Book Read Free

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

Page 723

by International GAAP 2019 (pdf)


  either classification of the loans at amortised cost or at fair value through profit or loss.

  Proponents of amortised cost classification would argue that, at the date of initial application, even though

  the bank intends to sell the business at some point in the future, the loans are still held within a business

  model whose objective is to hold them to collect their contractual cash flows. That objective continues

  regardless of whether the bank intends or is able to sell the business. In addition, some of the loans may be

  fully collected even before the business is sold. Therefore, based on facts and circumstances at the date of

  initial application, the loans are considered to be held within a business model whose objective is to hold

  them to collect their contractual cash flows.

  On the other hand, proponents of the fair value through profit or loss classification would argue that on the

  date of initial application, the expectation is that the bank will dispose of the loans rather than hold them to

  collect their contractual cash flows. Therefore, from the bank’s perspective, the loans are no longer held

  within a business model whose objective is to hold assets to collect their contractual cash flows.

  This issue was brought before the Interpretations Committee in November 2016 (see 5.5 above).

  10.2.3

  Applying the contractual cash flow characteristics test

  For existing IFRS reporters, there are no transition provisions relating to the application

  of the contractual cash flow characteristics test. Accordingly, the contractual cash flow

  characteristics of an asset should be assessed based on conditions at the date of initial

  recognition, not at the date of initial application. This is likely to have the most effect

  when assessing contractually linked instruments (see 6.6 above) because their

  characteristics may have changed significantly between the date of initial recognition

  and the date of initial application.

  At the date of initial application, it may be impracticable (as defined in IAS 8) for an

  entity to assess a modified time value of money element as described in 6.4.2 above on

  the basis of the facts and circumstances that existed at the initial recognition of the

  financial asset. In such instances, the entity must assess the contractual cash flow

  characteristics of that financial asset on the basis of the facts and circumstances that

  existed at the initial recognition of the financial asset without taking into account the

  requirements related to the modification of the time value of money element as set out

  in 6.4.2 above. [IFRS 9.7.2.4]. This means that, in such cases, the entity would apply the

  assessment of the asset’s contractual cash flows characteristics as set out in the original

  requirements issued in IFRS 9; i.e. without the notion of a modified economic

  relationship. [IFRS 9.BC7.55]. As a result, the asset would most likely be classified as

  measured at fair value though profit or loss.

  Financial

  instruments:

  Classification

  3653

  At the date of initial application, it may be impracticable (as defined in IAS 8) for an

  entity to assess whether the fair value of a prepayment feature was insignificant, as

  described in 6.4.4 above, on the basis of the facts and circumstances that existed at the

  initial recognition of the financial asset. If this is the case, an entity shall assess the

  contractual cash flow characteristics of that financial asset on the basis of the facts and

  circumstances that existed at the initial recognition of the financial asset. For instance

  an entity may hold a convertible bond for which the conversion option has expired by

  the date of initial application, in such a case the entity would still be obliged to take the

  conversion option into consideration. The entity would not take into account the

  exception for prepayment features. [IFRS 9.7.2.5]. This means that the asset would be

  classified as measured at fair value though profit or loss.

  For contractually linked instruments, on initial application of the standard, the look-through

  assessment should be performed as at the date that the reporting entity (i.e. the investor in

  the tranche) initially recognised the contractually linked instrument. It is inappropriate to

  make the risk assessment based on the circumstances existing either at the date that the

  arrangement was first established or the date of initial application of IFRS 9.

  The situation is slightly different for first-time adopters of IFRS, who are required to

  apply the contractual cash flow characteristics test to previously acquired assets on the

  basis of the facts and circumstances that exist at the date of transition to IFRSs (or the

  beginning of the first IFRS reporting period for entities that choose not to apply IFRS 9

  in comparative periods). [IFRS 1.B8, E1].

  10.2.4

  Making and revoking designations

  On application of IFRS 9, entities are required to revisit designations previously made

  in accordance with IAS 39 and are given an opportunity to make designations in

  accordance with IFRS 9. More specifically, at the date of initial application:

  (a) any previous designation of a financial asset as measured at fair value through

  profit or loss may be revoked in any case, but must be revoked if such designation

  no longer eliminates or significantly reduces an accounting mismatch;

  (b) a financial asset or a financial liability may be designated as measured at fair value

  through profit or loss if such designation would now eliminate or significantly

  reduce an accounting mismatch;

  (c) any previous designation of a financial liability as measured at fair value through profit

  or loss that was made on the basis that it eliminated or significantly reduced an

  accounting mismatch may be revoked in any case, but must be revoked if such

  designation no longer eliminates or significantly reduces an accounting mismatch; and

  (d) any investment in a non-derivative equity instrument that is not held for trading

  may be designated as at fair value through other comprehensive income.

  It should be noted that it is not possible to change the previous designation of a financial

  liability to being measured at fair value through profit or loss on the grounds that it is

  now managed on a fair value basis.

  Such designations and revocations should be made on the basis of the facts and

  circumstances that exist at the date of initial application and that classification should

  be applied retrospectively. [IFRS 9.7.2.8-10]. For the purposes of (d), an entity should

  3654 Chapter 44

  determine whether equity investments meet the definition of held for trading as if they

  had been acquired at the date of initial application. [IFRS 9.B7.2.1].

  At the date of initial application, an entity shall determine whether the own credit

  requirements of IFRS 9 would create or enlarge an accounting mismatch in profit or

  loss on the basis of the facts and circumstances that exist at the date of initial

  application. Those requirements shall be applied retrospectively on the basis of that

  determination. [IFRS 9.7.2.14].

  10.2.5

  Restatement of comparatives

  Notwithstanding the general requirement to apply the standard retrospectively, an

  entity that adopts the classification and measuremen
t requirements of IFRS 9 (which

  include the requirements related to amortised cost measurement for financial assets and

  expected credit losses as described in Chapter 47) shall provide the disclosures set out

  in IFRS 7 as described in Chapter 50 at 8.2, but need not restate prior periods. An entity

  may restate prior periods if, and only if, it is possible without the use of hindsight.

  [IFRS 9.7.2.15].

  Where prior periods are not restated, any difference between the previous reported

  carrying amounts and the new carrying amounts of financial assets and liabilities at the

  beginning of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application

  should be recognised in the opening retained earnings (or other component of equity,

  as appropriate) of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial

  application. However, if an entity restates prior periods, the restated financial

  statements must reflect all of the requirements in IFRS 9. [IFRS 9.7.2.15].

  Where interim financial reports are prepared in accordance with IAS 34, the

  requirements in IFRS 9 need not be applied to interim periods prior to the date of initial

  application, if it is impracticable to do so. [IFRS 9.7.2.16].

  10.2.6

  Financial instruments derecognised prior to the date of initial

  application

  If an entity decides to restate prior periods or chooses to apply IFRS 9 from other than

  the beginning of an annual reporting period, it should not apply the standard to financial

  assets or financial liabilities that have already been derecognised at the date of initial

  application. [IFRS 9.7.2.1]. In other words, following the application of IFRS 9, to the extent

  those financial assets or financial liabilities were held during any period presented prior

  to the date of initial application, they will be accounted for under IAS 39.

  When the reporting entity elects to restate comparative information or, for example,

  chooses to apply IFRS 9 from the beginning of an interim reporting period, the effect

  of derecognition could potentially be confusing for users of the financial statements,

  Therefore, it may require careful explanation. This is because the information for

  reporting periods prior to the date of initial application would be prepared on a mixed

  basis, partially under IFRS 9 (for those financial instruments not derecognised before

  that date) and partially under IAS 39 (for those financial instruments which have been

  derecognised prior to that date), reducing the consistency of the information provided.

  Financial

  instruments:

  Classification

  3655

  10.2.7

  Transition adjustments and measurement of financial assets and

  liabilities

  10.2.7.A

  Hybrid financial assets

  A hybrid financial asset that is measured at fair value through profit or loss in

  accordance with IFRS 9, may previously have been accounted for as a host financial

  asset and a separate embedded derivative in accordance with IAS 39. In these

  circumstances, if the entity restates prior periods and the fair value of the hybrid

  contract had not been determined in those comparative reporting periods, at the end

  of each comparative reporting period the fair value of the hybrid contract is deemed to

  be the sum of the fair values of the components (i.e. the non-derivative host and the

  embedded derivative). [IFRS 9.7.2.6].

  At the date of initial application, any difference between the fair value of the entire

  hybrid contract at the date of initial application and the sum of the fair values of the

  components of the hybrid contract at the date of initial application should be recognised

  in the opening retained earnings (or other component of equity, as appropriate) of the

  reporting period of initial application. [IFRS 9.7.2.7].

  IFRS 9 abolishes the separation of embedded derivatives from financial assets required

  by IAS 39. Under IFRS 9, most financial assets with separable embedded derivatives

  would be required to be classified in their entirety as at fair value through profit or loss.

  For example, a loan might contain a profit participation feature that provides the lender

  with an additional return based on a share of profits of the borrower. However, in some

  cases, it might be possible to renegotiate the transaction as two separate instruments

  before the transition to IFRS 9 – one instrument being a loan, the host instrument

  (which could be recorded at amortised cost or fair value through other comprehensive

  income) and the other being the profit-sharing derivative (to be recorded at fair value

  through profit or loss). This would only be possible, we believe, if after the

  renegotiation, the two new instruments are in substance separate financial instruments.

  Indicators that this is the case would include:

  • each instrument can be closed out or transferred separately, which will be a test

  of commercial practicality as well as legal possibility; or

  • there are no clauses that have the effect that the cash flows on one instrument will

  affect those on the other, except for typical master netting arrangements.

  The case for recognising the contracts as two separate financial instruments would be

  strengthened if the two new contracts were entered into at prevailing market prices. In

  that case the original compound instrument is derecognised under IAS 39 and a gain or

  loss is recognised when the two new instruments are first recorded at their fair values.

  10.2.7.B

  Financial assets and liabilities measured at amortised cost

  It may be impracticable to apply retrospectively the effective interest method to a

  financial asset or liability that is measured at amortised cost on transition to IFRS 9, e.g. if

  it was previously classified at fair value through profit or loss. In those circumstances, the

  fair value of the financial asset or liability at the end of each comparative period should

  be treated as its gross carrying amount or amortised cost, respectively. Also, the fair value

  3656 Chapter 44

  of the financial asset or financial liability at the date of initial application should be treated

  as its new gross carrying amount or amortised cost, respectively, at that date. [IFRS 9.7.2.11].

  Aside from this exception, the effective interest method should be applied

  retrospectively. This means that for any financial asset reclassified in accordance with the

  October 2008 amendments to IAS 39, for example from trading to loans and receivables

  or available-for-sale, the effective interest method should be applied based on the original

  cost of the asset, not the amounts determined on reclassification. This is because

  retrospective application means that an entity presents its financial statements as if it had

  always applied IFRS 9. However, the standard does not have the same reclassification

  requirements as IAS 39. Hence, the entity has to go back to the date of initial recognition

  of the financial instrument in order to determine the accounting treatment.

  10.2.7.C

  Unquoted equity investments

  An investment in an unquoted equity instrument (or a derivative that is linked to and

  must be settled by delivery of such an unquoted equity instrument) might previously

  have been measured at cost in a
ccordance with IAS 39. In those circumstances the

  instrument should be measured at fair value at the date of initial application of IFRS 9.

  Any difference between the previous carrying amount and fair value should be

  recognised in the opening retained earnings (or other component of equity, as

  appropriate) of the reporting period that includes the date of initial application.

  [IFRS 9.7.2.12-13]. This means that that previous periods cannot be restated. The Board

  explains that this is because as an entity would not have previously determined the fair

  value of an investment in an unquoted equity instrument it will not now have the

  necessary information to determine fair value retrospectively without using hindsight.

  [IFRS 9.BC7.15].

  References

  1

  IFRIC Update, November 2016.

  2 IFRIC Update, May 2017.

  3657

  Chapter 45

  Financial instruments:

  Recognition and

  initial measurement

  1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 3659

  2 RECOGNITION ............................................................................................ 3659

  2.1

  General requirements ....................................................................................... 3659

  2.1.1

  Receivables and payables ................................................................ 3660

  2.1.2

  Firm commitments to purchase or sell goods or services ......... 3660

  2.1.3 Forward

  contracts ............................................................................. 3660

  2.1.4 Option

  contracts

  ................................................................................

  3660

  2.1.5

  Planned future transactions (forecast transactions) .................... 3660

  2.1.6

  Transfers of financial assets not qualifying for

  derecognition by transferor – Impact on recognition ................ 3661

  2.1.7 Cash

  collateral ..................................................................................... 3661

  2.1.8 Principal

 

‹ Prev