Proposed changes to Revenue Recognition

my last Sat’s lunch – ICPAS AGM

Which FRSs could be affected? FRS 18 Revenue and FRS 11 Construction Contracts are proposed to be merged into a single revenue recognition model in a discussion paper published in Dec 2008.

What is the proposed underlying principle?
The underlying principle in the proposed model is that revenue is recognised when a company satisfies a performance obligation in a contract; in other words, when the company fulfils one of its promises in the contract.

Who will be affected?
The abolition of FRS 11 would affect industries involved in ship building and property development. Particularly those industries delivering products and services with long gestation period.

What would be the difference in treatment?
Currently, revenue is recognised on a percentage of completion basis.
In proposed model, revenue can only be recognised if and only if the work-in-progress is transferred to the Customer as it is created. Since the Customer will not be accepting the handover of partially completed products/services, the business entities involved could experience fluctuations in reported earnings.

For those in the software business – For eg. a software developer is paid $1 million to develop a software with a warranty period of 3 months after delivery date. The developer cannot recognise the full $1 million upon delivery of the software. To satisfy the proposed change, the $1 million must be apportioned as separately identifiable revenue to software development and warranty respectively. Over the delivered portion can be recognised as revenue.

Reference – Accounting and Business 04/2009

FRS 1 – Presentation of Financial Statements Apr 2009

The objective of FRS 1 is to prescribe the basis of presentation of general purpose financial statements, to ensure comparability of entity’s financial statements with previous periods and with other entities’ financial statements.

Below is a summary of the overall considerations for the presentation of financial statements.

a) Fair presentation and compliance with FRS;
b) Going concern;
c) Accrual basis of accounting:
d) Consistency of presentation
e) Materiality and aggregation
f) Offsetting
g) Comparative information

FRS 1 also specifies the minimum line item disclosure required on the face of the balance sheet, income statement, statement of changes in equity and notes to the financial statements.

FRS 7 sets out the requirements for presentation of a cash flow statement.

FRS 1 also specifies that entities discloses information that is presented in the financial statements such as the accounting policies, judgements and key sources of estimation uncertainty at the balance sheet date.

Source – CPA Singapore Wire Apr 2009

ACCA F6 – Discussion with Examiner

Below is my interpretation of what was discussed in today’s meeting with the Examiner.

Generally computation ie. greater than or equal to 60% of total marks.

Question 1
Only 21% has >15 marks based on sample.
There are more parts to this question.
And this change in question structure is apparently the main reason for the generally poor overall performance of F6 students.

Question 2
56% achieved more than 11 marks based on sample.
The peculiar exceptions below were the killers ie.
– spousal transfer
– tax concession on royalty income of an author
– accrued income concept
– unable to compute net rental income

Question 3
less than 1% achieved more than 11 marks (Shocking!!!!)
Limited Liability Partnership is almost a sure thing for the coming exam.
Students unable to appreciate that past relevant deductions > than contributed capital.

Question 4 – GST
Part (a) and (b) were on GST. Part (c) – not GST.
Examiner said at least 10 marks will be assigned to GST in the exam.
Students unable to address pre-commencement expenses.

Question 5
51% scored more than 11 marks.

Other comments
Students did well in June 2008 exam but did very badly for Dec 2008 exam.
Warning to students – Order of set-off must be correctly stated in the utilisation of Capital Allowances/Losses/Donations.
Budget 2009 will not be examined in June 2009 exam.
Try to find out about tax-on-tax, tax reimbursement and tax allowance for the coming exam.

ACCA P6 Meeting with the Examiner

The following is my interpretation of what was discussed in the meeting the Examiner this afternoon.

What was done well?
– Knowledge – particularly in personal income tax, recent tax changes and withholding tax (but lacking in mitigation of liability under witholding tax).
– Approach & structure – students are observed to be attempting the more “approachable” questions in Part B first, then Part A. (Statistically from a worldwide basis, questions should be attempted in the order as per numbered ==> otherwise perform badly)

What was not done well?
Students failed to plan their time and answers. How?
Massive download of unnecessary info into the answers.
Don’t produce rote answers.
Don’t do unnecessary calculations.
Unable to structure answers to “advisory” questions.
Students should “tailor” their answer to the requirements of each question.
Poor performance on GST in all three sittings under the new syllabus to date. (wink! wink! study harder in this area)

What to focus on?
Need to know the technical details under F6 being foundation knowledge to P6.
Answer all parts of the questions. Address each paragraph in the question.
Focus on command words.
“What you intend to write must be to earn marks”

Other comment
Do the students have enough questions to practice? The old Paper 3.2 is different from current P6.
When the question asked for “a five-year period”, students only need to do one calculation for 5 years and NOT five single-year calculations.
P6 questions are on multi-tax type basis.

In the last sitting, there was someone who scored “zero” mark despite having written pages after pages. Why? The person spent the time copying the exam questions word for word twice into the answer script.

Students do not seem to under the meaning of “business undertaking”.

Tax cases are examinable. But the participants had a very vigorous discussion on where to get the details of the tax cases.

Tax Deferment Scheme

What is the Scheme about?
Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) allows taxpayers with GIRO arrangement to defer income tax instalments for 3 months, from May 2009 to July 2009.

I thought IRAS was in the same helpful mode as per Budget just presented earlier ie. delaying its collection of current tax payable due to IRAS.

But which 3 months are we talking about? May, Jun and July 2009!!! For these months, we are actually paying tax in ADVANCE ie. for YA2009. They are actually not due until we receive our Assessment after we report our income on April 15.

So IRAS, are you really helping us to alleviate our financial burden? I don’t think so.

Bottomline – You are not defering tax on money I owe you but rather you are defering on tax I am not due to pay you.

We understand better with graphics?

keep roaring!

Just read a paper from University of Chicago entitled “Human Judgement Accuracy, Multidimensional Graphics, and Humans vs Models”.

The objective of the paper was to check whether graphics aid humans in the detection of changes in firms’ performance and consequently reflect their judgement in bond’s rating of bonds from the respective companies.

So the researchers showed financial info in “boring” tabular format and then “pictorial” format to groups of people with different levels of financial accounting training.

Results

  • The research confirmed our common understanding that graphics do help with our understanding of any issue, including complex financial results.
  • This behaviour is similar to people from different levels of financial accounting training. This means that even the highly trained/”practiced” professionals would also get additional understanding.

Applications

  • So at work, can we try to present to our bosses in pictorial format ie. at least use bar charts and pie charts, to help them with their understanding?
  • If you are reading financial statments from public listed companies, they come with all the bells and whistles in term of presentation. For presentation of results to the press, go check out the powerpoints they use. You download a copy of SMRT’s if you wish.
  • Edgar should put more pictures in his notes to help his charges.

So we are kindergarten kids, basically?

Putting "Public" back into "Public Accountant"

amk at midnite walk

Who is Public Accountant suppose to serve? Is there a heavy emphasis on “public interest”?

Who are the people in control of financial standards setting process?

Do we all need such complex accounting standards? Are the accounting standards complex because the standards setting people want them to remain complex? For what? To ensure that we still have a job?

Or is it just the demand of some groups? Who then are these groups?

Could large public accounting firms, who have amassed valuable expertise regarding the intricacies of accounting standards and of corporations issuing financial statements be one such group?

I am reading this article entitled “What is the meaning of “the public interest”?” by Richard Baker. The article examined rhetorical claims by American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), and PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC).

I am doing an injustice to the article by paraphrasing them as above. If you are interested to read the full article, buzz me.

Till then, smile.

Singapore Budget 2009 – My budget chats

Dear Friends,

Happy ‘Niu’ Year to you.

The Singapore Budget 2009 has been touted as bold. I do agree with this labelling to a big extent.

I have placed my comment at AccountingWithEdgar blog. My latest entry is my views on Dr Basant Kapur’s idea to roll back GST to stimulate Consumption.

So please have a read through and share with me your views and comment too.

Gongxi to you!

Is your business a Going Concern?

Are your bankers, suppliers, customers, employees… asking questions or passing remarks about your company’s health ie. going concern (GC) status?

Given the current economic situation, may businesses may display certain symptoms that they may have caught the GC disease.

There is one more key person whom you may have to contend with in due course.. the auditor!

Auditors will increasingly question the viability of business. Helen Brand, head of ACCA reinterated this point in yesterday’s BT article entitled “Going concern dilemma for auditors”.

A CFO of a public listed company that I “accidentally” had lunch with recently, made this remark about their auditor. The company has some investment in China. To check for impairment, auditor requested that his company to do a 5-year cashflow projection and to be followed by computing for its NPV using the higher Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) as the discount rate. He said the end result of that exercise is obvious. There will definitely be a write down on the investment. The write down may wipe off whatever profit and resulting in a loss. A loss ==> any going concern problem?

While a loss may not lead to a going concern problem, nevertheless the loss would activate another series of tests to confirm whether a company has the ability to meet its obligations within 12 months from its balance sheet date.

A quick and simple test would be whether Current Assets > or < Current Liabilities.

A loss in the P&L and CA Qualified Audit Report => investors/bankers withdrawing their support. Unthinkable?

Business owners, you may wish to get ready the following for the GC test.

  • a realistic business plan
  • a realistic plan to liquidate non-current assets
  • a financial support package secured
  • capital injection from shareholders
  • or any other info that will help the auditor to appreciate that your business can go on for another 12 months

Both auditors and business owners do understand the gravity of GC.

Budget Chat 2 – Dr Basant K. Kapur

With reference to today’s ST “Making the case for GST roll-back” editorial by Dr Kapur, his principle position is:-

Singapore’s fiscal policy is too supply oriented.

I disagree with Dr Kapur in the following areas. Whether the budget measures are too supply-sided or demand-sided could be a matter of perception.

Keynes gave us fiscal policy measures to manage Aggregate Demand.

Aggregate Demand = Consumption (C) + Investment (I) + Government Spending (G)

My position – When I analyse the headline measures of the Budget, they are as much demand-sided as supply-sided.

  • For the Job Credits Scheme, it is primarily aimed at maintaining the job/income for many and hopefully translate to Consumption. This is a more indirect but maybe sustainable) approach to Consumption as compare to Government just crediting your accounts with some monies. This simple-putting-money-into-your-pockets idea is also done in the form of GST credits.
  • Unfreezing Credit by provding loan guarantees – While this is a way to keep the cash flow going to pay wages, it could be viewed as a means to encourage domestic Investment demand.
  • Double GST rebates – Dr Kapur called for GST roll-back ie. reverse the 2% GST increase to stimulate domestic demand. He argued that negative “real-balance effect” of higher prices due to higher GST would curb Consumption. My views – Would the Double GST rebates achieve the same? Or as GST rebates (and Job Credits schemes) are only given to Singaporeans, does it imply that the postive impact on demand (if any) would be more muted as compared to a GST roll-back to all residents? I hesitate to agree with Dr Kapur until I am given some info on the cost to businesses in changing GST/CPF rates up and down.
  • $20billion on Construction project – Is this not a direct prescription of Keynes where we would count the intended expenditure as Government Spending (G) and/or Investment (I)? Dr Kapur is asking for 2%/$1.8billion GST roll-back. May I have your view on $20billion thingy too? While the Contractors will be happy first, I am sure when they spend the money they earn, the rest of Singapore will be happy too.
  • The longer term spending on Education, Healthcare, Marriage, Parenthood and Green theme – I would agree with Dr Kapur that these would be more supply-sided initiatives.

Other Dr Kapur’s key views to share:-
The biggest thing that is weighing down on Consumption is Housing. Given the high owner occupied properties and “high” property prices, a lot of purchasing power is directed at maintaining our place of residence.