows consisting solely of principal and interest.

1. This document is provided as the basis for discussion with the objective to develop an
ACLI position on the subject matter. These notes are based on staff’s analysis of tentative
views of the IASB and FASB, reference to various resource documents, and prior ACLI
discussions and position statements expressed in letters to accounting standard setters on
the topic.
INFORMATION FOR DEPUTIES SUBGROUP
Date: December 28, 2010
Project: Insurance Contracts
Topic: Cost Option for the Measurement of Certain Insurance Contracts
______________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
The IASB and FASB are in the process of developing an accounting standard for insurance
contracts. The proposed measurement attribute is a “current fulfillment” model where the inputs
into the measurement of the insurance liability are unlocked at each reporting period. The current
fulfillment model would be the only measurement attribute for insurance contracts, unlike IFRS
9, Financial Instruments, which is a mixed attribute standard with financial instruments measured
at fair value or amortized cost.
Issues
In developing the ACLI response to the IASB Exposure Draft, Insurance Contracts (ED), and the
FASB Discussion Paper on the same topic, we stated:
While we have no objection to the current fulfillment measurement approach, we are
concerned that the insurance accounting standard will not align with the guidance in
IFRS 9, Financial Instruments, where financial instruments may be measured at fair
value or amortized cost. Limiting the measurement of insurance contracts to a current
value measurement could put insurers at a disadvantage with other financial institutions
for financial products. The ACLI recommends that the Board add a cost option
alternative within the insurance contracts standard.
Not only is the concern about misalignment with IFRS 9, but also the potential volatility and
mismatch of the changes in the value of assets measured at fair value and the change in the value
of insurance liabilities measured at current fulfillment value. For example, where cash flows of
the asset portfolio align with the cash outflows of the insurance liabilities, changes in interest rate
spreads may not affect the assets and liabilities in the same way. Other trade organizations and
insurers have expressed similar views.
1

2. IFRS 9:
To develop a cost option for insurance contracts, an appropriate starting point would be IFRS 9.
The following sections have been extracted to help frame the cost option proposal.
Chapter 4 Classification
4.1 Unless paragraph 4.5 applies, an entity shall classify financial assets as subsequently
measured at either amortised cost or fair value on the basis of both:
(a) the entity's business model for managing the financial assets; and
(b) the contractual cash flow characteristics of the financial asset.
4.2 A financial asset shall be measured at amortised cost if both of the following
conditions are met:
(a) the asset is held within a business model whose objective is to hold assets in
order to collect contractual cash flows.
(b) the contractual terms of the financial asset give rise on specified dates to
cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal
amount outstanding.1
Classification
The entity's business model for managing financial assets
B4.1 Paragraph 4.1(a) requires an entity to classify financial assets as subsequently measured
at amortised cost or fair value on the basis of the entity's business model for managing
the financial assets. An entity assesses whether its financial assets meet this condition on
the basis of the objective of the business model as determined by the entity's key
management personnel (as defined in IAS 24 Related Party Disclosures).
B4.2 The entity's business model does not depend on management's intentions for an
individual instrument. Accordingly, this condition is not an instrument-by-instrument
approach to classification and should be determined on a higher level of aggregation.
However, a single entity may have more than one business model for managing its
financial instruments. Therefore, classification need not be determined at the reporting
entity level. For example, an entity may hold a portfolio of investments that it manages in
order to collect contractual cash flows and another portfolio of investments that it
manages in order to trade to realise fair value changes.
B4.3 Although the objective of an entity's business model may be to hold financial assets in
order to collect contractual cash flows, the entity need not hold all of those instruments
until maturity. Thus an entity's business model can be to hold financial assets to collect
contractual cash flows even when sales of financial assets occur. For example, the entity
may sell a financial asset if:
(a) the financial asset no longer meets the entity's investment policy (eg the credit
rating of the asset declines below that required by the entity's investment policy);
1
Extracted from IFRS 9, Financial Instruments. © IASC Foundation.
2

3. (b) an insurer adjusts its investment portfolio to reflect a change in expected duration
(ie the expected timing of payouts); or
(c) an entity needs to fund capital expenditures.
However, if more than an infrequent number of sales are made out of a portfolio, the
entity needs to assess whether and how such sales are consistent with an objective of
collecting contractual cash flows.2
B4.5 One business model in which the objective is not to hold instruments to collect the
contractual cash flows is if an entity manages the performance of a portfolio of financial
assets with the objective of realising cash flows through the sale of the assets. For
example, if an entity actively manages a portfolio of assets in order to realise fair value
changes arising from changes in credit spreads and yield curves, its business model is not
to hold those assets to collect the contractual cash flows. The entity's objective results in
active buying and selling and the entity is managing the instruments to realise fair value
gains rather than to collect the contractual cash flows.
B4.6 A portfolio of financial assets that is managed and whose performance is evaluated on a
fair value basis (as described in paragraph 9(b)(ii) of IAS 39) is not held to collect
contractual cash flows. Also, a portfolio of financial assets that meets the definition of
held for trading is not held to collect contractual cash flows. Such portfolios of
instruments must be measured at fair value through profit or loss.
Contractual cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the
principal amount outstanding
B4.7 Paragraph 4.1 requires an entity (unless paragraph 4.5 applies) to classify a financial asset
as subsequently measured at amortised cost or fair value on the basis of the contractual
cash flow characteristics of the financial asset that is in a group of financial assets
managed for the collection of the contractual cash flows.
B4.8 An entity shall assess whether contractual cash flows are solely payments of principal
and interest on the principal amount outstanding for the currency in which the financial
asset is denominated (see also paragraph B5.13).
B4.9 Leverage is a contractual cash flow characteristic of some financial assets. Leverage
increases the variability of the contractual cash flows with the result that they do not have
the economic characteristics of interest. Stand-alone option, forward and swap contracts
are examples of financial assets that include leverage. Thus such contracts do not meet
the condition in paragraph 4.2(b) and cannot be subsequently measured at amortised
cost.3
B4.10 Contractual provisions that permit the issuer (ie the debtor) to prepay a debt instrument
(eg a loan or a bond) or permit the holder (ie the creditor) to put a debt instrument back to
the issuer before maturity result in contractual cash flows that are solely payments of
principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding only if:
(a) the provision is not contingent on future events, other than to protect:
(i) the holder against the credit deterioration of the issuer (eg defaults, credit
downgrades or loan covenant violations), or a change in control of the
issuer; or
2
Extracted from IFRS 9, Financial Instruments. © IASC Foundation.
3
Extracted from IFRS 9, Financial Instruments. © IASC Foundation.
3

4. (ii) the holder or issuer against changes in relevant taxation or law; and
(b) the prepayment amount substantially represents unpaid amounts of principal and
interest on the principal amount outstanding, which may include reasonable
additional compensation for the early termination of the contract.
B4.11 Contractual provisions that permit the issuer or holder to extend the contractual term of a
debt instrument (ie an extension option) result in contractual cash flows that are solely
payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding only if:
(a) the provision is not contingent on future events, other than to protect:
(i) the holder against the credit deterioration of the issuer (eg defaults, credit
downgrades or loan covenant violations) or a change in control of the
issuer; or
(ii) the holder or issuer against changes in relevant taxation or law; and
(b) the terms of the extension option result in contractual cash flows during the
extension period that are solely payments of principal and interest on the
principal amount outstanding.
B4.12 A contractual term that changes the timing or amount of payments of principal or interest
does not result in contractual cash flows that are solely principal and interest on the
principal amount outstanding unless it:
(a) is a variable interest rate that is consideration for the time value of money and the
credit risk (which may be determined at initial recognition only, and so may be
fixed) associated with the principal amount outstanding; and
(b) if the contractual term is a prepayment option, meets the conditions in paragraph
B4.10; or
(c) if the contractual term is an extension option, meets the conditions in paragraph
B4.11.4
B4.15 In some cases a financial asset may have contractual cash flows that are described as
principal and interest but those cash flows do not represent the payment of principal and
interest on the principal amount outstanding as described in paragraphs 4.2(b) and 4.3 of
this IFRS.
B4.16 This may be the case if the financial asset represents an investment in particular assets or
cash flows and hence the contractual cash flows are not solely payments of principal and
interest on the principal amount outstanding. For example, the contractual cash flows
may include payment for factors other than consideration for the time value of money and
for the credit risk associated with the principal amount outstanding during a particular
period of time. As a result, the instrument would not satisfy the condition in paragraph
4.2(b). This could be the case when a creditor's claim is limited to specified assets of the
debtor or the cash flows from specified assets (for example, a 'non-recourse' financial
asset).
B4.17 However, the fact that a financial asset is non-recourse does not in itself necessarily
preclude the financial asset from meeting the condition in paragraph 4.2(b). In such
situations, the creditor is required to assess ('look through to') the particular underlying
assets or cash flows to determine whether the contractual cash flows of the financial asset
being classified are payments of principal and interest on the principal amount
outstanding. If the terms of the financial asset give rise to any other cash flows or limit
4
Extracted from IFRS 9, Financial Instruments. © IASC Foundation.
4

5. the cash flows in a manner inconsistent with payments representing principal and interest,
the financial asset does not meet the condition in paragraph 4.2(b). Whether the
underlying assets are financial assets or non-financial assets does not in itself affect this
assessment.
B4.18 If a contractual cash flow characteristic is not genuine, it does not affect the classification
of a financial asset. A cash flow characteristic is not genuine if it affects the instrument's
contractual cash flows only on the occurrence of an event that is extremely rare, highly
abnormal and very unlikely to occur.
B4.19 In almost every lending transaction the creditor's instrument is ranked relative to the
instruments of the debtor's other creditors. An instrument that is subordinated to other
instruments may have contractual cash flows that are payments of principal and interest
on the principal amount outstanding if the debtor's non-payment is a breach of contract
and the holder has a contractual right to unpaid amounts of principal and interest on the
principal amount outstanding even in the event of the debtor's bankruptcy. For example, a
trade receivable that ranks its creditor as a general creditor would qualify as having
payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. This is the case
even if the debtor issued loans that are collateralised, which in the event of bankruptcy
would give that loan holder priority over the claims of the general creditor in respect of
the collateral but does not affect the contractual right of the general creditor to unpaid
principal and other amounts due.5
BC30 The objective of the effective interest method for financial instruments measured at
amortised cost is to allocate interest revenue or expense to the relevant period. Cash
flows that are interest always have a close relation to the amount advanced to the debtor
(the 'funded' amount) because interest is consideration for the time value of money and
the credit risk associated with the issuer of the instrument and with the instrument itself.
The Board noted that the effective interest method is not an appropriate method to
allocate cash flows that are not principal or interest on the principal amount outstanding.
The Board concluded that if a financial asset contains contractual cash flows that are not
principal or interest on the principal amount outstanding then a valuation overlay to
contractual cash flows (fair value) is required to ensure that the reported financial
information provides useful information. 6
Definitions relating to recognition and measurement
The amortised cost of a financial asset or financial liability is the amount at which the
financial asset or financial liability is measured at initial recognition minus principal
repayments, plus or minus the cumulative amortisation using the effective interest
method of any difference between that initial amount and the maturity amount, and
minus any reduction (directly or through the use of an allowance account) for
impairment or uncollectibility.
The effective interest method is a method of calculating the amortised cost of a
financial asset or a financial liability (or group of financial assets or financial
liabilities) and of allocating the interest income or interest expense over the relevant
period. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future
cash payments or receipts through the expected life of the financial instrument or,
when appropriate, a shorter period to the net carrying amount of the financial asset
or financial liability. When calculating the effective interest rate, an entity shall
5
Extracted from IFRS 9, Financial Instruments. © IASC Foundation.
6
Extracted from IFRS 9, Basis for Conclusions. © IASC Foundation.
5

6. estimate cash flows considering all contractual terms of the financial instrument
(for example, prepayment, call and similar options) but shall not consider future
credit losses. The calculation includes all fees and points paid or received between
parties to the contract that are an integral part of the effective interest rate (see
IAS 18 Revenue), transaction costs, and all other premiums or discounts. There is a
presumption that the cash flows and the expected life of a group of similar financial
instruments can be estimated reliably. However, in those rare cases when it is not
possible to estimate reliably the cash flows or the expected life of a financial
instrument (or group of financial instruments), the entity shall use the contractual
cash flows over the full contractual term of the financial instrument (or group of
financial instruments).7
Cost option for insurance contracts
To align the insurance contracts standard with IFRS 9, the ACLI proposes that a cost option
should be added to the accounting standard for insurance contracts. The cost option should be
conceptually consistent with the amortized cost measurement attribute contained in IFRS 9 and
consistent with the building block model proposed in the ED.
Principle for insurance contracts
An entity shall classify insurance liabilities as measured at either cost or current fulfilment value
on the basis of both:
(a) the entity's business model is based on the co-ordination of financial assets and
insurance liabilities; and
(b) the contractual cash flow characteristics of the insurance liabilities.
Unless the current fulfilment value8 is selected as the measurement approach, an insurance
liability shall be measured at cost if the following conditions are met:
TBD based upon decisions about the types of contracts suitable for the cost option
Application
Not all products would be suited for a cost option. For example, variable products where the
policyholder assumes the investment risk and the investments are in mutual funds measured at
fair value may not be a candidate. The entity would identify and disclose the products or range of
products that are managed based upon their contractual cash flows and the insurance liability
measured under the cost option. Application guidance may be influenced by decisions about
revenue recognition, which was not addressed in the ED (see ACLI document of Presentation of
the financial statement). For example, if the recommendation is to unbundle deferred annuity
contracts with the accumulation component accounted for under IFRS 9, could the remaining
insurance component be measured under the cost option?
Measurement at inception
At inception, the measurement of insurance contract liabilities under the cost option or current
fulfilment value would be the same, i.e., based upon the building blocks model and the
underlying assumptions and inputs (unless the PAA method applies).
7
Extracted from IAS 39, Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement. © IASC
Foundation.
8
The guidance for the current fulfillment value approach would be described in the standard.
6

7. Subsequent measurement
At each reporting period, all assumptions and inputs, except for the discount rate, would be
remeasured. The discount rate for the portfolio of contracts, set at inception, would continue
unless the underlying asset cash flows (principal and interest) are insufficient to meet the
contractual cash flows of the insurance liabilities. At least annually, an asset adequacy test must
be performed to ensure the asset cash flows are sufficient. If the test results indicate the cash
flows are insufficient, the discount rate is unlocked and remeasured based upon the new set of
cash flows.
Presentation
In a cost option model, the expectation is that there would not be any gains or losses since the
assets and liabilities would be measured at cost (amortized cost). However, it is likely that
companies would sell assets from time-to-time producing gains or losses. An issue that needs to
be addressed is how should gains and losses resulting from the sale of investments be presented
in the statement of comprehensive income? Should gains and losses be recognized in OCI or
profit and loss? If the amounts are reported and accumulated in OCI, should there be recycling?
Questions for the Subgroup
In order to advance the discussion and decision making with respect to the cost option the
Subgroup is asked the following questions.
1. Before developing guidance on the cost option, what products would likely benefit by
having the option (review table below)?
2. Would decisions about revenue recognition affect the list of products to consider for
the cost option?
3. At inception, is the discount rate the only assumption that should be locked-in? If not,
what other inputs should be included and why?
4. Should the effective interest method be prescribed for the cost option? If not, why not
and what are the alternatives?
5. Should the guidance clarify that embedded derivatives should be unbundled and are
there other options that should be unbundled? If yes, what should be unbundled?
6. Do we agree with the subsequent measurement proposed guidance for the cost option?
If not, what changes should be made?
7. Are there any issues with other inputs, e.g., acquisition costs that need to be considered
in developing the cost option guidance?
8. If investment gains and losses occur related to liabilities measured under the cost
option, how should the gains and losses be presented in the financial statements, e.g.,
OCI?
9. If the discount rate is unlocked, how should the change in value be reported, e.g., OCI?
7

8. Measurement
Business objective Secondary objective approach-building
- Insurance - Insurance blocks or cost option
protection or protection or Modified measurement Revenue -
Contract type savings savings Unbundling* approach choice Presentation
Term insurance, building blocks or
e.g., 10 year, 20 Modified approach Customer
year (non-par) Insurance protection N/A No (YRT contracts) Yes consideration
Traditional Whole Customer
life (non-par) Insurance protection savings No building blocks Maybe consideration
Customer
Universal Life Insurance protection savings No building blocks No consideration
Variable Life,
Variable UL, unit-
linked insurance, Customer
participating life Insurance protection savings No building blocks No consideration
building blocks or Customer
Credit Life Insurance protection N/A No Modified approach Yes consideration
IFRS 9-savings;
Deferred IFRS 9 for savings; IFRS 9-savings; customer
annuities with building blocks or maybe for consideration
guarantees Savings Insurance protection Yes Modified approach insurance for insurance
Immediate life Customer
income annuities Insurance protection N/A No building blocks Yes consideration
Customer
Disability income Insurance protection N/A No building blocks Maybe consideration
8

9. Primary business Measurement
objective - Secondary business approach-building
Insurance objective - Insurance blocks or cost option
protection or protection or Modified measurement Revenue -
Contract type savings savings Unbundling* approach choice Presentation
Customer
Long-term Care Insurance protection N/A No building blocks Maybe consideration
building blocks or Customer
Health insurance Insurance protection N/A No Modified approach Yes consideration
Non-life contracts
e.g.,
property/business, building blocks or Customer
auto Insurance protection N/A No Modified approach Yes consideration
* Do we need to identify contracts containing embedded derivatives or other options that should be unbundled?
9