اذهب الي المحتوي

معيار القيمة العادلة


المشاركات الموصى بها

ما الذى اتى به المعيار الجديد للقيمة العادلة و كيف عالج عدم الاتساق التى كانت قائمة فى المعيار السابق و ما هى درجة الاختلاف فيما بينهما و كيف يمكن تلافيها ؟

رابط هذا التعليق
شارك على مواقع اخرى

[align=left:770dcb895a]Measurement Subsequent to Initial Recognition

Subsequently, financial assets and liabilities (including derivatives) should be measured at fair value, with the following exceptions: [iAS 39.46]

Loans and receivables, held-to-maturity investments, and non-derivative financial liabilities should be measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method.

Investments in equity instruments with no reliable fair value measurement (and derivatives indexed to such equity instruments) should be measured at cost.

Financial assets and liabilities that are designated as a hedged item or hedging instrument are subject to measurement under the hedge accounting requirements of the IAS 39.

Financial liabilities that arise when a transfer of a financial asset does not qualify for derecognition, or that are accounted for using the continuing-involvement method, are subject to particular measurement requirements.

Fair value is the amount for which an asset could be exchanged, or a liability settled, between knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm's length transaction. IAS 39 provides a hierarchy to be used in determining the fair value for a financial instrument: [iAS 39 Appendix A, paragraphs AG69-82]

Quoted market prices in an active market are the best evidence of fair value and should be used, where they exist, to measure the financial instrument.

If a market for a financial instrument is not active, an entity establishes fair value by using a valuation technique that makes maximum use of market inputs and includes recent arm's length market transactions, reference to the current fair value of another instrument that is substantially the same, discounted cash flow analysis, and option pricing models. An acceptable valuation technique incorporates all factors that market participants would consider in setting a price and is consistent with accepted economic methodologies for pricing financial instruments.

If there is no active market for an equity instrument and the range of reasonable fair values is significant and these estimates cannot be made reliably, then an entity must measure the equity instrument at cost less impairment.

Amortised cost is calculated using the effective interest method. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash payments or receipts through the expected life of the financial instrument to the net carrying amount of the financial asset or liability. Financial assets that are not carried at fair value though profit and loss are subject to an impairment test. If expected life cannot be determined reliably, then the contractual life is used.

IAS 39 Fair Value Option

IAS 39 permits entities to designate, at the time of acquisition or issuance, any financial asset or financial liability to be measured at fair value, with value changes recognised in profit or loss. This option is available even if the financial asset or financial liability would ordinarily, by its nature, be measured at amortised cost – but only if fair value can be reliably measured. Once an instrument is put in the fair-value-through-profit-and-loss category, it cannot be reclassified out.

IAS 39 Available for Sale Option for Loans and Receivables

IAS 39 permits entities to designate, at the time of acquisition, any loan or receivable as available for sale, in which case it is measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognised in equity.

Impairment

A financial asset or group of assets is impaired, and impairment losses are recognised, only if there is objective evidence as a result of one or more events that occurred after the initial recognition of the asset. An entity is required to assess at each balance sheet date whether there is any objective evidence of impairment. If any such evidence exists, the entity is required to do a detailed impairment calculation to determine whether an impairment loss should be recognised. [iAS 39.58]

The amount of the loss is measured as the difference between the asset's carrying amount and the present value of estimated cash flows discounted at the financial asset's original effective interest rate. [iAS 39.63]

Assets that are individually assessed and for which no impairment exists are grouped with financial assets with similar credit risk statistics and collectively assessed for impairment. [iAS 39.64]

If, in a subsequent period, the amount of the impairment loss relating to a financial asset carried at amortised cost or a debt instrument carried as available-for-sale decreases due to an event occurring after the impairment was originally recognised, the previously recognised impairment loss is reversed through profit and loss. Impairments relating to investments in available-for-sale equity instruments are not reversed. [iAS 39.65]

Derecognition of a Financial Asset

The basic premise for the derecognition model in IAS 39 is to determine whether the asset under consideration for derecognition is: [iAS 39.16]

an asset in its entirety; or

specifically identified cash flows from an asset; or

a fully proportionate share of the cash flows from an asset; or

a fully proportionate share of specifically identified cash flows from a financial asset.

Once the asset under consideration for derecognition has been determined, an assessment is made as to whether the asset has been transferred, and if so, whether the transfer of that asset is subsequently eligible for derecognition.

An asset is transferred if either the entity has transferred the contractual rights to receive the cash flows, or the entity has retained the contractual rights to receive the cash flows from the asset, but has assumed a contractual obligation to pass those cash flows on under an arrangement that meets the following three conditions: [iAS 39.17-19]

the entity has no obligation to pay amounts to the eventual recipient unless it collects equivalent amounts on the original asset,

the entity is prohibited from selling or pledging the original asset (other than as security to the eventual recipient), and

the entity has an obligation to remit those cash flows without material delay.

Once an entity has determined that the asset has been transferred, it then determines whether or not it has transferred substantially all of the risks and rewards of ownership of the asset. If substantially all the risks and rewards have been transferred, the asset is derecognised. If substantially all the risks and rewards have been retained, derecognition of the asset is precluded. [iAS 39.20]

If the entity has neither retained nor transferred substantially all of the risks and rewards of the asset, then the entity must assess whether it has relinquished control of the asset or not. If the entity does not control the asset then derecognition is appropriate; however if the entity has retained control of the asset, then the entity continues to recognise the asset to the extent to which it has a continuing involvement in the asset. [iAS 39.30]

These various derecognition steps are summarised below in a decision tree.

Derecognition of a Financial Liability

A financial liability should be removed from the balance sheet when, and only when, it is extinguished, that is, when the obligation specified in the contract is either discharged, cancelled, or expired. Where there has been an exchange between an existing borrower and lender of debt instruments with substantially different terms, or there has been a substantial modification of the terms of an existing financial liability, this transaction is accounted for as an extinguishment of the original financial liability and the recognition of a new financial liability. A gain or loss from extinguishment of the original financial liability is recognised in the income statement. [iAS 39.39]

Hedge Accounting

IAS 39 permits hedge accounting under certain circumstances provided that the hedging relationship is: [iAS 39.88]

formally designated and documented, including the entity's risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedge, identification of the hedging instrument, the hedged item, the nature of the risk being hedged, and how the entity will assess the hedging instrument's effectiveness; and

expected to be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows attributable to the hedged risk as designated and documented, and effectiveness can be reliably measured.

Hedging Instruments

All derivative contracts with an external counterparty may be designated as hedging instruments except for some written options. [iAS 39.72-73]

An external non-derivative financial asset or liability may not be designated as a hedging instrument except as a hedge of foreign currency risk. [iAS 39.72]

A proportion of the derivative may be designated as the hedging instrument. Generally, specific cash flows inherent in a derivative cannot be designated in a hedge relationship while other cash flows are excluded. However, the intrinsic value and the time value of an option contract may be separated, with only the intrinsic value being designated. Similarly, the interest element and the spot price of a forward can also be separated, with the spot price being the designated risk. [iAS 39.75]

Hedged Items

A hedged item can be: [iAS 39.78]

a single recognised asset or liability, firm commitment, highly probable transaction, or a net investment in a foreign operation;

a group of assets, liabilities, firm commitments, highly probable forecast transactions, or net investments in foreign operations with similar risk characteristics;

a held-to-maturity investment for foreign currency or credit risk (but not for interest risk or prepayment risk);

a portion of the cash flows or fair value of a financial asset or financial liability; or

a non-financial item for foreign currency risk only or the risk of changes in fair value of the entire item.

in a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk (Macro Hedge) only, a portion of the portfolio of financial assets or financial liabilities that share the risk being hedged.

Effectiveness

IAS 39 requires hedge effectiveness to be assessed both prospectively and retrospectively. To qualify for hedge accounting at the inception of a hedge and, at a minimum, at each reporting date, the changes in the fair value or cash flows of the hedged item attributable to the hedged risk must be expected to be highly effective in offsetting the changes in the fair value or cash flows of the hedging instrument on a prospective basis, and on a retrospective basis where actual results are within a range of 80% to 125%.

All hedge ineffectiveness is recognised immediately in the income statement (including ineffectiveness within the 80% to 125% window).

Categories of Hedges

A fair value hedge is a hedge of the exposure to changes in fair value of a recognised asset or liability or a previously unrecognised firm commitment to buy or sell an asset at a fixed price or an identified portion of such an asset, liability or firm commitment, that is attributable to a particular risk and could affect profit or loss. The gain or loss from the change in fair value of the hedging instrument is recognised immediately in profit or loss. At the same time the carrying amount of the hedged item is adjusted for the corresponding gain or loss with respect to the hedged risk, which is also recognised immediately in net profit or loss.

A cash flow hedge is a hedge of the exposure to variability in cash flows that (i) is attributable to a particular risk associated with a recognised asset or liability (such as all or some future interest payments on variable rate debt) or a highly probable forecast transaction and (ii) could affect profit or loss. [iAS 39.86]

The portion of the gain or loss on the hedging instrument that is determined to be an effective hedge is recognised directly in equity and recycled to the income statement when the hedged cash transaction affects profit or loss. [iAS 39.95]

If a hedge of a forecast transaction subsequently results in the recognition of a financial asset or a financial liability, any gain or loss on the hedging instrument that was previously recognised directly in equity is 'recycled' into profit or loss in the same period(s) in which the financial asset or liability affects profit or loss. [iAS 39.97]

If a hedge of a forecast transaction subsequently results in the recognition of a non-financial asset or non-financial liability, then the entity has an accounting policy option that must be applied to all such hedges of forecast transactions: [iAS 39.98]

Same accounting as for recognition of a financial asset or financial liability – any gain or loss on the hedging instrument that was previously recognised directly in equity is 'recycled' into profit or loss in the same period(s) in which the non-financial asset or liability affects profit or loss.

'Basis adjustment' of the acquired non-financial asset or liability – the gain or loss on the hedging instrument that was previously recognised directly in equity is removed from equity and is included in the initial cost or other carrying amount of the acquired non-financial asset or liability.

A hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation as defined in IAS 21 is accounted for similarly to a cash flow hedge. [iAS 39.86]

A hedge of the foreign currency risk of a firm commitment may be accounted for as a fair value hedge or as a cash flow hedge.

Fair Value Hedge Accounting for a Portfolio Hedge of Interest Rate Risk (Macro Hedging)

IAS 39 allows fair value hedge accounting to be used for a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk (macro hedging) as follows:

1. The entity identifies a portfolio of items whose interest rate risk it wishes to hedge. The portfolio may include both assets and liabilities.

2. The entity analyses the portfolio into time periods based on expected, rather than contractual, repricing dates.

3. The entity designates the hedged item as a percentage of the amount of assets (or liabilities) in each time period from step 2. All of the assets from which the hedged amount is drawn must be items (a) whose fair value changes in response to the risk being hedged and (B) that could have qualified for fair value hedge accounting under IAS 39 had they been hedged individually. The time periods must be sufficiently narrow to ensure that all assets (or liabilities) in a time period are homogeneous with respect to the hedged risk – that is, the fair value of each item moves proportionately to, and in the same direction as, changes in the hedged interest rate risk.

4. The entity designates what interest rate risk it is hedging. This risk could be a portion of the interest rate risk in each of the items in the portfolio, such as a benchmark interest rate like LIBOR.

5. The entity designates a hedging instrument for each time period. The hedging instrument may be a portfolio of derivatives (for instance, interest rate swaps) containing offsetting risk positions.

6. The entity measures the change in the fair value of the hedged item (from step 3) that is attributable to the hedged risk (from step 4). The result is recognised in profit or loss and in one of two separate line items in the balance sheet. The balance sheet line item depends on whether the hedged item is an asset (in which case the change in fair value is reported in a separate line item within assets) or is a liability (in which case the value change is reported in a separate line item within liabilities). This separate balance sheet line item is presented on the face of the balance sheet adjacent to the related asset(s) or liability(ies) – but it cannot be allocated to individual assets or liabilities, or to separate classes of assets or liabilities (that is, no "basis adjustment").

7. The entity measures the change in the fair value of the hedging instrument and recognises this as a gain or loss in profit or loss. It recognises the fair value of the hedging instrument as an asset or liability in the balance sheet.

8. Ineffectiveness is the difference in profit or loss between the amounts determined in step 6 and step 7.

A change (up or down) in the amounts that are expected to be repaid or mature in a time period will result in ineffectiveness. That ineffectiveness is the difference between (a) the initial hedge ratio applied to the initially estimated amount in a time period and (B) that same ratio applied to the revised estimate of the amount.

Demand deposits and similar items with a demand feature (such as a bank’s 'core deposits') cannot be designated as the hedged item in a fair value hedge for any period beyond the shortest period in which the counterparty can demand repayment. Thus deposits payable immediately on demand are not eligible for hedge accounting.

Discontinuation of Hedge Accounting

Hedge accounting must be discontinued prospectively if: [iAS 39.91 and 39.101]

the hedging instrument expires or is sold, terminated, or exercised;

the hedge no longer meets the hedge accounting criteria - for example it is no longer effective;

for cash flow hedges the forecast transaction is no longer expected to occur; or

the entity revokes the hedge designation.

If hedge accounting ceases for a cash flow hedge relationship because the forecast transaction is no longer expected to occur, gains and losses deferred in equity must be taken to the income statement immediately. If the transaction is still expected to occur and the hedge relationship ceases, the amounts accumulated in equity will be retained in equity until the hedged item affects profit or loss. [iAS 39.101©]

If a hedged financial instrument that is measured at amortised cost has been adjusted for the gain or loss attributable to the hedged risk in a fair value hedge, this adjustment is amortised to profit or loss based on a recalculated effective interest rate on this date such that the adjustment is fully amortised by the maturity of the instrument. Amortisation may begin as soon as an adjustment exists and must begin no later than when the hedged item ceases to be adjusted for changes in its fair value attributable to the risks being hedged.

Transition and Effective Date [iAS 39.103-108]

Comparative Financial Statements

In 2005 financial statements only, an entity may elect for the prior-year comparative information to still be prepared under their existing GAAP. If this election is taken the entity must:

disclose this fact together with the basis used to prepare this information; and

disclose the nature of the main adjustments that would make the information comply with IAS 32 and IAS 39. The entity need not quantify those adjustments. However, the entity must treat any adjustment between the balance sheet at the comparative period's reporting date and the balance sheet at the start of the first IFRS reporting period as arising from a change in accounting policy.

Effective Date

IAS 39 must be applied for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2005. Earlier application is permitted only if the entity also early applies IAS 32. If the entity early adopts the two standards that fact should be disclosed.

Transition

On initial adoption, subject to the guidance below, IAS 39 should be applied retrospectively, with the opening balance of retained earnings for the earliest period presented and all other comparative amounts adjusted as if the standard had always been in use, except where restating the information would be impracticable, in which case the entity must disclose that fact and indicate the extent to which the information was restated.

Derecognition

With respect to derecognition the entity may either apply the IAS 39 requirements prospectively for financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2004, or apply the IAS 39 requirements retrospectively from a date of the entity's choosing, provided that the information needed to apply IAS 39 to assets and liabilities derecognised as a result of past transactions was obtained at the time of initially accounting for those transactions.

Designation upon Transition

On initial adoption of the standard an entity may designate a previously recognised financial asset or financial liability as a financial asset or financial liability at fair value through profit or loss or as available for sale.

Hedging

If, before the date of transition to IFRSs, an entity had designated a transaction as a hedge, but the hedge does not meet the conditions for hedge accounting in IAS 39, the entity must apply the rules on discontinuation of hedge accounting. Transactions entered into before the date of transition to IFRSs may not be retrospectively designated as hedges.

The designation and documentation of a hedge relationship must be completed on or before the date of transition to IFRSs if the hedge relationship is to qualify for hedge accounting from that date.

Fair Value Hedges

With respect to fair value hedges, if under previous GAAP the hedged item was not adjusted, the entity should adjust the carrying amount of the hedged item on transition with the adjustment amounting to the lower of:

a. that portion of the cumulative change in the fair value of the hedged item that reflects the designated hedged risk and that was not recognised under previous GAAP; and

b. that portion of the cumulative change in the fair value of the hedging instrument that reflects the designated hedged risk.

Cash Flow Hedges

Under its previous GAAP, an entity may have deferred gains and losses on a cash flow hedge of a forecast transaction. If, at the date of transition to IFRSs, the hedged forecast transaction is not highly probable, but is expected to occur, the entire deferred gain or loss is recognised in equity. Any net cumulative gain or loss that is reclassified to equity on initial application of IAS 39 remains in equity until (a) the forecast transaction subsequently results in the recognition of a non-financial asset or non-financial liability, (B) the forecast transaction affects profit or loss, or © circumstances subsequently change and the forecast transaction is no longer expected to occur, in which case any related net cumulative gain or loss that had been recognised directly in equity is recognised in profit or loss. If the hedging instrument is still held, but the hedge does not qualify as a cash flow hedge under IAS 39, hedge accounting is no longer appropriate starting from the date of transition to IFRSs.

An entity may not adjust the carrying amount of non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities to exclude gains and losses related to cash flow hedges that were included in the carrying amount before the beginning of the financial year in which IAS 39 is first applied.

Disclosure

When IAS 32 and IAS 39 were revised in 2003, all of the disclosures about financial instruments that had been in old IAS 39 were moved to IAS 32, so IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation and Disclosure now includes all financial instruments disclosure requirements. In 2005, the IASB issued IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures to replace the disclosure portions of IAS 32 effective 1 January 2007, with earlier application encouraged. IFRS 7 also supersedes IAS 30 Presentation of Financial Statements of Banks and Similar Financial Institutions.

April 2005 Amendment to IAS 39 on Cash Flow Hedges of Forecast Intragroup Transactions

On 14 April 2005, the IASB issued an amendment to IAS 39 to permit the foreign currency risk of a highly probable intragroup forecast transaction to qualify as the hedged item in a cash flow hedge in consolidated financial statements – provided that the transaction is denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of the entity entering into that transaction and the foreign currency risk will affect consolidated financial statements. The amendment also specifies that if the hedge of a forecast intragroup transaction qualifies for hedge accounting, any gain or loss that is recognised directly in equity in accordance with the hedge accounting rules in IAS 39 must be reclassified into profit or loss in the same period or periods during which the foreign currency risk of the hedged transaction affects consolidated profit or loss.

The amendment is effective 1 January 2006, although earlier application is encouraged.

This amendment removes a difference with US GAAP that was created when IAS 39 was amended in December 2003, because that amendment did not permit hedge accounting for forecast intragroup transactions.

June 2005 Amendment to IAS 39 – Fair Value Option

On 15 June 2005 the IASB issued its final amendment to IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement to restrict the use of the option to designate any financial asset or any financial liability to be measured at fair value through profit and loss (the 'fair value option'). The IASB developed this amendment after commentators, particularly prudential supervisors of banks, securities companies, and insurers, raised concerns that the fair value option contained in the 2003 revisions of IAS 39 might be used inappropriately. The new revisions limit the use of the option to those financial instruments that meet certain conditions. Those conditions are that: [iAS 39.9]

a. the fair value option designation eliminates or significantly reduces an accounting mismatch, or

b. a group of financial assets, financial liabilities, or both is managed and its performance is evaluated on a fair value basis, in accordance with a documented risk management or investment strategy, and information about the group is provided internally on that basis to the entity's key management personnel.

The fair value option amendment also provides that if a contract contains an embedded derivative, an entity may generally elect to apply the fair value option to the entire hybrid (combined) contract, thereby eliminating the need to separate out the embedded derivative. Conditions (a) and (B) are not relevant to this election. [iAS 39.11A]

The amendment is effective 1 January 2006, with earlier application encouraged. Click for Press Release (PDF 55k).

August 2005 Amendment to IAS 39 and IFRS 4 – Financial Guarantee Contracts

On 18 August 2005, the IASB amended the scope of IAS 39 to include financial guarantee contracts issued. However, if an issuer of financial guarantee contracts has previously asserted explicitly that it regards such contracts as insurance contracts and has used accounting applicable to insurance contracts, the issuer may elect to apply either IAS 39 or IFRS 4 Insurance Contracts to such financial guarantee contracts. The issuer may make that election contract by contract, but the election for each contract is irrevocable.

A financial guarantee contract is a contract that requires the issuer to make specified payments to reimburse the holder for a loss it incurs because a specified debtor fails to make payment when due.

Under IAS 39 as amended, financial guarantee contracts are recognised:

initially at fair value. If the financial guarantee contract was issued in a stand-alone arm's length transaction to an unrelated party, its fair value at inception is likely to equal the consideration received, unless there is evidence to the contrary.

subsequently at the higher of (i) the amount determined in accordance with IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets and (ii) the amount initially recognised less, when appropriate, cumulative amortisation recognised in accordance with IAS 18 Revenue. (If specified criteria are met, the issuer may use the fair value option in IAS 39, see IASB press release of 16 June 2005. Furthermore, different requirements continue to apply in the specialised context of a 'failed' derecognition transaction.)

Some credit-related guarantees do not, as a precondition for payment, require that the holder is exposed to, and has incurred a loss on, the failure of the debtor to make payments on the guaranteed asset when due. An example of such a guarantee is a credit derivative that requires payments in response to changes in a specified credit rating or credit index. These are derivatives and are not affected by the amendments. They must be measured at fair value under IAS 39.

The amendments address the treatment of financial guarantee contracts by the issuer. They do not address their treatment by the holder. Accounting by the holder is excluded from the scope of IAS 39 and IFRS 4 (unless the contract is a reinsurance contract). Therefore, paragraphs 10–12 of IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors apply. Those paragraphs specify criteria to use in developing an accounting policy if no IFRS applies specifically to an item.

The amendments to IAS 39 and IFRS 4 are effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2006, with earlier application encouraged. [/align:770dcb895a]

 

 

محمد بشارة - أبوعبدالله

أستغفر الله العظيم واتوب اليه

رابط هذا التعليق
شارك على مواقع اخرى

المعايير موجودة باللغة العربية على هذا الرابط

http://infotechaccountants.com/index_files/Page7210.htm

 

 

محمد بشارة - أبوعبدالله

أستغفر الله العظيم واتوب اليه

رابط هذا التعليق
شارك على مواقع اخرى

الرجاء إعداد مقارنة علمية بين المصطلحات الآتية:ـ

1. القيمة العادلة

2. القيمة السوقية

3. القيمة السوقية العادلة

4. القيمة الجارية

5. التكلفة التاريخية المعدلة

اللهم زدنا علماً

رابط هذا التعليق
شارك على مواقع اخرى

  • 3 سنوات بعد ...

انشئ حساب جديد او قم بتسجيل دخولك لتتمكن من اضافه تعليق جديد

يجب ان تكون عضوا لدينا لتتمكن من التعليق

انشئ حساب جديد

سجل حسابك الجديد لدينا في الموقع بمنتهي السهوله .

سجل حساب جديد

تسجيل دخول

هل تمتلك حساب بالفعل ؟ سجل دخولك من هنا.

سجل دخولك الان
×
×
  • اضف...