July 2008

Our July edition leads with an article onthe International Accounting StandardsBoard’s (IASB) latest plans forconvergence with its counterpart in theUnited States, the Financial AccountingStandards Board (FASB). We then lookat some recent changes that have takenplace and some that are expected to occurin the near future as well as commentingon the effect the credit crisis may haveon the future reporting of financialinstruments.

Welcome to IFRS News– a quarterly update fromthe Grant ThorntonInternational IFRS team.IFRS News offers asummary of the moresignificant developmentsin International FinancialReporting Standards (IFRS)along with insights intotopical issues andcomments and viewsfrom the Grant ThorntonInternational IFRS team.

IFRS News

2 IFRS News July 2008

Update to the Memorandum ofUnderstanding between the IASB andthe US FASB to set out steps neededto facilitate mandatory adoption ofIFRS in all major capital markets

Following the elimination of the USGAAP reconciliation requirement forSEC-registered foreign companies thatuse IFRS, the IASB and FASB havediscussed the need to update their 2006joint Memorandum of Understanding(MoU). With the reconciliationmilestone achieved, the Boards have settheir sights on adoption of IFRS in all ofthe world’s major capital markets by2013. The Boards also acknowledge thata stable period will be needed ahead ofthat date.

The revised MoU is not yet final, butthe Boards have discussed its majorthemes. The most significant outcome isan expected reordering of the IASB’spriorities and work plans between nowand 2011. That is the target date bywhich ‘major deficiencies’ in IFRS willneed to be addressed if the ambitious2013 goal is to have a realistic chance ofsuccess. The projects falling into the‘major deficiencies’ category are:

• Revenue recognition – the Boardsregard existing guidance in IAS 18‘Revenue’ as incomplete, insufficient,and internally inconsistent. Preparerswho do not find a ready answer inIAS 18 often resort to the detailedguidance provided in US GAAP. TheBoards therefore intend to develop asingle model of revenue recognitionin time for the 2013 deadline.

• Fair value measurement – IFRScurrently lacks a consistent/robustdefinition of fair value, and this hasbeen identified as a significant issuefor US investors. The Boardstherefore aim to complete a projecton this matter by mid-2011 by;limiting the objective of the projectto amending existing IFRSs toreplace the various measurementterms used with references to eitherentry or exit prices; and including adefinition of exit prices that isidentical to the one used in the USstandard dealing with fair valuemeasurement.

• Consolidation policy – the Boardshave identified the need forimproved guidance relating toeffective control and special-purposeentities as being critical issues thatneed to be addressed, particularly inlight of the current credit crisis. Theintention is to complete aconsolidation policy standard thatembraces the idea of effective controlby 2011.

• Derecognition – the Boards viewboth IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments:Recognition and Measurement’ andthe US derecognition standard asbeing flawed and have thereforeidentified a need for a replacementstandard to be developed which willadequately address securitisationissues.

In addition, the Boards have identifiedprojects that address areas for whichthere is a significant need forimprovement in IFRS, which includefinancial statement presentation, post-retirement benefits and lesseeaccounting. The MoU discussions haveprovided some clear pointers on theBoards’ current views on what should bedone in these areas.

Inevitably, this prioritisation exercisemeans that other projects will be pushedback. Any other projects not specificallymentioned in the MoU can be expectedto be relegated to the longer termagenda. The project on insurance islikely to fall into this category.

Convergence moves a step closer

IFRS News July 2008 3

Amendments to IFRS 1 and IAS 27aim to encourage greater use of IFRSin separate financial statements

The IASB has issued amendments toIFRS 1 ‘First-time Adoption ofInternational Financial ReportingStandards’ and IAS 27 ‘Consolidatedand Separate Financial Statements’,entitled ‘Cost of an Investment in aSubsidiary, Jointly Controlled Entity orAssociate’.

These changes affect only theseparate financial statements of a parententity or investor. In some jurisdictions,parent entities apply IFRS in theirconsolidated financial statements butcontinue to use local GAAP in theirseparate (or ‘Company-only’) financialstatements. The changes aim to removeone of the problems which havediscouraged the use of IFRS in separatefinancial statements. The main changesare:• the introduction of a ‘deemed cost’

exemption into IFRS 1 for first-timeadopters of IFRS when measuringthe cost of an investment in asubsidiary, jointly controlled entityor associate, and

• the removal of IAS 27’s requirementto deduct dividends paid from pre-acquisition profits from the cost ofsuch an investment in the investor’sseparate financial statements.

Previously parent entities recognisedincome from investments in subsidiariesonly to the extent that dividends werepaid out of post-acquisition accumulatedprofits; distributions received out of pre-acquisition profits were regarded as arecovery of the investment and werededucted from its cost. In future,dividends receivable will be recorded asincome. However, IAS 36 ‘Impairment ofAssets’ has also been amended to includea dividend in excess of the investee’s

comprehensive income for the period asan indicator of possible impairment ofthe investment.

The changes also include newrequirements on accounting by a parentthat reorganises its group by forming anew parent entity without affecting theinterests of shareholders.

The Amendments are effective forannual periods beginning on or after1 January 2009.

IASB acts to reduce obstaclespreventing companies fromadopting IFRS

CommentThe previous requirement to treat dividends paid out of pre-acquisition profits as areduction of the cost of investment in a subsidiary, joint venture or associatecreated practical problems for many companies and no doubt was a factor behindsome of them continuing to use local GAAP rather than IFRS in their separatefinancial statements.

The IFRS 1 changes are perhaps more pragmatic than principle-based.However, they are not inconsistent with other exceptions contained in IFRS 1 andshould encourage wider adoption of IFRS in separate financial statements. Wepressed for these changes and therefore welcome their publication.

4 IFRS News July 2008

Minor problem areas in standardsaddressed by IASB amendments

The IASB has completed its first roundof annual improvements by publishing‘Improvements to IFRSs’ (‘the 2008Improvements’). These make minoramendments to a number ofInternational Financial ReportingStandards.

This process is intended to deal withnon-urgent (but necessary) minoramendments. These could be mattersreferred to the International FinancialReporting Interpretations Committee(IFRIC) or suggestions frompractitioners. Rather than makingpiecemeal changes during the year, theprocess streamlines the improvementactivity through publication of changesin a single, annual document.

The 2008 Improvements are dividedinto two parts, with the first partincluding amendments that result inaccounting changes for presentation,recognition or measurement purposeswhile the second deals with amendmentsthat are terminology or editorial changesonly, which the IASB expect to have noor minimal effect on accounting.

In most (but not all) cases theamendments apply for annual periodsbeginning on or after 1 January 2009,with early adoption permitted.

IASB completes its first annualimprovements project

CommentWhen the Exposure Draft containing the proposed amendments to IFRS werepublished last year, we raised concerns that some proposals amidst the 40-pluschanges originally put forward could have far-reaching implications. An examplewas the proposed broadening of the definition of a derivative (including embeddedderivatives) which we felt was likely to capture many contracts currently outside thescope of IAS 39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’. This andcertain other proposals did not seem to fall into the ‘minor but necessary’ category.

We are therefore pleased that the IASB has removed most of the morecontroversial changes from the 2008 Improvements. One controversial issue thatthe Board did include concerns accounting for advertising and promotionalactivities. An entity incurring costs on promotional goods such as catalogues willneed to expense these costs when it has a ‘right to access’ the goods. Companiesthat previously recognised catalogues and brochures as assets will therefore needto review their accounting policies in the light of the 2008 Improvements.

IFRS News July 2008 5

Interpretation will cause some entitiesto recognise revenue at a later stage

The International Financial ReportingInterpretations Committee (IFRIC) haspublished IFRIC 15 ‘Agreements for theConstruction of Real Estate’.

The development of thisInterpretation was prompted by thedesire to standardise accounting practiceamong real estate developers for ‘offplan’ sales of apartments or houses (salesbefore the construction of theapartments or houses is complete). Upto now, there have been significantdifferences in the way real estate

developers have accounted for suchsales, with some recording revenue onlywhen the completed unit is handed overto the buyer, and others recognisingrevenue as construction progresses inaccordance with IAS 11 ConstructionContracts.

The IFRIC Interpretation will makeit more difficult to argue that this type ofagreement falls within the scope of IAS11. It emphasises that a feature ofconstruction contracts is the buyer’sability to specify major structuralcomponents of the design both beforeand during construction activity. Ittherefore seems likely that this

Interpretation will require changes torevenue recognition policies for someproperty developers and house-builders.IFRIC 15 is effective for annual periodsbeginning on or after 1 January 2009,with earlier application permitted.

IFRIC Interpretation on Agreementsfor the Construction of Real Estate

The International Financial ReportingInterpretations Committee (IFRIC) haspublished IFRIC 16 ‘Hedges of a NetInvestment in a Foreign Operation’.

The IFRIC clarifies certain issuesabout the accounting for hedges offoreign currency risk relating to foreignoperations (such as subsidiaries andassociates whose activities are conductedin a currency other than the functionalcurrency of the reporting entity).

The main issues addressed are:• the type of risk that can qualify for

this form of hedge accounting, and• where within a group the instrument

that offsets that risk may be held.

In respect of the first issue, IFRIC 16concludes that translation risks relating toexchange differences between a foreignoperation’s functional currency and thereporting entity’s presentation currencyare not eligible for hedge accounting. Thisis based on the view that mere translationof currency for presentational use doesnot represent an economic risk. Theeconomic risk relates to the functionalcurrency exposure between the parent orinvestor and its foreign operation.

On the second issue, IFRIC clarifiesthat the hedging instrument can be heldby any subsidiary or parent entitywithin a group regardless of the entity’sfunctional currency.

IFRIC 16 is effective for annualperiods commencing on or after1 October 2008, with earlier applicationbeing permitted. However, inrecognition of the difficulty that entitieswould face in preparing adequateinformation from the inception of thehedge relationship, retrospectiveapplication is not required.

IFRIC Interpretation on Hedgesof a Net Investment in a ForeignOperation

6 IFRS News July 2008

Discussion paper aims to increasetransparency in the accounting forpost-employment benefits

The IASB has issued a Discussion Paper‘Preliminary Views on Amendments toIAS 19 Employee Benefits’ which setsout the IASB’s preliminary views onhow the accounting for certain types ofpost-employment benefit, includingpensions, could be improved.

IAS 19 has been criticised in manyquarters for permitting the inclusion ofmisleading figures in the statement offinancial position (balance sheet). Thecriticisms stem largely from the so-called‘corridor mechanism’ which enablescompanies to defer the recognition ofactuarial gains and losses on theirdefined benefit pension schemes.

The proposal to removethe ‘corridor mechanism’is an important one as thepension liabilities of somelarge companies cansometimes exceed the actualmarket capitalisation of thecompanies themselves

The preliminary view expressed inthe Discussion Paper is that the optionsfor deferred recognition of gains andlosses in defined benefit plans should beremoved, thereby improvingcomparability between companies andreflecting the actual pension schemeexposure more accurately. This proposalis an important one, as the pensionliabilities of some large companies cansometimes exceed the actual marketcapitalisation of the companiesthemselves.

The Discussion Paper also proposesa new classification of what it refers to as‘benefit promises’ into ‘contribution-based promises’ and ‘defined benefitpromises’. Some schemes that currentlyfail the IAS 19 definition of ‘definedcontribution plans’ would fall into thenew contribution-based category. ThePaper puts forward a new measurementattribute for contribution-basedpromises, which would involve a fairvalue approach assuming that the benefitpromise does not change. This wouldnot change the accounting for simplefixed contribution schemes but isintended to clarify and improve theaccounting for plans that include apromised return on contributions linkedto an asset or an index.

In this respect, the focus of theDiscussion Paper is quite narrow: it isprincipally aimed at addressing theaccounting for cash balance pensionscheme plans or pension schemes whichcontain promises linked to contributionswith a minimum guaranteed return.Using current terminology, theseschemes have some of the characteristicsof both defined benefit plans and definedcontribution plans.

IASB takes first step to revisingIAS 19

IFRS News July 2008 7

The IASB has published a DiscussionPaper ‘Reducing the Complexity ofFinancial Instruments’ as the first step ina project towards developing a lesscomplex and principles-based standardthat will replace IAS 39 ‘FinancialInstruments: Recognition andMeasurement’.

The Discussion Paper considers themain sources of complexity in reportingfinancial instruments. The authorssuggest that a key source of complexityis the multiple methods currently usedto measure financial instruments. ThePaper argues that the long-term solutionto these problems is a move to full fairvalue, but then explains why thissolution is not realistic in the near term.Accordingly, three possible ‘intermediateapproaches’ are explored.

The intermediate approachessuggested are:• amending the current measurement

requirements;• replacing them with alternative

requirements; and• simplifying hedge accounting

requirements.

Ways of amending the currentmeasurement requirements includereducing the number of categories offinancial assets by, for example,eliminating either the held-to-maturityor the available-for-sale-categories.Alternatively, some of the currentmeasurement restrictions such as thetainting rules for the held-to-maturitycategory could be eliminated.

The project is the first stepin developing a lesscomplex and moreprinciples-based standardthat will replace IAS 39

Under the second intermediateapproach, the existing measurement

requirements would be replaced with afair value measurement principle. Fairvalue would become the default categoryfor financial instruments but limited,optional exemptions would be made toallow some instruments to be measuredat amortised cost. The nature of theexemptions would no doubt be ofsignificant interest – one approach putforward is to base it on the extent ofvariability of an instrument’s cash flows.

The third intermediate approach is tosimplify hedge accounting requirementsin some way. This might beaccomplished by replacing the currentmodels with a less complex fair valuehedging model or simplifying theexisting model by changing therequirements for assessing hedgingeffectiveness or the hedging of portionsor partial term hedges.

Reducing the complexity inreporting financial instruments

CommentSadly the project is at present only on the IASB’s research agenda (as opposed tobeing an active agenda project), so those readers hoping to see a reduction incomplexity in the near future are likely to be disappointed.

It is nevertheless a thought-provoking paper for several reasons. It is notable inpart for what it does not cover. Some issues, such as derecognition, are covered inseparate projects while others, such as IAS 39’s complex language and convolutedstructure, or its lack of a clear principle on when an embedded derivative is ‘closelyrelated’, are not addressed at all. More fundamentally, however, should the IASB beseeking to make significant ‘intermediate’ changes to IAS 39 if it has alreadydecided on the long-term solution?

8 IFRS News July 2008

IASB and FASB seek views on twoconsultative documents on theconceptual framework

The IASB and the US FinancialAccounting Standards Board (FASB) havepublished two consultative documentsrelating to their joint project to develop animproved conceptual framework. Theproject is an important one as a solidfoundation upon which future standardscan be based is essential if the boards areto succeed in their aim of developingprinciples based standards which areconsistent with one another.

The first document is an ExposureDraft which seeks views on an improved

objective of financial reporting, thequalitative characteristics of informationprovided by financial reporting andconstraints on the provision of thatinformation. It proposes that theobjective of financial reporting is toprovide financial information that isuseful to present and potential equityinvestors, lenders and other creditors inmaking decisions as capital providers.

The second document sets out theBoards’ preliminary views on thereporting entity concept and related issues.Although the reporting entity conceptdetermines some important aspects offinancial reporting, the boards’ existingframeworks do not address it specifically.

A solid foundation isessential if the Boards areto succeed in their aim ofdeveloping principles-based standards

Views on the two documents areinvited by 29 September 2008. There areeight phases to the overall project, sowhile the publications dealing with thefirst two phases are welcome, it will besome while before we see completion ofthe revised conceptual framework.

Conceptual framework– views sought

IASB redeliberations expected to leadto a stand-alone Standard for privateentities

The IASB has begun redeliberating theproposals in the Exposure Draft of aproposed IFRS for SMEs, which has ledamongst other things to a change in namefor the project.

Some commentators struggled toreconcile the use of the term ‘Small andMedium-sized Entity’ with that project’sscope (it addressed the accounting for allentities which do not have shares issuedon a public stock market and whichtherefore could be any size, big orsmall). They will be pleased to learn that

the IASB has decided to rename theproject the ‘International FinancialReporting Standard for Private Entities’although its scope remains the same.

Other important decisions thatwere tentatively made by the IASB inits May and June meetings included aresolution that the final standardshould be a stand-alone document andthat all accounting policy optionscontained in the full text of IFRSsshould be available to private entities.This would mean that topics such asshare-based payment and lessoraccounting for finance leases will nowbe addressed directly rather than bycross-reference to full IFRS.

The eventual standard will also reflectthe requirements contained in the revisedversion of IAS 1 ‘Presentation ofFinancial Statements’ published last year.Amongst other things, this will meanthat the final version of the IFRS forPrivate Entities will use the new titles forfinancial statements contained in IAS 1(eg Statement of Financial Position ratherthan Balance Sheet). As is the case for fullIFRS, these titles will not be mandatory.Entities using the IFRS for PrivateEntities will also be required to present a“statement of comprehensive income”.

The Board will continue to debatethe proposals in future meetings beforeany final standard is developed.

The International Financial ReportingStandard for Private Entities – a bettername for the IFRS for SMEs project

IFRS News July 2008 9

Although IAS 1 ‘Presentation ofFinancial Statements’ (Revised 2007)does not become effective until reportingperiods beginning on or after 1 January2009, preparers of accounts should bethinking now about the changes that itwill bring. The new requirements areretrospective so companies adoptingthem in 2009 will need comparativeinformation for 2008.

Perhaps the most important changeis the requirement to present all items ofincome and expense recognised in theperiod in either a single “statement ofcomprehensive income” or in twoseparate statements (an “incomestatement” and a “statement ofcomprehensive income”).‘Comprehensive income’ includesnormal profits and losses along withother gains and losses that are reportedoutside profit or loss in accordance withIFRS. These items of othercomprehensive income includerevaluation surpluses, actuarial gains andlosses and changes in the fair value ofavailable-for-sale financial assets. Theseitems, previously charged or credited toequity, will in future be reportedseparately from owner transactions suchas dividends and changes in share capital.

The new requirements will focusattention on comprehensive income as aperformance indicator in addition to themore traditional net income sub-total,and could result in a change in the wayanalysts read the financial statements.

The amended version of the Standardalso makes changes to the titles of theprimary financial statements, with• the term “statement of financial

position” replacing “balance sheet”;• “statement of cash flows” replacing

“cash flow statement”; and• “statement of comprehensive

income” replacing “statement ofrecognised income and expenditure”as explained above.

While these changes in title haveattracted considerable attention, theiruse is not mandatory. Instead preparersmay be wise to focus on a change thathas attracted less attention but couldhave a major impact – the need to makeadditional comparative disclosures inparticular circumstances.

IAS 1 as amended in 2007 introducesa requirement to present an additionalbalance sheet (or statement of financialposition) as at the beginning of theearliest comparative period in a set offinancial statements when the entityretrospectively applies an accountingpolicy or makes a retrospectiverestatement, or when it reclassifies itemsin its financial statements.

Should you find that you need toprepare a third balance sheet, 2009 willsuddenly seem not so far away!

IAS 1 Revised: Implementationdraws nearer

10 IFRS News July 2008

Credit crisis causes IASB to reviewits work schedule

CommentThe IASB has sensibly acknowledged that standard-setters can learn from the creditcrisis. Hence this difficult period may at least provide the impetus for some lastingimprovements in financial reporting.

However, a note of realism is also necessary. Forming a workable definition of‘off balance sheet arrangements’ is a challenging task in itself, even before decidinghow the transparency of such arrangements can be enhanced.

Financial statements should inform users about risks but could not have beenexpected to foresee a crisis that very few predicted.

‘Sub-prime’ losses and the wider effectsof the global credit crisis are continuing.Unsurprisingly, these events have led todemands for the IASB to review theeffectiveness of some of its standardsagainst the backdrop of these extrememarket conditions. In April the G7finance ministers and central bankscalled for the IASB to take actionurgently to improve accounting anddisclosure standards for off-balancesheet entities and enhance guidance onfair value accounting. How will theIASB respond?

The IASB has a long-running projectto develop a consolidation modelapplicable both to normal subsidiariesand to special purpose entities. It hasrecently suggested that it will omit thediscussion paper stage and proceeddirectly to an exposure draft later thisyear. Around the same time, proposalsto improve IFRS 7 ‘FinancialInstruments: Disclosures’ (the Standarddealing with financial instrumentdisclosures) may emerge. Additionaltransparency concerning off balancesheet risks and arrangements is likely tobe the main theme of any such proposalsalthough refinements in other areas(such as liquidity risks) could alsofeature. A review is timely in any case,with 2007 being the first year in whichIFRS 7 has been applied widely.

Additional transparencyconcerning off balancesheet risks andarrangements is likelyto be the main themeof proposals to improveIFRS 7

The IASB is also expected to moveahead with detailed guidance on fairvalue measurement, along the lines of the(US GAAP influenced) discussion paperit issued in 2007. However, it will surelybe less sympathetic to calls to limit orroll-back the use of fair valueaccounting. Some commentators suggestthat fair value is appropriate only whenitems are held for trading or managed ona fair value basis. Others have gonefurther, suggesting that fair valueaccounting may have exacerbated theeffects of the credit crisis. Proponents offair value argue that cost-basedalternatives would mask the impact ofchanging market conditions and, indoing so, would ultimately prolong thedifficulties. This debate will continue.

IFRS News July 2008 11

Over the last few months, the IFRS teamof Grant Thornton International hasdeveloped a number of publications.These include:

IFRS Top 20 TrackerThe IFRS Top 20 Tracker takesmanagement through 20 top disclosureand accounting issues identified byGrant Thornton International, based onthe experience of member firms withinGrant Thornton International.

Intangible Assets in a BusinessCombination – Identifying and ValuingIntangibles under IFRS 3This guide reflects collective efforts of theGrant Thornton International IFRS teamand member firm IFRS experts and

valuation specialists. It includes practicalguidance on the detection of intangibleassets in a business combination and alsodiscusses the most common methods usedin practice to estimate their fair value. Alsoincluded in the guide is an overview ofIFRS 3 ‘Business combinations’ (January2008), which summarises the main aspectsof accounting for business combinationsand draws out a number of practicalpoints to consider.

Non-current Assets Held For Sale andDiscontinued Operations – Challengesin Applying IFRS 5This guide looks into the moreproblematic aspects of IFRS 5 ‘Non-current Assets Held For Sale andDiscontinued Operations’. It explains

IFRS 5’s key implementation issues andcommon approaches to practicalapplication. The guide also includesseveral examples illustrating theStandard’s disclosure and presentationrequirements.

Grant Thornton InternationalIFRS guides available

This table lists the documents that theIASB currently has out to comment andthe comment deadline. Grant ThorntonInternational aims to respond to each ofthese publications.

Open for comment

Current IASB documents

Document type Title Comment deadline

IASB Discussion Paper Discussion Paper: Financial Instruments with 5 September 2008

Characteristics of Equity

IASB Discussion Paper Discussion Paper: Reducing Complexity in Reporting 19 September 2008

Financial Instruments

IASB Discussion Paper Preliminary Views on Amendments to IAS 19 Employee 26 September 2008

Benefits

IASB Exposure Draft An improved Conceptual Framework for Financial 29 September 2008

Reporting: Chapter 1: The Objective of Financial Reporting

and Chapter 2: Qualitative Characteristics and Constraints

of Decision-useful Financial Reporting Information

IASB Discussion Paper Preliminary Views on an improved Conceptual 29 September 2008

Framework for Financial Reporting: The Reporting Entity

The table below lists new IFRS standards and IFRIC Interpretations with an effective date on or after 1 January 2007.Companies are required to make certain disclosures in respect of new Standards and Interpretations under IAS 8 ‘AccountingPolicies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors’.

Effective dates of new standardsand IFRIC interpretations

New IFRS Standards and IFRIC Interpretations with an effective date on or after 1 January 2007

Title Full title of Standard or Interpretation Effective for accounting Early adoption permitted?

periods beginning on

or after

IAS 1 Amendment to IAS 1 Presentation of 1 Jan 2007 Yes

Financial Statements: Capital Disclosures

IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosure 1 Jan 2007 Yes

IFRIC 11 IFRS 2 – Group and Treasury Share Transactions 1 March 2007 Yes

IFRIC 14 IAS 19 – The Limit on a Defined Benefit Asset, 1 Jan 2008 Yes

Minimum Funding Requirements and their Interaction

IFRIC 12 Service Concession Arrangements 1 Jan 2008 Yes

IFRIC 13 Customer Loyalty Programmes 1 July 2008 Yes

IFRS 8 Operating Segments 1 Jan 2009 Yes

IAS 23 Amendments to IAS 23 Borrowing Costs 1 Jan 2009 Yes

IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements 1 Jan 2009 Yes

IFRS 2 Amendment to IFRS 2 Share-based Payment: Vesting 1 Jan 2009 Yes

Conditions and Cancellations

IAS 32 and IAS 1 Amendments to Financial Instruments: Presentation and 1 Jan 2009 Yes (but must be applied in conjunction

IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements: Puttable Financial with related amendments to IAS 39,

Instruments and Obligations Arising on Liquidation IFRS 7 and IFRIC 2)

IAS 32 Amendments to Financial Instruments: Presentation and 1 Jan 2009 Yes

IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements: Puttable Financial

Instruments and Obligations Arising on Liquidation

IFRS 3 Business Combinations (Revised 2008) 1 July 2009 Yes (but only for periods beginning

on or after 30 June 2007

IAS 27 Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements 1 July 2009 Yes (but must be applied in conjunction

with IFRS 3 Revised 2008)

IFRS 1 and IAS 27 Amendments to IFRS 1 First-time Adoption of International 1 January 2009 Yes

Financial Reporting Standards and IAS 27 Consolidated and

Separate Financial Statements

Various Improvements to IFRSs 1 January 2009 (unless

otherwise stated) Yes

IFRIC 15 Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate 1 January 2009 Yes

IFRIC 16 Hedges of a Net Investment in a Foreign Operation 1 October 2008 Yes

www.gti.org

© 2008 Grant Thornton International Ltd. All rights reserved.Grant Thornton International Ltd (Grant Thornton International) andthe member firms are not a worldwide partnership. Services aredelivered independently by the member firms.