Part Significant decisions made by the Board - Accounting Standard AASB 1060 General Purpose Financial Statements – Simplified Disclosures for For-Profit and Not-for-Profit Tier 2 Entities - Significant decisions made by the Board in developing the disclosures | Zoe
Accounting Standard AASB 1060 General Purpose Financial Statements – Simplified Disclosures for For-Profit and Not-for-Profit Tier 2 Entities
Significant decisions made by the Board Significant decisions made by the Board in developing the disclosures
Start here
Get a plain-English read of Significant decisions made by the Board
Turn the raw legal text into a practical explanation grounded in Accounting Standard AASB 1060 General Purpose Financial Statements – Simplified Disclosures for For-Profit and Not-for-Profit Tier 2 Entities.
Significant decisions made by the Board in developing the disclosures
Replacing entire Standards with AASB 1060
In considering the ease of application for Tier 2 entities, the Board decided to replace any Standards that deal exclusively with presentation and disclosure requirements in their entirety with the corresponding requirements in AASB 1060. New paragraphs 20A and 20B are added to AASB 1057 Application of Australian Accounting Standards to note that entities applying this Standard do not need to comply with AASB 7 Financial Instruments:Disclosures, AASB 12 Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities, AASB 101, AASB 107 and AASB 124. These Standards will be replaced with the following sections from the IFRS for SMEs Standard:
Other Financial Instruments Issues (AASB 7): paragraphs 120 – 122
Investments in Associates (AASB 12): paragraphs 125 – 128
Investments in Joint Ventures (AASB 12): paragraphs 129 – 131
Related Party Disclosures (AASB 124): paragraphs 189 – 203
The Board noted that by replacing the five Standards listed in paragraph BC54, this also removes some of the guidance included in these Standards which is not included in the IFRS for SMEs Standard. However, for the sake of maintaining simplicity of the disclosure requirements, the Board considered this to be preferable to considering on a case-by-case basis which guidance should be included and which could be omitted. As noted in paragraph BC47, the Board does not intend the removal of the guidance to result in any differences in the presentation requirements to full AAS. However, in response to stakeholder feedback, the Board added paragraph 2 which specifically permits entities to refer to other Standards for guidance on requirements in this Standard. The Board also added the definitions from the replaced Standards in Appendix A.
To prevent possible differences in presentation requirements to full AAS, the Board further decided to add the following requirements from AASB 101, AASB 107 and AASB 124 to AASB 1060 which deal with:
the prohibition for Australian entities that apply AASB 1060 to depart from a requirement in an Australian Accounting Standard (paragraph 12 in this Standard and paragraph Aus19.1 in AASB 101);
the specific prohibition to offset assets and liabilities or income and expenses, unless required or permitted by an Australian Accounting Standard (paragraph 24 in this standard and paragraph 32 in AASB 101);
the option to present the net cash flow from operating activities under the indirect method by showing the revenues and expenses disclosed in the statement of comprehensive income and the changes during the period in inventories and operating receivables and payables (paragraph 72 in this standard and paragraph 20 in AASB 107);
options to report certain cash flows on a net basis (paragraphs 75 to 78 in this Standard and paragraphs 22−24 in AASB 107);
the exemption from the disclosure of key management personnel compensation where the entity obtains key management personnel services from another entity (paragraphs 195 and 196 in this standard and paragraphs 17A and 18A in AASB 124).
The prohibition to depart from a requirement in an Australian Accounting Standard reflects Australian specific circumstances which are also relevant to Tier 2 entities and hence needs to be included. Paragraphs 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 of the IFRS for SMEs Standard have been deleted, as they are not relevant to entities applying this Standard.
The offsetting prohibition in paragraph BC56(b) is included in Section 2 Concepts and Pervasive Principles of the IFRS for SMEs Standard (paragraph 2.52). As this section has been otherwise excluded from this Standard on the basis that it does not include any disclosures, the prohibition had to be separately added to this Standard.
Permitting the options in the presentation of the cash flow statement from AASB 107 ensures that there are no differences in presentation to full AAS and avoids any possible issues, for example for the consolidation of subsidiaries that report under Tier 2 by parent entities that report under Tier 1 (full AAS).
Retaining the exemption from disclosing key management personnel compensation in paragraph BC56(e) for entities that obtain key management personnel services from another entity avoids having potentially more onerous disclosure requirements than for Tier 1 entities. While arguably the exemption in paragraph 17A of AASB 124 (paragraph 195 in this Standard) only provides relief from disclosing the breakdown of key management personnel compensation that is otherwise required to be disclosed by AASB 124 paragraph 17, the Board noted that the fees paid to a management entity that must be disclosed under paragraph 18A of AASB 124 (paragraph 196 in this Standard) may also cover other services, and that the fees many not specifically identify the amount relating to key management personnel services.
To avoid any potential R&M differences, the Board further decided to replace the definition of materiality in the IFRS for SMEs Standard with the recently updated definition of material from AASB 101 and added paragraph 23 which clarifies the application of materiality (based on paragraph 31 in AASB 101). The Board also replaced the guidance on the presentation of information in the notes (structure of notes, paragraph 93 in this standard and paragraph 8.4 in the IFRS for SMEs Standard) with the revised guidance from paragraphs 114 and 116 of AASB 101 that was introduced via amendments to AASB 101 in 2015 and added additional guidance to paragraph 40 confirming that the terms of a liability that could, at the option of the counterparty, result in its settlement by the issue of equity instruments do not affect its classification (from paragraph 69(d) of AASB 101). This will further ensure that there are no presentation differences to full AAS.
Consistent with the basic approach of minimising differences to the disclosures in the IFRS for SMEs Standard, the Board decided to retain paragraph 3.18 of the IFRS for SMEs Standard which includes an option of not presenting a statement of changes in equity if the only changes to equity during the periods for which financial statements are presented arise from profit or loss, payment of dividends, corrections of prior period errors, and changes in accounting policy (paragraph 26 in this Standard).
In relation to the replacement of AASB 12, the Board noted that the investment entity exemption from consolidation creates a R&M difference to the IFRS for SMEs Standard. However, based on the principles listed in paragraph BC41, the Board did not consider that additional disclosures would be warranted in relation to this exemption. The Board noted that the IASB discussed the investment entity exception in the context of the 2020 Request for Information Comprehensive Review of the IFRS for SMEs Standard and concluded that few entities eligible to apply the IFRS for SMEs Standard would be investment entities. The Board also expects the exemption to have limited practical impact, since the majority of investment entities will be publicly accountable and therefore not able to apply this Standard.
In responding to stakeholders’ concerns that an investment entity preparing separate financial statements could not comply with paragraph 105 of this Standard because the paragraph requires the entity to identify the consolidated financial statements or other primary financial statements to which the separate financial statements relate, the Board noted that separate financial statements are defined in AASB 127 Separate Financial Statements as financial statements that are presented in addition to consolidated financial statements or to financial statements that apply equity-accounting to investments in associates or joint ventures (consistent with the definition of separate financial statements in the IFRS for SMEs Standard). Therefore, the financial statements prepared by investment entities would not be separate financial statements under that definition and as a result paragraph 105 would not apply.
Judgements made in adding, removing or adapting the disclosures in the IFRS for SMEs Standard
The Board has exercised a number of significant judgements while adding, removing and amending disclosures from the certain sections of the IFRS for SMEs Standard.
In considering the R&M differences between AASB 16 Leases and Section 20 Leases in the IFRS for SMEs Standard, the Board noted that the accounting for all leases held by lessees under AASB 16 is broadly similar to the the accounting for finance leases in the IFRS for SMEs Standard. As a consequence, the Board considered that the disclosures for finance leases should be used as a basis, and only be adapted for different terminology used in AASB 16 (eg referring to variable lease payments instead of contingent rent).
The Board also decided in principle to adapt the current disclosures for operating leases to apply to short-term leases and leases of low value assets that have not been recognised as right-of-use assets per the exemption in paragraph 6 of AASB 16. However, the Board noted that the disclosures in the IFRS for SMEs Standard about operating lease commitments are more extensive than what is required under paragraphs 55 and 60 of AASB 16. AASB 16 is a recent Standard that was finalised after the IFRS for SMEs Standard was developed. As noted in paragraph BC40, the Board considered that where the IASB has removed disclosures from full IFRS after the IFRS for SMEs Standard was finalised, similar reductions in disclosures should also be carried over to the new Tier 2 Standard. Therefore, the Board decided to replace the disclosures in the IFRS for SMEs Standard with the relevant disclosures from AASB 16.
In considering the R&M differences between AASB 15 and Section 23 Revenue in the IFRS for SMEs Standard, the Board noted that while the differences may affect the amount and timing of the revenue recognised, under both AASB 15 and Section 23, revenue is either recognised at a point in time or over time. On that basis, the Board decided to adapt the disclosures in the IFRS for SMEs Standard to reflect the different terminology used in AASB 15 but without adding unnecessary details. For example, the requirement to disclose specified categories of revenue has been replaced with a requirement to disaggregate revenue into categories that depict how the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows are affected by economic factors. The reference to “methods used to determine the stage of completion” has been changed to “methods used to recognise revenue for performance obligations that are satisfied over time”.
In considering the difference between AASB 123 Borrowing Costs and Section 25 Borrowing Costs in the IFRS for SMEs Standard, the Board noted that the IFRS for SMEs Standard does not permit the capitalisation of borrowing costs and therefore does not require any additional disclosures. As this is an R&M difference, the Board decided to require disclosure of the amount of capitalised borrowing costs on the grounds that total interest is an important element for a user to understand liquidity and solvency of an entity, and that information about these amounts capitalised would therefore be relevant. The Board further considered that the benefits of this disclosure would exceed the cost, noting that it is was also required for RDR entities.
Based on the principle to avoid differences to the IFRS for SMEs Standard as far as possible, the Board decided to retain certain disclosures even though they were not required for RDR entities. These include:
in relation to the section covering employee benefits, disclosures about termination benefits which are over and above what is required under full IFRS/AAS (paragraphs 173(d),(g), 174-175);
disclosures about the entity’s domicile and other general information (paragraph 32), the qualitative factors that make up goodwill (paragraph 142(g)), adjusting events that occurred after the end of the reporting period (paragraph 185) and parent-subsidiary relationships where an entity applies the exemption from providing related party disclosures for government-related entities (paragraph 200);
disclosures about hedging (paragraphs 121 and 122), investments in associates (paragraph 126) and leasing (paragraphs 144(b), 147(d) and 148(b)) where some disclosures were added but many others removed as a result of applying the principles in paragraph BC41; and
a number of disclosures in relation to the section covering transition to Australian Accounting Standards – Simplified Disclosures – see paragraph BC100 for details.
While acknowledging stakeholders concerns about the potential increase in disclosures, the Board noted that the small increases will be more than offset with the reduction in disclosures in other areas. On this basis, the Board agreed to retain the disclosures from IFRS for SMEs Standard, which have been demonstrated to be appropriate for small and medium sized entities without public accountability. However, consistent with the principles in paragraph BC40, the Board agreed to remove disclosures about specific components of capitalised defined benefit cost, group plans and other long-term benefits from the disclosures proposed in ED 295 as these disclosures had been included in full IFRS when the IFRS for SMEs Standard was first issued, but had since been removed from full IFRS.
In relation to the adjusting events after the end of the reporting period, the Board noted that paragraph 185 specifically refers to an update of ‘related disclosures’, which is different to the equivelant requirements in AASB 110 Events after the Reporting Period, where paragraph 8 requires the adjustment of amounts recognised in the financial statements and paragraphs 19 and 20 deal with disclosure-related adjustments. While RDR entities were not required to comply with paragraphs 19 and 20 of AASB 110, the Board noted that paragraph 185 refers only to disclosures that relate to amounts recognised in the financial statements and is therefore narrower than the requirements in paragraphs 19 and 20 of AASB 110. On that basis, the Board did not consider the requirements to be particularly onerous and decided to retain them consistent with the principle of consistency with the IFRS for SMEs Standard.
In considering differences between AASB 138 Intangible Assets and Section 18 Intangible Assets other than Goodwill in the IFRS for SMEs Standard, the Board noted that the IFRS for SMEs Standard does not permit the revaluation of intangible assets and therefore does not require relevant disclosures. The Board decided that these disclosures would be relevant and should be added, using the disclosures for property plant and equipment from paragraph 17.33 of the IFRS for SMEs Standard as a basis. The Board also decided to add a requirement to disclose the reason for an intangible asset having an indefinite useful life based on AASB 140 Investment Property paragraph 122(a), as this option is not available under the IFRS for SMEs Standard.
However, the IFRS for SMEs Standard also requires for revalued property, plant and equipment the disclosure of the carrying amount of the assets that would have been recognised under the cost model (paragraph 17.33(d) in the IFRS for SMEs Standard). The Board noted that the option to use the revaluation model for property, plant and equipment was only introduced into the IFRS for SMEs Standard as part of the amendments made in 2015. While the Basis for Conclusions to the amendments explain the reasons for permitting this option[56], they do not discuss the associated disclosures that were added in the process. When the Board discussed this particular disclosure requirement in the context of the original RDR disclosures in ED 192 Revised Differential Reporting Framework, it noted that the revaluation model provides more relevant information than the cost model, and that it would appear illogical and irrelevant to provide comparative information about the cost model[57]. The Board therefore concluded that the cost of this disclosure would outweigh the benefits. These arguments are still valid and on that basis the Board decided not to include this particular disclosure from the IFRS from SMEs Standard.
Audit fees
Stakeholders were generally supportive of adding the requirement to disclose the fees paid to each auditor and reviewer, including any network firm, from AASB 1054 to AASB 1060 (paragraphs 98 and 99). The Board considered that the disclosure of audit fees is a public policy issue (see paragraph BC42) and requiring this disclosure will assist in improving auditor independence and accountability, thereby increasing users’ confidence in the quality of companies’ financial reports. The Board noted that the term ‘network firm’ is defined in APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants issued by Accounting and Professional Ethical Standards Board (APESB) (November 2018 incorporating all amendments to April 2018) and that preparers and auditors may refer to APES 110 for guidance.
Maturity Analysis
A number of respondents to ED 295 and roundtable participants noted an inconsistency in disclosures about the maturity of financial liabilities. While paragraph 144(b) (paragraph 20.13(b) in the IFRS for SMEs Standard) requires disclosure of a quantitative maturity analysis for future lease payments of lessees in fixed time periods, paragraph 114 (paragraph 11.42 in the IFRS for SMEs Standard) only has a general requirement for other financial liabilities to disclose terms and conditions “such as … maturity, repayment schedule …”.
The Board acknowledged that information about the maturity of an entity’s financial liabilities is important as the users of financial statements of entities that do not have public accountability are particularly interested in information about short-term cash flows, obligations and commitments, and liquidity. However, as stakeholder feedback on this issue was mixed, the Board decided to retain the disclosures consistent with the IFRS for SMEs Standard. Noting that the IFRS for SMEs disclosures, in particular the leasing disclosures, are currently being reviewed by the IASB, the Board decided to flag the inconsistency in the disclosures to the IASB instead.
However, The Board also noted that while paragraph 114 only has general disclosure requirements, these still require disclosure of the terms and conditions of the debt instrument and make specific reference to the instruments’ maturity and repayment schedule. The Board therefore expects entities to provide this information in some form.
Tax reconciliation
Consistent with the disclosures in the IFRS for SMEs Standard, ED 295 only required disclosure of a narrative explanation of any significant differences between the tax expense (income) and accounting profit multiplied by the applicable tax rate without requiring a numerical reconciliation. Stakeholder feedback on this proposed reduction in disclosures was mixed. Amongst others, the Australian Taxation Office noted that the audited tax reconciliation is an important source of information for its risk identification and assessment purposes.
After considering the stakeholders’ feedback, the Board decided to require disclosure of a numerical tax reconciliation (paragraph 178(c)) on the basis that this is a public policy issue. The Board further noted that there has been significant interest in the income tax disclosures not only by regulators but also by the public in general, as part of the focus on possible tax avoidance in particular by multi-national entities.
Individually material items of income and expenses
Some respondents to ED 295 were concerned about the absence of a specific requirement to disclose individually material items of income and expenses and noted that this disclosure is currently explicitly required for both RDR GPFS and SPFS. While the Board acknowledged these concerns, it noted that entities applying this Standard are still expected to disclose information that is not presented elsewhere but that is relevant to an understanding of the financial statement in accordance with paragraph 91(c). This would include information about individually material items of income and expense where information about these items is necessary to assess the entity’s financial performance.
However, the Board, also agreed to monitor entities’ disclosure practices and may revisit this issue should it become apparent that entities do not provide sufficient disclosures in this regard.
Imputation credits
In response to stakeholders’ feedback, the Board decided to add in paragraphs 100–103 the disclosure of imputation credits from paragraphs 12–15 in AASB 1054. The Board noted that, although the disclosure of imputation credits was not required under the current RDR framework, it was mandatory for entities preparing SPFS under Part 2M.3 of the Corporations Act 2001 and therefore it should not be onerous to provide for the majority of entities transitioning from SPFS to the new Tier 2 GPFS.
The Board noted that Australia and New Zealand are among a limited number of jurisdictions that have an imputation tax regime and information about imputation credits provides useful information as the credits have the characteristics of an asset to equity investors. Moreover, published research demonstrates that the franking status of dividends increases the association between dividends and future earnings and therefore provides useful information about an entity’s future earnings potential and short-term cash flows.[58] Requiring the disclosure will ensure that information about the entity’s imputation credits will not be lost when entities transition from SPFS to this Standard.
Specific transition disclosure requirements in another Standard
The Board noted that other Australian Accounting Standards may provide transition options for entities on initial application and that these options may be accompanied by specific transition disclosure requirements. Examples of such transition options can be found in AASB 15, AASB 16, AASB 1058 Income of Not-for-Profit Entities or AASB 1059 Service Concession Arrangements: Grantors. The Board decided that where this is the case, the entity shall apply the relevant specific transition disclosures that are required under that Standard for the selected transition option instead of the disclosures for a change in accounting policy specified in paragraph 106 of this Standard.
This is because even though the specific transition option under another Standard may require additional disclosures compared to what would be required under paragraph 106, the Board noted that the targeted disclosures of the selected transition option provide more relevant information about the transitional impact than the general accounting policy change disclosures required under paragraph 106.
For example, where an entity adopts AASB 16 using the simplified transition approach and does not restate comparative information, AASB 16 paragraph C12 requires disclosure of an explanation of the differences between operating lease commitments disclosed under AASB 117 Leases at the end of the previous annual reporting period to the lease liabilities recognised in the statement of financial position at the date of initial application under AASB 16, together with the weighted average lessee’s incremental borrowing rate applied to the lease liabilities recognised at the date of initial application. In addition, the entity must also disclose whether it has used any of the specified practical expedients when adopting AASB 16. This provides more relevant information than a disclosure of the adjustments recognised for each financial statement line item affected by the new accounting policy in paragraph 106(b) for the current and each prior period presented.
AASB Standards and Interpretations not covered in AASB 1060
There are a number of Standards that the Board decided not to address in this Standard for the following reasons:
AASB 14 Regulatory Deferral Accounts as it would only be relevant for entities that have recognised regulatory deferral account balances under their current accounting policy (eg where the entity prepared SPFS without complying with the R&M of full AAS). None of the respondents to ED 295 identified any entities that intend to apply AASB 14 on transition to GPFS. The Board’s decision also is consistent with IASB’s view that it should not incorporate the requirements of IFRS 14 as part of the current comprehensive review of the IFRS for SMEs Standard[59];
AASB 4 Insurance Contracts, AASB 17 Insurance Contracts, AASB 1023 General Insurance Contracts, AASB 1038 Life Insurance Contarcts and AASB 1056 Superannuation Entities are not addressed in this Standard as the majority of the entities applying these Standards would have public accountability by holding assets in a fiduciary capacity.
The Board acknowledged that AASB 4 and AASB 17 would also be applicable to entities such as ‘captive insurers’ which may not be publicly accountable and hence would be eligible to apply this Standard. These entities will have to provide the full disclosures of AASB 4 or AASB 17, as the disclosures in these standards have not been replaced by AASB 1060. However, the Board was of the view that ‘captive insurers’ deal only with insurance contracts within their own group and as a result are likely to have relatively simple insurance arrangements. They would therefore not be unduly impacted by the full disclosure requirements under these Standards.
In relation to AASB 1056, the Board concluded that superannuation entities are currently divided between Tier 1 entities and non-reporting entities (including Small Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) Funds (SAFs) and Self-Managed Superannuation Funds (SMSFs)). Accordingly, Tier 2 disclosures were not developed for these entities. The Board further noted that there is currently no legislative requirements for superannuation entities to prepare financial statements in accordance with AAS. Until such time as the legislation is changed, superannuation entities could therefore continue preparing SPFS and thus AASB 1056 has been excluded from this Standard.
AASB 8 Operating Segments and AASB 133 Earnings per Share require disclosure of segment information and of earnings per share data only for entities which have debt or equity instruments that are traded, or are in the process of being issued for trading in a public market. These entities would have public accountability and, accordingly, the Board decided that these Standards are not applicable for Tier 2 entities. Instead, consistent with the IFRS for SMEs Standard, paragraph 33 refers back to these Standards and provides that an entity disclosing segment information or earnings per share must comply with AASB 8 or AASB 133 respectively in full.
AASB 134 Interim Financial Reporting is applicable for the specific purpose of preparing interim financial reports and AASB 1039 Concise Financial Reports is applicable for the specific purpose of preparing concise reports under the Corporations Act 2001. AASB 1060 is intended to be used in the preparation of annual GPFS. Accordingly, the Board considered that AASB 134 and AASB 1039 are not relevant in relation to this disclosure Standard.
The majority of the disclosures from AASB 1054 are now covered in AASB 1060: paragraphs 7 and 8 of AASB 1054 are covered in paragraphs 10–11 of AASB 1060, paragraphs 10 and 11 of AASB 1054 are covered in paragraphs 98 and 99 of AASB 1060 as discussed in paragraph BC75 and paragraphs 12–15 of AASB 1054 are covered in paragraphs 100–103 of AASB 1060 as discussed in paragraphs BC83–BC84. Paragraph 9 of AASB 1054 will no longer be relevant as it refers to SPFS and paragraph 16 of AASB 1054 does not provide information about short-term cash flows, obligations, commitment, contingencies, liquidity or solvency and is therefore not required.
AASB 1057 and AASB 1053 do not include any R&M or disclosure requirements and as a result have not been included in this Standard.
In assessing whether disclosure requirements of a particular AASB Interpretation would need to be added to AASB 1060, the Board has considered the following:
If the Basis for Conclusions in the IFRS for SMEs Standard confirmed that particular interpretations had been incorporated in the IFRS for SMEs Standard, no further action was required.
No action was required for interprations that have been superseded or do not have any disclosure requirements.
The Board further considered whether disclosure requirements from AASB Interpretations would need to be added to AASB 1060 but concluded this was not necessary for the following reasons:for the following reasons:
AASB Interpretation 1019 The Superannuation Contributions Surcharge and AASB Interpretation 1047 Professional Indemnity Claims Liabilities in Medical Defence Organisations are not relevant for Tier 2 entities, as entities applying these interpretations would have public accountability by holding assets in a fiduciary capacity.
The disclosures in AASB Interpretation 1052 Tax Consolidation Accounting Disclosure were excluded for RDR entities on the basis of cost-benefit considerations. In addition, as the interpretation is not creating any R&M differences to IAS 12, and therefore also not to the IFRS for SMEs Standard, the Board concluded that additional disclosures will not be required.
The disclosure paragraphs in AASB Interpretation 23 Uncertainty over Income Tax Treatments do not introduce new disclosures, but refer to disclosures in the AASB 112 that are captured in paragraphs 96, 97 and 154 of AASB 1060.
Two of the three disclosure paragraphs in AASB Interpretation 5 Rights to Interests arising from Decommissioning, Restoration and Environmental Rehabilitation Funds were already excluded for Tier 2 entities on the basis of cost-benefit considerations. However, as there are also no R&M differences to the IFRS for SMEs Standard, the Board concluded that no additional disclosures would be required.
Not-for-profit private sector entities and public sector entities
As explained in paragraph BC51, the Board decided that AASB 1060 should be equally applicable to both for-profit and NFP private sector entities and any public sector entities that are eligible to report under Tier 2 based on the requirements in AASB 1053. The Board therefore also considered any NFP private sector and public sector entity differences in AAS and to what extent, if any, additional disclosures would be required for such Tier 2 entities.
In summary, the Board decided to:
include additional disclosures for AASB 1, AASB 16, AASB 102 and AASB 123 to address R&M differences that are specific to NFP entities; and
include additional disclosures for AASB 1004, AASB 1050, AASB 1051, AASB 1055, AASB 1058 and AASB 1059 which are only applicable for NFP private sector and/or public sector entities.
Consistent with the conclusions in paragraph BC53, the proposed disclosures reflect the fact that the relevant transactions and circumstances covered are unique to NFP private sector and/or public sector entities and that users would require information on non-financial accountability and stewardship, even if the broad principles in paragraph BC41 would not indicate such a need.
As a general rule, the Board considered that previous decisions made under the current RDR framework in relation to the cost vs the benefits of these disclosures in relation to Tier 2 NFP entities remain relevant.
Drafting conventions and future maintenance
While ED 295 used the numbering from the IFRS for SMEs Standard, the Board agreed to use consecutive paragraph numbers in this Standard consistent with the approach used in other AAS. To show the linkage to the IFRS for SMEs disclosures and allow easy comparison, equivalent IFRS for SMEs paragraph numbers are added at the end of each paragraph where applicable. Where paragraphs from the IFRS for SMEs Standard have been amended, the words ‘based on’ are used.
The Board further decided that the analysis tables developed for ED 295 (See Detailed comparison of R&M requirements in IFRS for SMEs Standard and full IFRS and analysis of impact on disclosures – For for-profit private sector entities with no public accountability and Analysis of NFP modifications paragraphs in AAS and NFP specific AASB Standards for detailed analysis) will include all the edits and mark-ups and will be used as an ongoing document for future reference. They will be a record of the rationale behind certain decisions and judgements and would facilitate any future amendments.
The Board also acknowledged that a review of the disclosures will need to take place any time the IFRS for SMEs Standard is updated, a new Australian Accounting Standard or Interpretation is issued or amendments are made to existing Australian Accounting Standards or Interpretations.