You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘IFRS’ tag.


The evolution from United States Generally Accepted Accounting Standards (US-GAAP) to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) has been under way for more than a decade. I’ve commented on IFRS adoption before. It’s a hot topic for accountants and auditors because it goes to the heart of how companies keep their books.

Until now, most public companies have been more in a wait-and-see mode than a get-ready mode with respect to IFRS. The main reason is some critical differences been the two systems that appeared very difficult to reconcile. However, big changes are coming in revenue recognition and accounting for leases that aim at harmonizing US-GAAP and IFRS independent of (and therefore ahead of) a U.S. decision to fully adopt IFRS, which may be a long way off. As a result of these breakthroughs, public corporations will have to incorporate fundamental changes to their accounting and statutory consolidation processes earlier than they had been expecting. A further consequence I believe is that they will need to address the implications of these changes on their IT systems sooner rather than later.

Initially formulated in 1989, IFRS is currently required by 85 countries for external financial reporting. As adoption broadened, it seemed logical that the United States, too, should embrace IFRS, since capital markets are now global. Yet fundamental issues have complicated the move. For one, over the past 20 years US-GAAP has become more rules-based as opposed to IFRS’s more principles-based approach. Each system is guided by similar principles, yet there are important differences in practices and the specificity of the rules. Then, in December 2010, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which mandates accounting standards for publicly traded companies, indicated that while in principle it favors a single international accounting standard, the Commission would take a “condorsement” approach, which I covered in an earlier blog. In practice this means that, although there is no fixed date as yet for the one replacing the other in the U.S., a series of changes – some major – to US-GAAP will be implemented over the next several years, such as those noted above in revenue recognition and accounting for leases. The upshot is that rather waiting for some formal adoption date, which realistically will remain four or five years out, companies now will have to confront these changes piecemeal over the next several years.

Changes in accounting for revenue recognition and leases can have far-reaching impacts. For example, corporations will have to make changes to how they keep records (such as increasing the details kept for any leased asset), alter their thinking about buy-vs.-lease trade-offs and how they structure and record contracts (to optimize the timing of revenue recognition). Their IT systems for transactions, analytics and reporting may need considerable changes or even replacement. Some of the changes in accounting will mainly affect how data is reported, some the general ledger and subsidiary accounting systems (such as sales orders), others the statutory consolidation system and some a combination of all three. For most companies I expect there will be no single obvious approach. Trade-offs will need to be made. For example, they may have to decide between spending money to adapt existing systems or replace them sooner than intended to get added features or functional capabilities. It’s hard to provide useful generalizations here because the best decisions will depend on the company’s existing systems and the nature and requirements of the industry in which it operates.

For years software vendors and consultants have been beating the drums about the challenges to U.S. companies and their finance organizations posed by IFRS adoption. For years, most CFOs and senior finance executives have taken a skeptical approach to the need for immediate action. I used to think this was the right approach, but now I advise them to start thinking seriously about the best ways to adapt IT systems to the changes that are on the way.

Regards,

Robert Kugel CFA – SVP of Research


For me, the most significant announcement to come out of the recent SAPinsider conference was the company’s formal release of Business Planning and Consolidation (BPC) running on HANA, SAP’s in-memory computing appliance. For me, HANA is a potential “game changer” for planning, statutory consolidation and other analytics-supported financial processes because of the substantial reduction it enables in processing time from loading to reporting. In-memory systems provide a substantial edge in speed of processing large data sets or complex calculations, whereas the latency between thought and answer in complex scenario analyses on disk-based systems often prevents a collaborative dialogue around possible situations and their potential outcomes. Today, companies have to simplify the analysis, severely limit the amount of detail or find some combination of the two. More than likely, they wind up not having a potentially valuable collaborative dialogue in activities such as weekly or monthly review and revision of operating plans and their financial consequences, closing the books or assessing the impact of pricing changes on profitability. In the case of planning, I expect that in-memory systems will enable make it easier for companies to make changes to detailed plans (such as the budget or production plans), which is difficult today for many of them.

In keynotes at SAPinsider company executives reiterated that cloud computing and mobile technologies as well as processing and analysis of big data are underpinnings of its development efforts. From a customer’s and user’s perspective, these technologies are innovation vectors that can change how they operate, providing new capabilities with which to evolve key business processes to enhance their effectiveness and efficiency. For instance, sales executives can use tablet-based business analytics to discuss business trends collaboratively with customers, or do price optimization and profitability analysis on the fly in making offers and setting terms. The “consumerization” of business applications – not just mobile apps – is another product development theme that SAP is embracing. This is consistent with other vendors’ directions, and it reflects the need to meet the demands of younger users who have more sophisticated expectations than those who, say, started working with ERP systems in the 1990s.

A business topic that surfaced several times in SAP’s presentations was the value of utilizing of shared services. Centralizing administrative functions into shared services can reduce costs (especially if they are performed in lower-wage areas) and improve execution by allowing for more specialization and a larger center of competence. Accounting is one common area where companies centralize (our research finds a highly centralized accounting function in 70 percent of midsize and larger companies). As well, companies in which separate units handle invoice payment, accounts payable, travel management, workforce management and real estate management could benefit from bringing them together. However, shared services can be more trouble than they’re worth unless systems are established to ensure responsiveness to local needs. Software can be helpful here by standardizing processes (so suppliers or customers don’t become frustrated with different requirements), streamlining process execution (so that invoices can be paid in time to earn discounts) and speeding collections.

For me, some of the most relevant sessions at the conference covered the ongoing evolution from United States Generally Accepted Accounting Standards (US-GAAP) to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). This is a critical change for finance departments of almost all midsize and larger U.S. corporations. The topic is timely because recent progress made in converging US-GAAP and IFRS means that corporations will have to incorporate fundamental changes to their accounting and statutory consolidation processes sooner than they were expecting.

SAPinsider offered both high-level discussion of technology trends that will affect business software and in-the-trenches advice on how to address current business issues. I think it’s fitting that the official announcement of BPC on HANA came at this venue because, as I’ve noted, while I expect innovative finance departments to quickly exploit the advantages of BPC on HANA, I’m afraid it will take a while for mainstream companies to get around to changing how they manage these core processes. Since this event is about providing SAP users with practical advice on how best to incorporate technology to transform business operations, in coming events I look forward to hearing concrete examples of how companies have progressed.

Regards,

Robert Kugel CFA – SVP of Research

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 80 other followers

Twitter Updates

Top Rated

Blog Stats

  • 47,669 hits
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 80 other followers

%d bloggers like this: