Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2023C00381:reg:8:p14
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2023C00381
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 8 (pt 14/28)
Character Range: 211544–214602

providing a consistent, enforceable and transparent reporting framework (despite a lack of comparability in the year of transition).  Thus the Board proposed in ED 297 that an entity would not be required to provide restated comparative information as per current AAS in the year the Standard first becomes effective, on the premise that the Standard would be issued by 30 June 2020, effective for periods beginning on or after 1 July 2020 (see paragraphs BC145-BC148 for further discussion on effective date).

     BC130        However, the Board noted the particular importance for users:

          (a)                    to understand the effect of an entity's transition from SPFS to Tier 2 GPFS on its assets, liabilities and equity; and

          (b)                   to have comparative information in the statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income to facilitate trend analysis.

     BC131        To balance the needs of users and the costs to preparers, the Board proposed in ED 297 that a pragmatic approach would be to require an entity to:

          (a)                    present two statements of financial position ie as at the reporting date and at the beginning of the reporting period, with a comparative statement of financial position as presented in the entity's last SPFS disclosed in the notes to the financial statements. This would be supplemented with a description of the main adjustments that were required to make the opening statement of financial position compliant with AAS. To reduce costs, the Board proposed an entity need not quantify those adjustments; and

          (b)                   present its statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income as presented in its last SPFS as comparative information, but clearly labelled, where applicable, that such comparative information is not AAS compliant. This would be supplemented with disclosure in the notes to the financial statements describing the main adjustments that would have been required to make the comparative information compliant with AAS. Also to reduce costs, the Board proposed an entity need not quantify those adjustments.

     BC132        Respondents to ED 297 agreed in principle with the transitional relief, however some respondents raised concern that the comparative information in the statement of financial position (being the adjusted opening balances – AAS compliant) would not be comparable to the comparative information in the statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income (which would not necessarily be AAS compliant). Those respondents argued that this would not be helpful for users of financial statements. Further, some software providers provided feedback that having comparative information presented on different bases could be difficult from both a software development and financial statement user perspective.

     BC133        In response, the Board decided a pragmatic approach would be to require the statement of financial position as presented in the entity's last SPFS to