Reverse Repurchase Agreement Ifrs 9

Dec 16th, 2020 | By | Category: Uncategorized

Another member agreed with the staff`s recommendation and added that the committee should not analyze this issue and could not analyze it. According to this member, the three transactions reflect a derivative. One member began the discussion by stating that this was a complex subject and that an evaluation element was needed. Moreover, the example of IG B6 is one where the counterparty is the same and, therefore, the same consideration is an indicator rather than a rule. The Member added that the last paragraph of IG B6 alluded to the fact that the purpose of concluding several contracts should be considered, that is, if it reflected the same effect, as if it were a transaction. In August 2013, the Committee received a request for clarification on whether three separate transactions should be accounted for or aggregated separately and treated as a single derivative. The three operations are as follows: the Staff proposed that the Committee not put this issue on its agenda and put the proposed text for an interim decision on the agenda. Staff members summarized the feedback they received from public relations and submitted them to the committee. It concluded that the Committee could not address the specific issue, as an assessment is necessary, which would depend on the facts and concrete circumstances related to this issue. In addition, the current standard provides sufficient instructions to enable the company to identify the analysis required to determine accounting treatment. In addition, due to the complexity of the issue, the Company proposed to disclose relevant information relating to these transactions, subject to a significant assessment taking into account both the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the transactions. The Chair first stressed that the topic was a specific topic and, as a general rule, the Committee would not discuss specific scenarios.

He therefore invited the committee to focus on the indicators, whether the transaction would be aggregated or whether each transaction would be treated as a single transaction, rather than addressing issues specific to each transaction. The Chair concluded that the Committee had agreed not to put this issue on its agenda and that the decision on the agenda would be rewritten with the assistance of two Members. One member added that these transactions are relatively frequent structured transactions and that there are practical differences of opinion on processing. The accounting processing of these transactions is generally based on the facts and circumstances of the transactions, as well as on a company`s interpretation of IG B6.

Comments are closed.