28 de enero de 2013

Convergencia NIIF - US GAAP

Uno de los miembros del IASB, Paul Pacter, elaboró una tabla donde explica los avances en los proyectos de convergergencia de esa Institución con el FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) en los últimos 10 años. En opinión del Sr. Pacter, además de cerrar la brecha de las diferencias mediante el proceso de convergencia, la adopción de las NIIF en USA contribuirá a lograr un set de normas internacionales de reporte financiero con más soporte a nivel mundial. La tabla que presento a continuación muestra, norma por norma, una visión de los resultados de los proyectos más importantes para lograr la convergencia y su estatus actual.

Como es sabido, el proceso de convergencia en USA se ha demorado en los dos últimos dos años por diversas posiciones asumidas por funcionarios, principalmente de la SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) y de otras instituciones de opinión y control. El gobierno ha propuesto para el cargo de dirección de la SEC a un nuevo funcionario que sustituirá a la saliente encargada. Observaremos los avances del proceso de convergencia bajo las nuevas autoridades e informaremos los avances (o rectrocesos).

   Topic    IASB/FASB Action    Convergence  Outcome    Was IFRS Improved?

Borrowing Cost

In January 2009 the IASB amended IAS 23 to require capitalization (the U.S. principle).
Converged on the broad principle of capitalization of borrowing costs.
Differences in how borrowing costs eligible for capitalization are defined and calculated and on which assets are eligible

IFRS were improved because a freechoice option was removed. Whether capitalization or expensing is the better principle is debatable.

Business Combinations

New standards issued by both boards.
Partial convergence. Differences remain, including:
• Measurement of goodwill (the IASB allows either 100% of goodwill or only the parent’s share. FASB is 100% only).
• The level at which the goodwill impairment test is imposed.

Yes, particularly in eliminating pooling-of-interests accounting. Some argue that IFRS 3 would have been further improved if the result had been a single measure for goodwill, rather than two. However, there was only limited support among IFRS preparers and users for the 100% goodwill approach.
Combinations of Entities Under Common Control

No action by the IASB. U.S. GAAP already requires “pooling of interests.”

Not converged.

There was no standard, hence no improvement.

Conceptual Framework
In September 2010, the IASB and FASB published virtually identical chapters on “Objectives and Qualitative Characteristics” of the new Conceptual Framework.
No other sections finished.
Converged on objective and qualitative characteristics. Other parts of the Framework were already broadly converged.

Readability was improved, but many question replacement of prudence with neutrality.

Consolidation
(including
special-
purpose  
entities)
The IASB completed IFRS 10 in May 2011.
FASB did not agree with effective control as the basic principle and did not join the IASB in the project.
Convergence broadly achieved for offbalance-sheet activities and disclosures about unconsolidated structured entities.
Not converged with respect to control and de facto control as the basis for consolidation.

There is a more clearly articulated effective control principle, clearer guidance for consolidating special-purpose vehicles, and much-improved disclosures.

Corrections of Errors
The IASB amended IAS 8 to require restatement, but the IASB added an impracticability exception that does not exist in U.S. GAAP.

Broadly converged.

Yes, though some question the need for an impracticability exception.

Derecognition
of Financial
Assets and
Liabilities
Despite a joint exposure draft, in the end, the boards could not agree on derecognition principles for removing financial assets from the balance sheet. The boards agreed on broadly aligned disclosures in October 2010. No success in convergence of derecognition principles.

Substantial success on converged disclosures.

Improved disclosures, but no improvement to the principles for derecognition.

Discontinued Operations
The IASB adopted IFRS 5. FASB adopted Statement No. 144.
Converged on timing for classifying an operation as discontinued.
Not converged on definition of discontinued operation or on whether to present discontinued operations on the face of the income statement.

Substantial success.

Yes, IFRS were improved. (And many prefer the IASB’s answer to FASB’s).

Earnings per Share
In August 2008 the IASB issued an ED proposing amendments to IAS 33.
This was never finalized.
Nor did FASB propose similar amendments to U.S. GAAP.

IAS 33 and U.S. GAAP were broadly converged in the project. Nothing has changed.

Because no action was taken, there was no improvement.

Emissions Trading
In November 2010 the IASB and FASB decided to defer work on this project.
Not converged. Neither the IASB nor FASB has standards directly on point.

There was no standard, hence no improvement.

Extractive
Industries
In April 2010 the IASB published a Discussion Paper. No action since.
FASB already has an oil and gas standard.

Not converged.

There was no standard, hence no improvement.

Fair Value Measurement
IASB issued IFRS 13 as a virtually  word-for-word equivalent to FASB Statement No. 157. 
Substantial success.

Yes, the guidance on fair value in IFRS is much improved and made consistent across standards, plus disclosures were enhanced significantly.
Fair Value
Option for
Financial
Assets
FASB has added a fair value option to its financial instruments standards similar to what the IASB had. Converged regarding fair value option.
But the issue is under reconsideration in the broader joint project on classification and measurement of financial instruments.

There was no change to IFRS, which already had a fair value option.

Financial Instruments— Hedge Accounting
Currently, IAS 39 and U.S. GAAP are substantially converged on hedge accounting (other than macro hedging).
The IASB will soon issue a new general hedge accounting standard that will result in significant divergence from U.S. GAAP.

Not converged.

Despite lack of convergence, the IASB’s new general hedge accounting standard is a significant improvement to IFRS.
Financial
Instruments—
Impairment of
Assets Carried
at Amortized
Cost

Still in process.
Both boards have agreed to adopt an expected loss approach rather than today incurred loss approach.
However, the two boards are currently heading toward different ways of implementing that approach.

Moving to an expected loss approach is an improvement in principle. The specifics have not yet been decided.

Financial Instruments—

Classification and Measurement
The two boards went different ways: The IASB issued IFRS 9 in November 2009 (for assets) and October 2010 (for liabilities).
Some financial assets amortized cost and some fair value through profit or loss (FVTPL), (and some equity instruments at fair value through other comprehensive income, or FVOCI).
Most liabilities at amortized cost, but with fair value option (FVO) and other comprehensive income
(OCI) option for own credit. FASB proposed a full fair value model, but is now moving to a mixed measurement model different from the IASB’s.

Limited success in convergence.

Many thought IFRS 9 was an improvement over IAS 39. But those improvements are being eroded in the interest of convergence because of additional categories of financial assets, greater use of OCI, recycling, and inconsistent treatment of “available for sale” debt and equity instruments.
Government Grants

No action.

Not converged.

There was no change in IFRS.

Impairment of
Nonfinancial
Assets
In 2008 the boards decided to defer pending completion of “other work.”

Not converged.

There was no change in IFRS.

Income Tax
In March 2009 the IASB issued an ED (not with FASB) proposing amendments to IAS 12 basically to eliminate exemptions from recognizing deferred taxes. Responses were generally not supportive.
The IASB did not finalize the ED.
Small amendments to IAS 12 were made later.
Even before convergence work began, IFRS and U.S. GAAP were converged on the principle of the temporary difference method, although not converged on how that method is implemented.

There has been no success in eliminating the differences.

Even though there was no convergence, the process did result in a few amendments to IFRS 12 that are considered improvements.

Si usted desea asesoría sobre el contenido de esta noticia o sobre cualquier otro aspecto relacionado con las NIIF Completas, la NIIF para las PyMES o con otros temas tratados en este Blog, por favor, contacte al Autor en la siguiente dirección: jdsmartinez@gmail.com
Gracias.

2 comentarios :

  1. Existira un trabajo de algun profesional contable sobre Asociones de Ahorro y las NIIF

    ResponderEliminar
  2. Buenas tardes. Gracias por su comentario.
    Hasta donde yo conozco y hasta la fecha que ejercí como CPC en Venezuela, no existía tal trabajo.
    Hasta donde entiendo, las Asociaciones de Ahorro deben aplicar el Manual de Contabilidad único que promulgó la Superintendencia en 2013. Utilizando el siguiente link puede obtener mayor información al respecto:
    https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1R39FOolCRya2RzMlh5SFNjNDBoczNQbk1sc2dvUWwzdHFN/edit
    Saludos,

    ResponderEliminar

Gracias por su comentario o por su pregunta. Si lo prefiere, envíeme un mensaje electrónico y con gusto responderé sus inquietudes. Saludos,