International GAAP® 2019: Generally Accepted Accounting Practice under International Financial Reporting Standards

Home > Other > International GAAP® 2019: Generally Accepted Accounting Practice under International Financial Reporting Standards > Page 400
International GAAP® 2019: Generally Accepted Accounting Practice under International Financial Reporting Standards Page 400

by International GAAP 2019 (pdf)


  be accounted for as a performance obligation (e.g. there is a discount for goods or

  services provided during the cancellable period that provides the customer with a

  material right) (see 5.6 below).24

  4.2.1.C

  Evaluating the contract term when an entity has a past practice of not

  enforcing termination payments

  A TRG agenda paper for the October 2014 TRG meeting noted that the evaluation of

  the termination payment in determining the duration of a contract depends on

  whether the law (which may vary by jurisdiction) would consider past practice as

  limiting the parties’ enforceable rights and obligations. An entity’s past practice of

  allowing customers to terminate the contract early without enforcing collection of the

  termination payment only affects the contract duration in cases in which the parties’

  legally enforceable rights and obligations are limited because of the lack of

  enforcement by the entity. If that past practice does not change the parties’ legally

  enforceable rights and obligations, the contract duration should equal the period

  throughout which a substantive termination penalty would be due (which could be

  the stated contractual term or a shorter duration if the termination penalty did not

  extend to the end of the contract).25

  4.2.1.D

  Accounting for a partial termination of a contract

  We believe an entity should account for the partial termination of a contract (e.g. a

  change in the contract term from three years to two years prior to the beginning of

  year two) as a contract modification (see 4.4 below) because it results in a change in

  the scope of the contract. IFRS 15 states that ‘a contract modification exists when the

  parties to a contract approve a modification that either creates new or changes

  existing enforceable rights and obligations of the parties to the contract’. [IFRS 15.18].

  A partial termination of a contract results in a change to the enforceable rights and

  obligations in the existing contract. This conclusion is consistent with TRG agenda

  paper no. 48, which states, ‘a substantive termination penalty is evidence of

  enforceable rights and obligations throughout the contract term. The termination

  penalty is ignored until the contract is terminated at which point it will be accounted

  for as a modification’.26

  2024 Chapter 28

  Consider the following example: An entity enters into a contract with a customer to

  provide monthly maintenance services for three years at a fixed price of £500 per

  month (i.e. total consideration of £18,000). The contract includes a termination clause

  that allows the customer to cancel the third year of the contract by paying a termination

  penalty of £1,000 (which is considered substantive for the purpose of this example). The

  penalty would effectively result in an adjusted price per month for two years of £542

  (i.e. total consideration of £13,000). At the end of the first year, the customer decides to

  cancel the third year of the contract and pays the £1,000 termination penalty specified

  in the contract.

  In this example, the modification would not be accounted for as a separate contract

  because it does not result in the addition of distinct goods or services (see 4.4.2 below).

  Since the remaining services are distinct, the entity would apply the requirements in

  paragraph 21(a) of IFRS 15 and account for the modification prospectively. The

  remaining consideration of £7,000 (£6,000 per year under the original contract for the

  second year, plus the £1,000 payment upon modification) would be recognised over the

  remaining revised contract period of one year. That is, the entity would recognise the

  £1,000 termination penalty over the remaining performance period.

  4.3 Combining

  contracts

  In most cases, entities apply the model to individual contracts with a customer.

  However, the standard requires entities to combine contracts entered into at, or near,

  the same time with the same customer (or related parties of the customer as defined in

  IAS 24 – Related Party Disclosures) if they meet one or more of the following criteria:

  [IFRS 15.BC74]

  (a) the contracts are negotiated as a package with a single commercial objective;

  (b) the amount of consideration to be paid in one contract depends on the price or

  performance of the other contract; or

  (c) the goods or services promised in the contracts (or some goods or services

  promised in each of the contracts) are a single performance obligation.

  In the Basis for Conclusions, the Board explained that it included the requirements on

  combining contracts in the standard because, in some cases, the amount and timing of

  revenue may differ depending on whether an entity accounts for contracts as a single

  contract or separately. [IFRS 15.BC71].

  Entities need to apply judgement to determine whether contracts are entered into at or

  near the same time because the standard does not provide a bright line for making this

  assessment. In the Basis for Conclusions, the Board noted that the longer the period

  between entering into different contracts, the more likely it is that the economic

  circumstances affecting the negotiations of those contracts will have changed. [IFRS 15.BC75].

  Revenue

  2025

  Negotiating multiple contracts at the same time is not sufficient evidence to

  demonstrate that the contracts represent a single arrangement for accounting

  purposes. In the Basis for Conclusions, the Board noted that there are pricing

  interdependencies between two or more contracts when either of the first two criteria

  (i.e. the contracts are negotiated with a single commercial objective or the price in

  one contract depends on the price or performance of the other contract) are met, so

  the amount of consideration allocated to the performance obligations in each contract

  may not faithfully depict the value of the goods or services transferred to the customer

  if those contracts were not combined.

  The Board also explained that it decided to include the third criterion (i.e. the goods or

  services in the contracts are a single performance obligation) to avoid any structuring

  opportunities that would effectively allow entities to bypass the requirements for

  identifying performance obligations. [IFRS 15.BC73]. That is, an entity cannot avoid

  determining whether multiple promises made to a customer at, or near, the same time

  need to be bundled into one or more performance obligations in accordance with Step 2

  of the model (see 5 below) solely by including the promises in separate contracts.

  IFRS 15 provides more requirements on when to combine contracts than the legacy

  requirements in IAS 18. IAS 18 indicated that the recognition criteria should be applied

  to two or more transactions on a combined basis ‘when they are linked in such a way

  that the commercial effect cannot be understood without reference to the series of

  transactions as a whole’. [IAS 18.13].

  The IFRS 15 contract combination requirements are similar to the requirements that

  were in IAS 11, but there are some notable differences. IAS 11 allowed an entity to

  combine contracts with several customers, provided the relevant criteria for

  combination were met. In
contrast, the contract combination requirements in IFRS 15

  only apply to contracts with the same customer or related parties of the customer.

  Unlike IFRS 15, IAS 11 did not require that contracts be entered into at or near the

  same time.

  IAS 11 also required that all criteria be met before contracts could be combined, while

  IFRS 15 requires that one or more of its criteria to be met. The criteria for

  combination in the two standards are similar. The main difference is the criterion in

  paragraph 17(c) of IFRS 15, which considers a performance obligation across different

  contracts. In contrast, IAS 11 considered concurrent or sequential performance.

  [IFRS 15.17(c), IAS 11.9(c)].

  Overall, the criteria are generally consistent with the underlying principles in the legacy

  revenue standards on combining contracts. However, since IFRS 15 explicitly requires

  an entity to combine contracts if one or more of the criteria in paragraph 17 of IFRS 15

  are met, some entities that have not combined contracts in the past may need to do so.

  2026 Chapter 28

  4.3.1

  Portfolio approach practical expedient

  Under the standard, the five-step model is applied to individual contracts with

  customers, unless the contract combination requirements discussed in 4.3 above are

  met. However, the IASB recognised that there may be situations in which it may be

  more practical for an entity to group contracts for revenue recognition purposes rather

  than attempt to account for each contract separately. Specifically, the standard includes

  a practical expedient that allows an entity to apply IFRS 15 to a portfolio of contracts

  (or performance obligations) with similar characteristics if the entity reasonably expects

  that application of this practical expedient will not differ materially from applying

  IFRS 15 to the individual contracts (or performance obligations) within the portfolio.

  Furthermore, an entity is required to use estimates and assumptions that reflect the size

  and composition of the portfolio. [IFRS 15.4].

  As noted above, in order to use the portfolio approach, an entity must reasonably expect

  that the accounting result will not be materially different from the result of applying the

  standard to the individual contracts. However, in the Basis for Conclusions, the Board

  noted that it does not intend for an entity to quantitatively evaluate every possible

  outcome when concluding that the portfolio approach is not materially different.

  Instead, they indicated that an entity should be able to take a reasonable approach to

  determine the portfolios that would be representative of its types of customers and that

  an entity should use judgement in selecting the size and composition of those portfolios.

  [IFRS 15.BC69].

  Application of the portfolio approach will likely vary based on the facts and

  circumstances of each entity. An entity may choose to apply the portfolio approach to

  only certain aspects of the new model (e.g. determining the transaction price in Step 3).

  See 4.1.6.A above for a discussion on how an entity would assess collectability for a

  portfolio of contracts.

  4.4 Contract

  modifications

  Parties to an arrangement frequently agree to modify the scope or price (or both) of

  their contract. If that happens, an entity must determine whether the modification it is

  accounted for as a new contract or as part of the existing contract. Generally, it is clear

  when a contract modification has taken place, but in some circumstances that

  determination is more difficult. To assist entities when making this determination, the

  standard states ‘a contract modification is a change in the scope or price (or both) of a

  contract that is approved by the parties to the contract. In some industries and

  jurisdictions, a contract modification may be described as a change order, a variation or

  an amendment. A contract modification exists when the parties to a contract approve a

  modification that either creates new or changes existing enforceable rights and

  obligations of the parties to the contract. A contract modification could be approved in

  writing, by oral agreement or implied by customary business practices. If the parties to

  the contract have not approved a contract modification, an entity shall continue to apply

  this Standard to the existing contract until the contract modification is approved.’

  [IFRS 15.18].

  Revenue

  2027

  The standard goes on to state ‘a contract modification may exist even though the parties

  to the contract have a dispute about the scope or price (or both) of the modification or

  the parties have approved a change in the scope of the contract but have not yet

  determined the corresponding change in price. In determining whether the rights and

  obligations that are created or changed by a modification are enforceable, an entity shall

  consider all relevant facts and circumstances including the terms of the contract and

  other evidence.’ [IFRS 15.19]. If the parties to a contract have approved a change in the

  scope of the contract but have not yet determined the corresponding change in price,

  an entity shall estimate the change to the transaction price arising from the modification

  in accordance with the requirements for estimating and constraining estimates of

  variable consideration. [IFRS 15.19].

  These requirements illustrate that the Board intended these requirements to apply more

  broadly than only to finalised modifications. That is, IFRS 15 indicates that an entity may

  have to account for a contract modification prior to the parties reaching final agreement

  on changes in scope or pricing (or both). Instead of focusing on the finalisation of a

  modification, IFRS 15 focuses on the enforceability of the changes to the rights and

  obligations in the contract. Once an entity determines the revised rights and obligations

  are enforceable, it accounts for the contract modification.

  The standard provides the following example to illustrate this point. [IFRS 15.IE42-IE43].

  Example 28.11: Unapproved change in scope and price

  An entity enters into a contract with a customer to construct a building on customer-owned land. The contract

  states that the customer will provide the entity with access to the land within 30 days of contract inception.

  However, the entity was not provided access until 120 days after contract inception because of storm damage

  to the site that occurred after contract inception. The contract specifically identifies any delay (including force

  majeure) in the entity’s access to customer-owned land as an event that entitles the entity to compensation

  that is equal to actual costs incurred as a direct result of the delay. The entity is able to demonstrate that the

  specific direct costs were incurred as a result of the delay in accordance with the terms of the contract and

  prepares a claim. The customer initially disagreed with the entity’s claim.

  The entity assesses the legal basis of the claim and determines, on the basis of the underlying contractual

  terms, that it has enforceable rights. Consequently, it accounts for the claim as a contract modification in

  accordance with paragraphs 18-21 of IFRS 15. The modification does not result in any additional goods and

  services being provided to the customer. In addition, all of the
remaining goods and services after the

  modification are not distinct and form part of a single performance obligation. Consequently, the entity

  accounts for the modification in accordance with paragraph 21(b) of IFRS 15 by updating the transaction

  price and the measure of progress towards complete satisfaction of the performance obligation. The entity

  considers the constraint on estimates of variable consideration in paragraphs 56-58 of IFRS 15 when

  estimating the transaction price.

  Once an entity has determined that a contract has been modified, the entity determines

  the appropriate accounting treatment for the modification. Certain modifications are

  treated as separate stand-alone contracts (discussed at 4.4.1 below), while others are

  combined with the original contract (discussed at 4.4.2 below) and accounted for in that

  manner. In addition, some modifications are accounted for on a prospective basis and

  others on a cumulative catch-up basis. The Board developed different approaches to

  account for different types of modifications with an overall objective of faithfully

  depicting an entity’s rights and obligations in each modified contract. [IFRS 15.BC76].

  2028 Chapter 28

  The following figure illustrates these requirements.

  Figure 28.4:

  Contract modifications

  Have the parties approved a

  No

  Continue to account for the existing

  modification that changes the

  scope or price (or both) of the

  contract and do not account for the

  contract?*

  contract modification until approved.

  Yes

  Is the contract modification for additional goods or services

  that are distinct and at their stand-alone selling price?**

  No

  Yes

  Account for the new goods or services

  as a separate contract.

  Update the transaction price and measure of

  Are the remaining goods

  No

  progress for the single performance

  or services distinct from

  obligation (recognise change as a cumulative

  those already provided?

  catch-up to revenue).

  Both Yes and No

  Yes

  Treat the modification as a termination of

  Update the transaction price and allocate it to

 

‹ Prev