| Topic | High-level overview of discussion and key decisions | More information |
Derecognition (project to develop a new IFRS for derecognition of financial instruments and possibly all assets) | The Board discussed the staff proposal on derecognition. The approach taken by the staff created some discussion. The indicative vote on the approach to be taken when a transferee lacks practical ability to transfer an asset was in favour of the staff recommendation (no practicability to transfer = no control for the transferee = no derecognition for the transferor). This topic will be discussed at the Joint Board meeting next week. | Agenda paper 7: Derecognition of Financial Assets: Cover note (PDF 50kb) Agenda paper 7: Derecognition of Financial Assets: Slides (PDF 274kb) Agenda paper 7A: Derecognition of Financial Assets: Proposed Derecognition model (PDF 103kb) Agenda paper 7B: Derecognition of Financial Assets: Lack of Practical Ability to Transfer - Now What? (PDF 78kb) Agenda paper 7C: Derecognition of Financial Assets: Application of Flowcharts to Transactions and Comparison to IAS 39 and FAS 140 ED (PDF 75kb) Agenda paper 7D: Derecognition of Financial Assets: Project timetable (PDF 20kb) IASB project page IAS Plus project page |
Consolidation (project to develop a new IFRS on consolidation - an ED is expected in Q4/2008) | The Board held an additional Board meeting on 2 October 2008 where the forthcoming ED on consolidation was discussed. At this meeting, the Board discussed an updated version of the staff draft ED incorporating comments from that meeting and other comments received. Much of the discussion focussed on the wording of the ED, including the definition of 'control' and the meaning of 'benefits'. The Board also decided that in assessing whether an entity controls another at the reporting date, options that represent a current legal right and which the holder can exercise should be considered in that assessment. | Agenda paper 2: Consolidation: IASB Staff draft of Consolidation ED (PDF 123kb) Meeting notes from the extra IASB meeting on 2 October 2008 IASB project page IAS Plus project page |
Liabilities and equity (project to develop an IFRSs providing guidance on how to distinguish between equity and liability) | The Board discussed a possible starting point for developing an ED on this topic. In order to meet the timeframe it was necessary to reduce, at the Joint Board meeting, the number of possible candidates. Most Board members expressed support for the 'perpetual approach', which would classify an instrument as equity if it (a) lacks a settlement requirement and (b) entitles the holder to a share of the entity's net assets in liquidation. | Agenda paper 2: Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity: Cover note (PDF 18kb) Agenda paper 2A: Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity: Comment letter analysis (PDF 74kb) Agenda paper 11: Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Equity: Selecting an approach (PDF 88kb) IASB project page IAS Plus project page |
Annual improvements process 2009 (minor amendments to IFRSs exposed in an annual omnibus IFRS, ED expected to be issued in August 2009) | The Board decided to propose an amendment to IAS 39 to clarify that a floating rate instrument is any instrument whose cash flows vary with an (observable) market variable. It also decided that in determining the effective interest rate for such a floating rate an entity should not include expectations about future cash flows. | Agenda paper 6: IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement - Application of the Effective Interest Rate Method (PDF, 338KB) IASB project page |
Proposed amendments to disclosure requirements (project to amend IFRS to expand the disclosure requirements with regard to liquidity risk and off-balance sheet items in response to the credit crisis) | The Board held an additional Board meeting on 2 October 2008. The Board decided to issue an exposure draft amending IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures with regard to liquidity risk and fair value disclosures. The changes would clarify the scope of what has to be included in the maturity analysis for financial liabilities and change the basis of the maturity analysis. The proposed amendments to the fair value disclosures would require entities to report fair values in accordance with a three level hierarchy (comparable to US GAAP) and require additional reconciliations for fair values determined by using unobservable market data. The exposure draft of proposed amendments to IFRS 7 was released on 15 October 2008. | Agenda paper 1: Disclosures: IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures, Proposed amendments - Improving Disclosures about Financial Instruments (PDF 274kb) Agenda paper 3: Consolidation: Off-balance sheet risk: Proposed amendments to Disclosure requirements (PDF 71kb) Meeting notes from the extra IASB meeting on 2 October 2008 Accounting alert 2008/14 |
Fair value measurement (project to establish a single source of guidance for all fair value measurements required or permitted by existing Standards, to clarify the definition of fair value and enhance disclosures about fair value) | The Board discussed whether pricing conventions, particularly a mid-market price convention, would be acceptable. The Board agreed to add such guidance and that it would be applicable to all levels within the hierarchy with some cautionary language. | Agenda paper 9: Fair Value Measurement: Bid-ask spreads (PDF, 43KB) IAS Plus project page IASB project page |
Insurance contracts (project to develop a standard on accounting for insurance contracts) | IASB staff led an education session that discussed a list of measurement attributes identified by the project staff as 'viable candidates' for selection in the case of insurance contracts (the 'current exit model', three variants of the 'current fulfilment model' and an 'unearned premium model'). The purpose of the discussion was to identify those candidates for which the Board needed or wanted further information. Board members requested more information from the staff, in particular they wanted the staff to reflect the consistency (or lack of consistency) of the candidates with the Framework, existing IFRS and other projects (particularly the revenue recognition project). Board members also noted that the answers developed by the staff needed to consider what might happen if the premium received was treated as a deposit rather than revenue. | Agenda paper 3: Insurance Contracts - education session: Cover note (PDF, 25KB) Agenda paper 3A: Insurance Contracts - education session: Overview of comments on the measurement attribute (PDF, 40KB) Agenda paper 3B: Insurance Contracts - education session: Candidate measurement approaches (PDF, 103KB) Agenda paper 3C: Insurance Contracts - education session: Candidate measurement approaches - tabular comparison (PDF, 45KB) Agenda paper 3D: Insurance Contracts - education session: Candidate measurement approaches - example (PDF, 78KB) IAS Plus project page IASB project page |