Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2025C00209:reg:221:p34
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2025C00209
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 221 (pt 34/73)
Character Range: 256432–259529

The Board therefore concluded that the cost of this disclosure would outweigh the benefits. These arguments are still valid and on that basis the Board decided not to include this particular disclosure from the IFRS from SMEs Standard.

Audit fees

      1.             Stakeholders were generally supportive of adding the requirement to disclose the fees paid to each auditor and reviewer, including any network firm, from AASB 1054 to AASB 1060 (paragraphs 98 and 99). The Board considered that the disclosure of audit fees is a public policy issue (see paragraph BC42) and requiring this disclosure will assist in improving auditor independence and accountability, thereby increasing users' confidence in the quality of companies' financial reports. The Board noted that the term 'network firm' is defined in APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants issued by Accounting and Professional Ethical Standards Board (APESB) (November 2018 incorporating all amendments to April 2018) and that preparers and auditors may refer to APES 110 for guidance.

Maturity Analysis

      1.             A number of respondents to ED 295 and roundtable participants noted an inconsistency in disclosures about the maturity of financial liabilities. While paragraph 144(b) (paragraph 20.13(b) in the IFRS for SMEs Standard) requires disclosure of a quantitative maturity analysis for future lease payments of lessees in fixed time periods, paragraph 114 (paragraph 11.42 in the IFRS for SMEs Standard) only has a general requirement for other financial liabilities to disclose terms and conditions "such as … maturity, repayment schedule …".

      2.             The Board acknowledged that information about the maturity of an entity's financial liabilities is important as the users of financial statements of entities that do not have public accountability are particularly interested in information about short-term cash flows, obligations and commitments, and liquidity. However, as stakeholder feedback on this issue was mixed, the Board decided to retain the disclosures consistent with the IFRS for SMEs Standard. Noting that the IFRS for SMEs disclosures, in particular the leasing disclosures, are currently being reviewed by the IASB, the Board decided to flag the inconsistency in the disclosures to the IASB instead.

      3.             However, The Board also noted that while paragraph 114 only has general disclosure requirements, these still require disclosure of the terms and conditions of the debt instrument and make specific reference to the instruments' maturity and repayment schedule. The Board therefore expects entities to provide this information in some form.

Tax reconciliation

      1.             Consistent with the disclosures in the IFRS for SMEs Standard, ED 295 only required disclosure of a narrative explanation of any significant differences between the tax expense (income) and accounting profit multiplied by the applicable tax rate without requiring a numerical reconciliation. Stakeholder feedback on this proposed reduction in disclosures was mixed.