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 532
International GAAP® 2019: Generally Accepted Accounting Practice under International Financial Reporting Standards Page 532

by International GAAP 2019 (pdf)

The remainder of the equity-settled share-based payment, as measured at the modification date, is recognised

  in profit or loss during years 3 and 4 i.e. an expense of €33,000 in each of the two years.

  10

  TRANSACTIONS WITH EQUITY AND CASH

  ALTERNATIVES

  It is common for share-based payment transactions (particularly those with employees)

  to provide either the entity or the counterparty with the choice of settling the

  transaction either in shares (or other equity instruments) or in cash (or other assets). The

  general principle of IFRS 2 is that a transaction with a cash alternative, or the

  components of that transaction, should be accounted for:

  (a) as a cash-settled transaction if, and to the extent that, the entity has incurred a

  liability to settle in cash or other assets; or

  (b) as an equity-settled transaction if, and to the extent that, no such liability has been

  incurred. [IFRS 2.34].

  More detailed guidance is provided as to how that general principle should be applied

  to transactions:

  • where the counterparty has choice of settlement (see 10.1 below); and

  • where the entity has choice of settlement (see 10.2 below).

  Some specific types of arrangement that include cash and equity alternatives, either as

  a matter of choice or depending on the outcome of certain events are covered

  elsewhere in this chapter, as outlined below.

  A common type of arrangement seen in practice is the ‘matching’ award or deferred

  bonus arrangement where an employee is offered a share award or a cash alternative to

  ‘match’ a share award or a cash bonus earned during an initial period. This type of

  arrangement is addressed at 15.1 below.

  Rather than providing either the entity or the counterparty with a choice between

  settlement in equity or in cash, some transactions offer no choice but instead require

  an arrangement that will generally be equity-settled to be settled in cash in certain

  specific and limited circumstances (awards with contingent cash settlement). There

  will also be situations where there is contingent settlement in equity of an award that

  is otherwise cash-settled. These types of arrangement are considered in more detail

  at 10.3 below.

  Some awards offer an equity alternative and a cash alternative where the cash

  alternative is not based on the price or value of the equity instruments. These

  arrangements are considered at 10.4 below.

  2666 Chapter 30

  10.1 Transactions where the counterparty has choice of settlement in

  equity or in cash

  Where the counterparty has the right to elect for settlement in either shares or cash,

  IFRS 2 regards the transaction as a compound transaction to which split accounting

  must be applied. The general principle is that the transaction must be analysed into a

  liability component (the counterparty’s right to demand settlement in cash) and an

  equity component (the counterparty’s right to demand settlement in shares). [IFRS 2.35].

  Once split, the two components are accounted for separately. The methodology of split

  accounting required by IFRS 2 is somewhat different from that required by IAS 32 for

  issuers of other compound instruments (see Chapter 43 at 6).

  A practical issue is that, where a transaction gives the counterparty a choice of

  settlement, it will be necessary to establish a fair value for the liability component both

  at grant date and at each subsequent reporting date until settlement. By contrast, in the

  case of transactions that can be settled in cash only, a fair value is not generally required

  at grant date for IFRS 2 accounting purposes, but a fair value is required at each

  subsequent reporting date until settlement (see 9 above). However, for entities subject

  to IAS 33, the grant date fair value is required in order to make the disclosures required

  by that standard – see Chapter 33 at 6.4.2.

  We consider in more detail at 10.1.1 to 10.1.3 below the accounting treatment required

  by IFRS 2 for transactions where the counterparty has a settlement choice. In addition,

  the following specific situations are discussed:

  • the addition of a cash-settlement alternative after the grant date (see 10.1.4 below);

  • arrangements where the counterparty is given a choice to cover more or less

  remote contingencies e.g. restrictions or limits on the issue of shares in a particular

  jurisdiction (see 10.1.5 below); and

  • the issue of convertible bonds in return for goods or services (see 10.1.6 below).

  10.1.1

  Transactions in which the fair value is measured directly

  Transactions with non-employees are normally measured by reference to the fair value

  of goods and services supplied at service date (i.e. the date at which the goods or

  services are supplied) – see 4 and 5 above.

  Accordingly where an entity enters into such a transaction where the counterparty has

  choice of settlement, it determines the fair value of the liability component at service

  date. The equity component is the difference between the fair value (at service date) of

  the goods or services received and the fair value of the liability component. [IFRS 2.35].

  10.1.2

  Transactions in which the fair value is measured indirectly –

  including transactions with employees

  All other transactions, including those with employees, are measured by reference to

  the fair value of the instruments issued at ‘measurement date’, being grant date in the

  case of transactions with employees and service date in the case of transactions with

  non-employees [IFRS 2 Appendix A] – see 4.1 and 5.1 above.

  Share-based

  payment

  2667

  The fair value should take into account the terms and conditions on which the rights to

  cash or equity instruments were issued. [IFRS 2.36]. IFRS 2 does not elaborate further on

  this, but we assume that the IASB intends a reporting entity to apply:

  • as regards the equity component of the transaction, the provisions of IFRS 2

  relating to the impact of terms and conditions on the valuation of equity-settled

  transactions (see 4 to 6 above); and

  • as regards the liability component of the transaction, the provisions of IFRS 2

  relating to the impact of terms and conditions on the valuation of cash-settled

  transactions (see 9.3 above).

  The entity should first measure the fair value of the liability component and then that

  of the equity component. The fair value of the equity component must be reduced to

  take into account the fact that the counterparty must forfeit the right to receive cash in

  order to receive shares. The sum of the two components is the fair value of the whole

  compound instrument. [IFRS 2.37]. IG Example 13 in IFRS 2 (the substance of which is

  reproduced as Example 30.41 below) suggests that this may be done by establishing the

  fair value of the equity alternative and subtracting from it the fair value of the liability

  component. This approach may be appropriate in a straightforward situation involving

  ordinary shares and cash, as illustrated in the Example in the implementation guidance,

  but will not necessarily be appropriate in more complex situations that include, for

  example, the likelihood of options being exercised.

  I
n many share-based payment transactions with a choice of settlement, the value to the

  counterparty of the share and cash alternatives is equal. The counterparty will have the

  choice between (say) 1,000 shares or the cash value of 1,000 shares. This will mean that

  the fair value of the liability component is equal to that of the transaction as a whole, so

  that the fair value of the equity component is zero. In other words, the transaction is

  accounted for as if it were a cash-settled transaction.

  However, in some jurisdictions it is not uncommon, particularly in transactions with

  employees, for the equity-settlement alternative to have more value (as in

  Example 30.41 below). For example, an employee might be able to choose at vesting

  between the cash value of 1,000 shares immediately or 2,000 shares (often subject to

  further conditions such as a minimum holding period, or a further service period). In

  such cases the equity component will have an independent value. [IFRS 2.37]. Such

  schemes are discussed in more detail in Examples 30.63 and 30.64 at 15.1 below.

  10.1.3 Accounting

  treatment

  10.1.3.A

  During vesting period

  Having established a fair value for the liability and equity components as set out in 10.1.1

  and 10.1.2 above, the entity accounts for the liability component according to the rules

  for cash-settled transactions (see 9 above) and for the equity component according to

  the rules for equity-settled transactions (see 4 to 8 above). [IFRS 2.38].

  Example 30.41 below illustrates the accounting treatment for a transaction with an

  employee (as summarised in 10.1.2 above) where the equity component has a fair value

  independent of the liability component.

  2668 Chapter 30

  Example 30.41: Award with employee choice of settlement with different fair

  values for cash-settlement and equity-settlement

  An entity grants to an employee an award with the right to choose settlement in either:

  • 1,000 phantom shares, i.e. a right to a cash payment equal to the value of 1,000 shares, or

  • 1,200 shares.

  Vesting is conditional upon the completion of three years’ service. If the employee chooses the share

  alternative, the shares must be held for three years after vesting date.

  At grant date, the entity estimates that the fair value of the share alternative, after taking into account the

  effects of the post-vesting transfer restrictions, is €48 per share. The fair value of the cash alternative is

  estimated as:

  €

  Grant date

  50

  Year 1

  52

  Year 2

  55

  Year 3

  60

  The grant date fair value of the equity alternative is €57,600 (1,200 shares × €48). The grant date fair value

  of the cash alternative is €50,000 (1,000 phantom shares × €50). Therefore the fair value of the equity

  component excluding the right to receive cash is €7,600 (€57,600 – €50,000). The entity recognises a cost

  based on the following amounts.

  Equity component

  Liability component

  Calculation of Cumulative Expense for

  Calculation of Cumulative Expense for

  Year cumulative expense expense (€)

  year (€)

  cumulative expense

  expense (€)

  year (€)

  1 €7,600 × 1/3

  2,533

  2,533

  1,000 phantoms ×

  17,333 17,333

  €52 × 1/3

  2 €7,600 × 2/3

  5,066

  2,533

  1,000 phantoms ×

  36,667 19,334

  €55 × 2/3

  3 €7,600

  7,600

  2,534

  1,000

  phantoms

  ×

  60,000 23,333

  €60

  This generates the following accounting entries.

  €

  €

  Year 1

  Profit or loss (employment costs)

  19,866

  Liability 17,333

  Equity 2,533

  €

  €

  Year 2

  Profit or loss (employment costs)

  21,867

  Liability 19,334

  Equity 2,533

  Year 3

  Profit or loss (employment costs)

  25,867

  Liability 23,333

  Equity 2,534

  The above Example is based on IG Example 13 in IFRS 2, in which the share price at

  each reporting date is treated as the fair value of the cash alternative. As discussed more

  Share-based

  payment

  2669

  fully at 9 above, the fair value of a cash award is not necessarily exactly the same as the

  share price as it will depend on the terms and conditions of the award (see 9.3.2 above).

  Accordingly, in adapting IG Example 13 as Example 30.41 above, we have deliberately

  described the numbers used in respect of the liability component as ‘fair value’ and not

  as the ‘share price’. [IFRS 2 IG Example 13].

  Example 30.41 also ignores the fact that transactions of this type often have different

  vesting periods for the two settlement alternatives. For instance, the employee might

  have been offered:

  (a) the cash equivalent of 1,000 shares in three years’ time subject to performance

  conditions; or

  (b) subject to the performance criteria in (a) above being met over three years,

  3,000 shares after a further two years’ service.

  IFRS 2 offers no guidance as to how such transactions are to be accounted for.

  Presumably, however, the equity component would be recognised over a five year

  period and the liability component over a three year period. This is considered further

  in the discussion of ‘matching’ share awards at 15.1 below.

  10.1.3.B Settlement

  At the date of settlement, the liability component is restated to fair value through profit

  or loss. If the counterparty elects for settlement in equity, the restated liability is

  transferred to equity as consideration for the equity instruments issued. If the liability is

  settled in cash, the cash is obviously applied to reduce the liability. [IFRS 2.39-40]. In other

  words, if the transaction in Example 30.41 above had been settled in shares the

  accounting entry would have been:

  €

  €

  Liability* 60,000

  Equity† 60,000

  *

  There is no need to remeasure the liability in this case as it has already been stated at fair value at vesting

  date, which is the same as settlement date.

  †

  The precise allocation of this amount within equity, and its impact on distributable reserves, will depend

  on a number of factors, including jurisdictional legal requirements, which are not discussed here.

  If the transaction had been settled in cash the entry would simply have been:

  €

  €

  Liability 60,000

  Cash 60,000

  If the transaction is settled in cash, any amount taken to equity during the vesting period

  (€7,600 in Example 30.41 above) is not adjusted. However, the entity may transfer it

  from one component of equity to another (see 4.2 above). [IFRS 2.40].

  10.1.4

  Transactions with cash-settlement alternative for em
ployee

  introduced after grant date

  Such transactions are not specifically addressed in the main body of IFRS 2. However,

  IG Example 9 in the implementation guidance does address this issue, in the context of

  the rules for the modification of awards (discussed at 7.3 and 9.4 above). The substance

  of this example is reproduced as Example 30.42 below. [IFRS 2 IG Example 9].

  2670 Chapter 30

  Example 30.42: Award with employee cash-settlement alternative introduced

  after grant

  At the beginning of year 1, the entity grants 10,000 shares with a fair value of $33 per share to a senior

  executive, conditional upon the completion of three years’ service. By the end of year 2, the fair value of

  the award has dropped to $25 per share. At that date, the entity adds a cash alternative to the grant, whereby

  the executive can choose whether to receive 10,000 shares or cash equal to the value of 10,000 shares on

  vesting date. The share price is $22 on vesting. The implementation guidance to IFRS 2 proposes the

  following approach.

  For the first two years, the entity would recognise an expense of $110,000 per year, (representing

  10,000 shares × $33 × 1/3), giving rise to the cumulative accounting entry by the end of year 2:

  $

  $

  Profit or loss (employee costs)

  220,000

  Equity 220,000

  The addition of a cash alternative at the end of year 2 constitutes a modification of the award, but does

  not increase the fair value of the award at the date of modification, which under either settlement

  alternative is $250,000 (10,000 shares × $25), excluding the effect of the non-market vesting condition

  as required by IFRS 2.

  The fact that the employee now has the right to be paid in cash requires the ‘split accounting’ treatment set

  out in 10.1.2 above. Because of the requirement, under the rules for modification of awards (see 7.3 above),

  to recognise at least the grant date fair value of the original award, a minimum fair value of $330,000 has to

  be recognised over the vesting period.

  At the modification date, a liability of $166,667 (representing 2/3 of the $250,000 fair value of the liability

 

‹ Prev