Book Read Free

International GAAP® 2019: Generally Accepted Accounting Practice under International Financial Reporting Standards

Page 664

by International GAAP 2019 (pdf)


  Application of this allocation methodology effectively involves a comparison of the

  expected level of activity for that component with the actual level of activity for the

  same component, to identify when additional activity may have occurred and may be

  creating a future benefit. See 15.5.3.B below for further discussion about how to

  determine a component.

  Where the actual level of activity exceeds the expected level of activity, the waste

  removal activity incurred at the expected level and its associated costs would then form

  part of the cost of inventory produced in that period. Any excess of actual activity over

  the expected level (and the associated costs of such excess activity) needs to be

  considered to determine whether it represents a stripping activity asset.

  It is important to note that where actual stripping levels exceed those expected for the

  identified component, this will not automatically result in the recognition of a stripping

  activity asset. An entity will need to assess whether the removal of such additional waste

  has actually resulted in a future economic benefit, i.e. improved access to future ore. If

  not, such costs should not be capitalised as an asset, but instead should be recognised in

  profit or loss in the period incurred. For example, the mining of an unexpected fault or

  dyke should not be capitalised but instead expensed as incurred.

  Where actual waste removal activity is less than the expected level of activity, only the

  actual waste removed and its associated costs, not the expected costs, will form part of

  the cost of inventory produced in that period. This is because continuing to recognise

  waste costs at the expected level would require an entity to recognise a deferred

  stripping liability. This is not permitted under IFRIC 20 or generally under IFRS

  because, in the absence of a legal or constructive obligation to continue to mine the

  deposit, such costs would not satisfy the criteria to be recognised as a liability.

  It is worth noting that while some of the allocation approaches set out in the

  Interpretation are similar to the life-of-mine average strip ratio approach used by many

  entities prior to the introduction of IFRIC 20, there are differences.

  The key difference is that the level at which the expected level of activity is to be

  determined when calculating the relevant production measure is likely to be lower than

  that was previously used for the life-of-mine average strip ratio approach. The life-of-

  mine average strip ratio approach used the entire ore body, whereas IFRIC 20 requires

  Extractive

  industries

  3355

  this to be determined for each component of the ore body, which is expected to be a

  subset of the ore body. See 15.5.3.B below for further discussion about how to determine

  a component.

  The other difference relates to the way in which any stripping activity asset is

  recognised in profit or loss. Under the life-of-mine average stripping ratio approach, a

  portion of the deferred stripping asset was recognised in profit or loss when the actual

  stripping ratio fell below the expected average life-of-mine strip ratio. Under IFRIC 20

  however, the stripping activity asset is to be depreciated or amortised over the useful

  life of the identified component of the ore body that becomes more accessible. The

  units of production (UOP) method is to be used unless another method is more

  appropriate. [IFRIC 20.15].

  It is important to note that the calculation of the expected production measure for each

  component will need to be reviewed and updated if there are material changes to the

  mine plan for that component (for example due to differences in actual versus budgeted

  performance or changes in future mining plans resulting from other factors, e.g. changes

  in commodity prices or increases in costs). Should these changes impact the expected

  production measure for the remaining life of the component, then the IFRIC 20

  calculations will need to be updated and applied on a prospective basis. The calculation

  of the expected production measures will also be required if and when new components

  commence production.

  Example 39.14: Allocating costs between inventory and the stripping activity

  asset

  Scenario A – actual performance measure exceeds the expected performance measure

  The following example illustrates how an entity would allocate costs between inventory and the stripping

  activity asset where the actual performance measure exceeds the expected performance measure for a

  component in a particular period.

  Assume Entity A has a mine which comprises two separate pits which are accessing the one ore body. For

  the purposes of IFRIC 20, each pit is identified as a component. Pit 1 has a total life of three years and at

  reporting period end, has been in production for one year. Pit 2 has a total life of five years but production

  has not yet commenced.

  At the commencement of production from pit 1, the company has forecast the following mining and stripping

  activity:

  Expected ore to be extracted over the 3 years

  1,000 tonnes

  Expected volume of waste to be extracted over the 3 years

  3,000 tonnes

  During the current period, the following had occurred in relation to the production from pit 1:

  Cost incurred for mining activity

  $13,000,000 (a)

  Actual tonnes of ore removed

  100 tonnes (b)

  Actual tonnes of waste removed

  1,200

  tonnes

  (c)

  Average cost per tonne in year 1 = (a) / [(b)+(c)]

  $10,000

  The company determined that it is not practically possible to identify separately what portion of the waste

  removal costs leads to the extraction of inventory and what portion to improved access to future ore. This is

  because these two activities were occurring simultaneously as there were multiple shovels in operation in

  multiple parts of the component and a single haulage fleet was used.

  Given this, the company has decided that it will allocate costs by comparing the actual volume of waste and

  ore extracted (the actual strip ratio) in the period with the expected volume of waste and ore (expected strip

  ratio) for the life of the component i.e. for pit 1.

  3356 Chapter 39

  The allocation of the actual waste removal costs incurred will involve the following steps:

  Step 1: Calculate the expected strip ratio for pit 1

  Expected volume of waste to be extracted / expected volume of ore to be extracted

  = 3,000 tonnes / 1,000 tonnes

  = 3.00 (expected strip ratio)

  This means that for every 1 tonne of ore extracted over the life of pit 1, the company expects (on average)

  to remove 3 tonnes of waste.

  Step 2: Calculate the additional waste extracted compared to the expected waste extracted for the actual

  volume of ore extracted

  Actual volume of ore extracted × expected strip ratio

  = 100 tonnes × 3 tonnes

  = 300 tonnes

  Actual volume of waste extracted in year 1 = 1,200 tonnes

  Additional waste extracted in year 1 = actual waste extracted less expected waste to be extracted

  = 1,200 tonnes – 300 tonnes

  = 900 tonnes of additional waste was extracted

  Step 3: Alloca
te mining costs between inventory and the stripping activity asset

  Stripping activity asset

  Additional waste tonnes removed × cost per tonne

  = 900 tonnes × $10,000

  =

  $9,000,000

  Inventory

  Total mining costs incurred less costs allocated to the stripping activity asset

  = $13,000,000 – $9,000,000

  =

  $4,000,000

  This

  comprises:

  (1) The cost of extracting the inventory tonnes

  = 100 × $10,000

  =

  $1,000,000

  Plus:

  (2) The cost of waste removal allocated directly to inventory (which was allocated at the expected level

  of 3:1)

  = 300 tonnes × $10,000

  =

  $3,000,000

  Scenario B – actual strip ratio is less than the expected strip ratio

  Assume the same basic fact pattern as per Scenario A above, but with different actual mining results for pit 1

  in the current period:

  Cost incurred for mining activity

  $13,000,000 (a)

  Actual tonnes of ore removed

  1,200 tonnes (b)

  Actual tonnes of waste removed

  100

  tonnes

  (c)

  Average cost per tonne in year 1 = (a) / [(b) + (c)]

  $10,000

  Extractive

  industries

  3357

  The allocation of the actual waste removal costs incurred will involve the following steps:

  Step 1: Calculate the expected strip ratio for pit 1

  Expected volume of waste to be extracted / expected volume of ore to be extracted

  = 3,000 tonnes / 1,000 tonnes

  = 3.00 (expected strip ratio)

  This means that for every 1 tonne of ore extracted over the life of pit 1, the company expects (on average)

  to remove 3 tonnes of waste.

  Step 2: Calculate the additional waste extracted compared to the expected waste extracted for the actual

  volume of ore extracted

  Actual volume of ore extracted × expected strip ratio

  = 1,200 tonnes × 3 tonnes

  = 3,600 tonnes

  Actual volume of waste extracted in year 1 = 100 tonnes

  During the current period the actual strip ratio was only 0.0833. As this is less than the expected strip

  ratio, as explained above, there is no additional waste removed during the period.

  Step 3: Allocate mining costs between inventory and the stripping activity asset

  Stripping activity asset

  As the actual strip ratio was below the expected strip ratio, no additional waste was removed during the

  period; therefore there is no amount to be added to the stripping activity asset.

  Inventory

  As the actual amount of waste removed during the current period is less than the expected level of waste

  for the life of the component, and there is no amount to be allocated to the stripping activity asset, then

  the total mining costs for the period will be allocated to inventory.

  =

  $13,000,000

  This

  comprises:

  (1) The cost of extracting the inventory tonnes

  = 1,200 × $10,000

  =

  $12,000,000

  Plus:

  (2) The cost of waste removal allocated directly to inventory (which is allocated based on the actual

  waste tonnes removed during the period)

  = 100 tonnes × $10,000

  =

  $1,000,000

  15.5.3.B

  Identifying the component of the ore body

  Identifying the various components of the ore body is one of the critical steps in

  applying IFRIC 20. This is necessary for several reasons:

  (a) production stripping costs can only be capitalised as an asset if the component of

  the ore body for which access has been improved, can be identified;

  (b) to allocate stripping activity costs between inventory and the stripping activity

  asset, an entity needs to determine the expected level of activity for each

  component of the mine; and

  (c) the stripping activity asset is required to be depreciated or amortised on a

  systematic basis, over the expected useful life of the identified component of the

  ore body that becomes more accessible as a result of the stripping activity.

  3358 Chapter 39

  The Interpretation provides limited guidance on how to identify components, although

  it does appear a component is expected to be a subset of the whole ore body. This view

  is supported in several parts of IFRIC 20.

  • A ‘component’ refers to the specific volume of the ore body that is made more

  accessible by the stripping activity; the identified component of the ore body

  would typically be a subset of the total ore body of the mine; and a mine may have

  several components, which are identified during the mine planning stage.

  [IFRIC 20.BC8].

  • The depreciation or amortisation requirements state that the expected useful life

  of the identified component of the ore body that is used to depreciate or amortise

  the stripping activity asset will differ from the expected useful life that is used to

  depreciate or amortise the mine itself and the related life-of-mine assets, unless

  the stripping activity provides improved access to the whole of the ore body.

  [IFRIC 20.BC17].

  In practice, the identification of components of an ore body is a complex process which

  requires a significant amount of management judgement. While it is considered that an

  entity’s mine plan will provide the information required allowing these judgements to

  be made with reasonable consistency, this may not be a straightforward exercise, and it

  will be particularly challenging for the more complex mines. This is because ore bodies

  vary significantly in shape and size and are more haphazard than often illustrated in

  simple examples. Management may identify components in a number of different ways.

  These could include identifying discrete components in the mine plan, such as phases,

  sections, push backs, cutbacks, lay backs, blocks, etc.; examining annual production

  plans; or examining push back campaigns. Whatever approach is adopted, it is essential

  that the components are recognisable to those who are responsible for mine planning

  as they will be the ones who will need to track progress as ore is removed and will need

  to update the assessment of components should the mine plan change. Given this,

  practice has revealed that when identifying the components of an ore body, it is

  essential that input is obtained from those who best understand the mine plan, i.e. the

  mining engineers and operational personnel.

  The identification of components will need to be reassessed and updated (if necessary)

  whenever there are material changes to the mine plan. Given this, an entity will need to

  establish systems, processes, procedures and controls to ensure it is able to identify

  when material changes to the mine plan have occurred that would require the IFRIC 20

  calculations to be updated. Identification of components will also be required when an

  entity commences production on a new component of the ore body or in relation to a

  new ore body.

  Extractive

  industries

  3359

  15.5.4 Subsequent

  measurement

  After initial recognition, the stripp
ing activity asset must be carried at its cost or revalued

  amount less depreciation or amortisation and less impairment losses, in the same way

  as the existing asset of which it is a part. [IFRIC 20.14]. The stripping activity asset is to be

  depreciated or amortised on a systematic basis, over the expected useful life of the

  identified component of the ore body that becomes more accessible as a result of the

  stripping activity. [IFRIC 20.15].

  The units of production method is effectively required to be applied unless another

  method is more appropriate. [IFRIC 20.15]. The expected useful life of the identified

  component that is used to depreciate or amortise the stripping activity asset will differ

  from the expected useful life that is used to depreciate or amortise the mine itself and

  the related life-of-mine assets, unless the stripping activity provides improved access to

  the whole of the ore body (this is expected to be rare). [IFRIC 20.16].

  Consistent with the units of production method used for other mining assets, the

  calculation of the units of production rate will be completed when a stripping activity

  asset is first recognised. It will then need to be reviewed (and if necessary, updated) at

  the end of each reporting period, or when the mine plan changes. The new units of

  production rate will be applied prospectively.

  Given the depreciation or amortisation of the stripping activity asset represents the

  consumption of the benefits associated with the stripping activity asset, and those

  benefits are realised by the extraction of the ore to which the stripping activity asset

  relates (i.e. the ore for which access was improved by the removal of this waste in prior

  periods), this depreciation or amortisation effectively represents part of the cost of

 

‹ Prev