IFRScommunity.com

Interesting topic! I’d say that PD decreases as we near the repayment date, mainly because the likelihood of external risks such as economic downturns or geopolitical unrest lessens. But risks specific to the borrower remain unknown to the lender, so we shouldn’t assume these are nearly zero a day b...

good point, the entity might have initially recognised too much interest revenue

It's as simple as can be

Why is this part of the consideration no longer deemed payable?

Hi, I've split your post into a separate topic, feel free to provide more background information and context

Once again, what inconsistencies have you identified between IFRS and CA06?

I think you are simply looking in the wrong place. UK-based entities use IFRS or UK GAAP so I don't think you should expect CA 2006 to have overlapping requirements with these accounting standards.

I'd assume that local law aligns with IFRS. The investment entity exception under IFRS 10 is mandatory so there'd be issues if it conflicts with local regulations. In such cases, entities would follow local law and be effectively using a local version of IFRS, such as IFRS 'as adopted by [a country]...

It's great to see our forums are aiding your internal discussions, Leo

This is a lease expense, but a variable one, which isn't included in the lease liability: https://ifrscommunity.com/knowledge-base/ifrs-16-recognition-and-measurement-of-leases/#variable-lease-payments This holds true unless the lessor is responsible for maintaining the printers, in which case these...

It appears to be a lease, and you have the option to apply either IAS 38 or IFRS 16, as outlined in IFRS 16.4 (most entities opt for IAS 38). For a licence spanning five years, you should recognise a liability and related intangible asset covering the entire period, taking into account that these fu...

Yes, geographical. Take, for instance, a Tesco store in London: its revenue is independent from the cash inflows of another store, say, in Manchester.

Could you please share the most relevant disclosures you've come across?

I've moved this topic to 'General accounting and financial reporting discussion'. Please don't post local law questions under 'IFRS-related topics', thanks!

I'm not sure what kind of adjustment you have in mind, can you clarify a bit more?

Retail stores typically have different customer bases, so in principle they should be treated as separate CGUs due to independent cash *inflows*. However, companies often consolidate CGUs, as tracking hundreds of small ones is practically challenging. You could look at the financial statements of pu...

A similar scenario is discussed in IFRS 16.B46-47. To me, it seems possible to avoid sale and leaseback accounting if the initial contract with lessor 'A' is made just before exercising the purchase option and entering into the SALT with lessor B.

yes

Orange's Polish subsidiary classifies such funds as cash equivalents:
https://www.orange-ir.pl/wp-content/upl ... df#page=48

When designing the layout of SoFP, consider what would be most helpful while satisfying the minimum requirements in IAS 1.54. For instance, you can present the following line items:
- Cash & cash equivalents
- Term deposits
- Trade receivables
- Bonds
- Other financial assets

See IAS 27.8A :) An investment entity that is required, throughout the current period and all comparative periods presented, to apply the exception to consolidation for all of its subsidiaries in accordance with paragraph 31 of IFRS 10 presents separate financial statements as its only financial sta...

Their approach is correct. Read more about impairment at https://ifrscommunity.com/knowledge-bas ... al-assets/

I'm not familiar with arrangements like these. Based on your description, it seems that straight-line P/L recognition for non-refundable lease payments would be the best approach. Ultimately, it's the responsibility of the lessee to utilise the land efficiently. Considering the development potential...

The list provided in IAS 24.9 is not exhaustive, and an entity may identify, for example, a director’s brother as a related party.

yes

Please provide a detailed explanation of the terms of this arrangement, they aren't clear to me.

These are variable lease payments and you'll need to reassess the lease liability at reach date the rate resets: https://ifrscommunity.com/knowledge-base/ifrs-16-recognition-and-measurement-of-leases/#variable-lease-payments https://ifrscommunity.com/knowledge-base/ifrs-16-recognition-and-measuremen...

The entry you proposed seems odd! The statute of limitations, as per your local law, may soon apply. Once it does, the right to legal action for debt recovery expires and you'll be able to derecognise the liability and recognise a gain in P/L. BTW, why the creditors aren't actively seeking payment?

Please start a new topic describing the situation you're dealing with.

Always consider the 'highest and best use' regardless of the valuation method. Also, remember that for assets valued at fair value, there are no impairment losses, only changes in fair value. If two valuation techniques yield significantly different results, you need to recalibrate one of them. Sinc...

In principle, the valuation technique you select should yield the same fair value. If the income approach yields much higher fair value compared to the market approach, it means that the necessary infrastructure investments and related risks might not have been adequately accounted for in the income...