Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2025C00172:body:0:p88
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2025C00172
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 231356–234427

Presentation of Financial Statements.
BC9 ED 233 also specifically asked respondents whether they have any alternative approaches/disclosure strategies that can be employed to minimise the adverse impact on the decision-making of the loss of consolidation information.
BC10 The AASB received 29 submissions on ED 233. The vast majority of respondents did not support the proposed Australian additional disclosures.  These respondents expressed support for introducing the IASB amendments without Australian additional disclosures.
BC11 The AASB staff also conducted targeted outreach with users of financial statements and the limited feedback received indicated that if there were to be Australian additional disclosures required, an example of the information that would be relevant is information about the earnings and liabilities of subsidiaries of investment entities.

AASB deliberations on adopting the IASB amendments in Australia without Australian additional disclosures
BC12 The AASB considered three main approaches to introducing the IASB amendments for investment entities in Australia:
A. issue the IASB amendments without Australian additional disclosures;
B. issue the IASB amendments with Australian additional disclosures as proposed in AASB ED 233; and
C. issue the IASB amendments with Australian additional disclosures that are reduced compared with the ED 233 proposals, in particular, disclosures about an unconsolidated subsidiary's total assets, total liabilities and total comprehensive income.
BC13 The AASB considered and rejected the approach of not adopting the IASB's amendments for Australian investment entities as this would result in Australian investment entities not being able to assert IFRS compliance, an outcome that would be contrary to the AASB's policy of having "… Tier 1 for-profit entities being IFRS compliant"[2].
BC14 The majority of AASB members expressed a preference for, or could at least accept, Approach A, consistent with the AASB's policy of IFRS adoption. Some members consider that the fair value of controlled entities can arguably be regarded as more relevant for users of financial statements of investment entities than consolidation information.  Some other members consider that the IASB's criteria for determining investment entities lack rigour and could lead to inconsistent application. However, on balance, the majority of members are willing to accept, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that the IASB amendments, including the disclosures required of investment entities in accordance with IFRS 12, would be sufficient to meet the needs of users of financial statements of investment entities, consistent with the feedback received from the vast majority of the respondents to ED 233.
BC15 This majority of AASB members could not accept Approach C as there was insufficient feedback from users to suggest that the reduced disclosures proposed in Approach C would be useful.  Those AASB members did not think it appropriate to delay adoption while further input from users is sought.
BC16