Abstrakti
Main topic: This study concentrates on those disclosure requirements, which are defined by the new IFRS 9 and IFRS 7 related IASB Taxonomy. IASB has introduced a new standard (IFRS 9) on impairment, which requires a three-step approach, which in general replaces the current incurred impairment model with a new expected loss model. This new standard requires additional complex disclosures. The study provides early insights into implementation of IFRS 9 disclosure requirements on impairment, as IFRS 9 will become applicable 2018.
There is a large debate ongoing about the interpretation of the implementation of the IFRS 9 and IFRS 7 disclosure requirements. However, the IFRS Taxonomy is not very much part of this debate, although several advantages relate to the IASB taxonomy: principle-based accounting standard does very often not define specifically disclosure rules for each and every topic, therefore to derive reporting elements would be very difficult to accomplish. A robust taxonomy development and governance process leading to the IFRS taxonomy simplifies the task of interpretations and the actual expression of reporting elements.
Results: The IFRS 9 and IFRS 7 corresponding IFRS Taxonomy is not easy to read, as it involves particularly a large multidimensional table for the impairment rollforward, which without the use of an XBRL taxonomy software is very difficult to understand. The provided illustrative IASB Taxonomy as a PDF can not sufficiently replace the transparency of an XBRL taxonomy software as it can not display multidimensional tables. This also due to the fact that the roll-forward is a matrix of columns and rows, which go over more than ten pages. Due to these very detailed and sophisticated requirements, however annual reports as they still have to printed out have “natural” limits with regard to size and maximum number of columns for multinational tables, the question will arise how larger banks cn cope up with these requirements.
There is a large debate ongoing about the interpretation of the implementation of the IFRS 9 and IFRS 7 disclosure requirements. However, the IFRS Taxonomy is not very much part of this debate, although several advantages relate to the IASB taxonomy: principle-based accounting standard does very often not define specifically disclosure rules for each and every topic, therefore to derive reporting elements would be very difficult to accomplish. A robust taxonomy development and governance process leading to the IFRS taxonomy simplifies the task of interpretations and the actual expression of reporting elements.
Results: The IFRS 9 and IFRS 7 corresponding IFRS Taxonomy is not easy to read, as it involves particularly a large multidimensional table for the impairment rollforward, which without the use of an XBRL taxonomy software is very difficult to understand. The provided illustrative IASB Taxonomy as a PDF can not sufficiently replace the transparency of an XBRL taxonomy software as it can not display multidimensional tables. This also due to the fact that the roll-forward is a matrix of columns and rows, which go over more than ten pages. Due to these very detailed and sophisticated requirements, however annual reports as they still have to printed out have “natural” limits with regard to size and maximum number of columns for multinational tables, the question will arise how larger banks cn cope up with these requirements.
| Alkuperäiskieli | Englanti |
|---|---|
| Kustantaja | Social Science Research Network (SSRN) |
| Tila | Julkaistu - 2018 |
| OKM-julkaisutyyppi | D4 Julkaistu kehittämis- tai tutkimusraportti taikka -selvitys |