2013年-FSB全球金融稳定委员会_Financial_regulatory_factors_affecting_the_availability_of_long_21页_337kb

Convergence Projects Summary

Core Content

This report provides an overview of the status and timeline of the remaining convergence projects between the IASB and FASB, focusing on financial instruments, impairment, leases, revenue recognition, insurance contracts, and investment entities. The goal is to develop converged accounting standards that improve transparency and consistency in financial reporting.

Main Projects and Their Status

1. Financial Instruments: Classification and Measurement

• Status: Converged decisions have been made in the classification and measurement of financial assets.
• Key Areas of Convergence:
  • Contractual Cash Flow Characteristics Assessment: Financial assets with cash flows solely based on principal and interest are eligible for measurement categories other than fair value through profit or loss.
  • Business Model Assessment: Assets held for collecting contractual cash flows qualify for amortised cost accounting; those held for both collecting and selling are measured at fair value through other comprehensive income.
  • Fair Value through Profit or Loss: This is the residual category for assets that fail the contractual cash flow assessment.
• Exposure Documents:
  • IASB: Published an Exposure Draft in November 2012, with a comment period ending on 28 March 2013.
  • FASB: Plans to issue a second Exposure Draft in February 2013, with a comment period ending on 30 April 2013.
• Next Steps: The boards plan to begin joint redeliberations on feedback received and expect to issue final standards in mid-2013.

2. Impairment (Loan Loss Provisioning)

• Status: Significant progress has been made, but challenges remain in achieving full convergence.
• Key Models:
  • Three-Bucket Model (IASB): Recognises lifetime expected losses when there is significant deterioration in credit quality. For investment-grade assets, this occurs when they fall below investment grade.
  • CECL Model (FASB): Requires recognition of lifetime expected losses at the point of initial recognition, based on current loss expectations.
• Similarities:
  • Both models are expected loss based.
  • They use the same information set for estimating losses.
  • Interest revenue is calculated on the gross carrying amount for non-credit impaired assets.
• Differences:
  • The IASB uses a 12-month expected loss measure for assets not meeting the lifetime criterion, whereas the FASB uses lifetime expected losses immediately.
  • The CECL model may result in a "day one" effect, potentially distorting the carrying amount of high-quality long-term assets.
• Feedback and Deliberations: The boards will consider public comments on both models during redeliberations and expect to complete deliberations in 2013.

3. Leases

• Status: Completed discussions, with revised proposals for identical lease accounting standards.
• Next Steps:
  • Exposure drafts will be published in the second quarter of 2013 with a 120-day comment period.
  • Additional outreach with users of financial statements and entities involved in lease activities will occur during the comment period.
  • Joint redeliberations are planned later in 2013.

4. Revenue Recognition

• Status: Substantive redeliberations completed in December 2012.
• Next Steps:
  • Remaining topics (scope, disclosure, transition, effective date) will be addressed in the first quarter of 2013.
  • Final standards are expected to be issued in mid-2013.
• Objective: To create consistent revenue recognition standards across various transactions, industries, and capital markets, excluding leases, financial instruments, and insurance contracts.

5. Insurance Contracts

• Status: Joint project with differing decisions on key aspects.
• Key Matters:
  • Both boards agree to measure insurance liabilities using current estimates of cost to fulfill obligations.
  • Differences exist in:
    • Recognition of changes in estimate
    • Inclusion of a risk margin in the liability measurement
    • Treatment of acquisition costs
• Next Steps:
  • IASB plans to publish an Exposure Draft in the first half of 2013, seeking feedback on five key matters.
  • FASB plans to publish its first Exposure Draft in mid-2013.

6. Investment Entities

• Status: Mostly jointly deliberated, with the IASB issuing final requirements in October 2012.
• Next Steps:
  • FASB plans to finalise its redeliberations and issue a final Standard in the first half of 2013.
  • Final requirements will be similar but not identical due to differing focuses.

Key Challenges

• Impairment: Challenges include aligning stakeholder needs and market differences. The IASB's three-bucket model and the FASB's CECL model differ in timing and approach to lifetime loss recognition.
• Insurance Contracts: The IASB needs to issue a final standard urgently, while the FASB is proposing amendments to its existing model. Differences in starting points make convergence difficult.
• Operational Complexity: The three-bucket model requires dual calculations for assets in the "good book," which has been a concern for users of financial statements.

Conclusion

The convergence projects aim to enhance financial reporting by aligning IFRS and US GAAP. While significant progress has been made in several areas, challenges remain, particularly in impairment and insurance contracts. The boards continue to work collaboratively, with a focus on addressing stakeholder feedback and achieving a converged solution in 2013.