.png?sfvrsn=dd675fd5_2)
-(1).png?sfvrsn=db949de5_0)
6a6c7fe2013f4be3b0ecc0a5930da5c9.jpg?sfvrsn=ab5334c8_0)
/business-management-global-connection/istock-1167579720-c.jpg?sfvrsn=ff93f9a5_2)
/audit-assurance/istock-1169206203-c.jpg?sfvrsn=1d6f9b25_6)
/ethics-and-professionalism/istock-1141115724-c.jpg?sfvrsn=4e54d691_2)
/business-management-global-connection/istock-1079974636-c.jpg?sfvrsn=e9fea23b_2)
/audit-assurance/istock-818732836-c-v3.jpg?sfvrsn=ae44e7b7_0)
.png?sfvrsn=905ee1bd_0)
/legal-secretarial/istock-866706340-c.jpg?sfvrsn=d7f57b8c_2)
To address stakeholders' feedback on challenges in applying certain aspects of IAS 37, the ED proposes targeted improvements to the following areas:
- Present obligation recognition criterion
- Costs to include in measuring a provision
- Rate used to 'discount' a provision
We are generally supportive of the proposals and have highlighted areas where further clarifications or enhancements could be made.
It should be noted that the proposals, once implemented, could result in significant changes to the current practice of measuring a provision, particularly for entities with significant long-term asset decommissioning obligations or are subject to levies and similar government-imposed charges.
Read more in our comment letter.