|
COMMISSION REGULATION
(EC) No 1073/2005 of 7 July 2005 amending Regulation (EC)
No 1725/2003 adopting certain international accounting
standards in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002
of the European Parliament and of the Council,
as regards IFRIC 2
Content |
|
- |
Members’ Shares
in Cooperative Entities and Similar Instruments
References:
IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Disclosure and Presentation (as revised in 2003)
IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement (as revised in 2003)
Background
1. Cooperatives and other
similar entities are formed by groups of persons to meet
common economic or social needs. National laws typically
define a cooperative as a society endeavouring to promote
its members’ economic advancement by way of a joint business
operation (the principle of self-help). Members’ interests
in a cooperative are often characterised as members’ shares,
units or the like, and are referred to below as ‘members’
shares’.
2. IAS 32 establishes
principles for the classification of financial instruments
as financial liabilities or equity. In particular, those
principles apply to the classification of puttable
instruments that allow the holder to put those instruments
to the issuer for cash or another financial instrument. The
application of those principles to members’ shares in
cooperative entities and similar instruments is difficult.
Some of the International Accounting Standards
Board’s constituents have asked for help in understanding
how the principles in IAS 32 apply to members’ shares and
similar instruments that have certain features, and the
circumstances in which those features affect the
classification as liabilities or equity.
Scope
3. This Interpretation applies
to financial instruments within the scope of IAS 32,
including financial instruments issued to members of
cooperative entities that evidence the members’ ownership
interest in the entity. This Interpretation does not apply
to financial instruments that will or may be settled in the
entity’s own equity instruments.
Issue
4. Many financial instruments,
including members’ shares, have characteristics of equity,
including voting rights and rights to participate in
dividend distributions. Some financial instruments give the
holder the right to request redemption for cash or another
financial asset, but may include or be subject to limits on
whether the financial instruments will be redeemed. How
should those redemption terms be evaluated in determining
whether the financial instruments should be classified as
liabilities or equity?
Consensus
5. The contractual right of the
holder of a financial instrument (including members’ shares
in cooperative entities) to request redemption does not, in
itself, require that financial instrument to be classified
as a financial liability. Rather, the entity must consider
all of the terms and conditions of the financial instrument
in determining its classification as a financial liability
or equity. Those terms and conditions include relevant local
laws, regulations and the entity’s governing charter in
effect at the date of classification, but not expected
future amendments to those laws, regulations or charter.
6. Members’ shares that would
be classified as equity if the members did not have a right
to request redemption are equity if either of the conditions
described in paragraphs 7 and 8 is present. Demand deposits,
including current accounts, deposit accounts and similar
contracts that arise when members act as customers are
financial liabilities of the entity.
7. Members’ shares are equity
if the entity has an unconditional right to refuse
redemption of the members’ shares.
8. Local law, regulation or the
entity’s governing charter can impose various types of
prohibitions on the redemption of members’ shares, e.g.
unconditional prohibitions or prohibitions based on
liquidity criteria. If redemption is unconditionally
prohibited by local law, regulation or the entity’s
governing charter, members’ shares are equity. However,
provisions in local law, regulation or the entity’s
governing charter that prohibit redemption only if
conditions — such as liquidity constraints — are met (or are
not met) do not result in members’ shares being equity.
9. An unconditional prohibition
may be absolute, in that all redemptions are prohibited. An
unconditional prohibition may be partial, in that it
prohibits redemption of members’ shares if redemption would
cause the number of members’ shares or amount of paid-in
capital from members’ shares to fall below a specified level.
Members’ shares in excess of the prohibition against
redemption are liabilities, unless the entity has the
unconditional right to refuse redemption as described in
paragraph 7. In some cases, the number of shares or the
amount of paid-in capital subject to a redemption
prohibition may change from time to time. Such a change in
the redemption prohibition leads to a transfer between
financial liabilities and equity.
10. At initial recognition, the
entity shall measure its financial liability for redemption
at fair value. In the case of members’ shares with a
redemption feature, the entity measures the fair value of
the financial liability for redemption at no less than the
maximum amount payable under the redemption provisions of
its governing charter or applicable law discounted from the
first date that the amount could be required to be paid (see
example 3).
11. As required by paragraph 35
of IAS 32, distributions to holders of equity instruments
are recognised directly in equity, net of any income tax
benefits. Interest, dividends and other returns relating to
financial instruments classified
as financial liabilities are expenses, regardless of whether
those amounts paid are legally characterised as dividends,
interest or otherwise.
12. The Appendix, which is an
integral part of the consensus, provides examples of the
application of this consensus.
Disclosure
13. When a change in the
redemption prohibition leads to a transfer between financial
liabilities and equity, the entity shall disclose separately
the amount, timing and reason for the transfer.
Effective date
14. The effective date and
transition requirements of this Interpretation are the same
as those for IAS 32 (as revised in 2003). An entity shall
apply this Interpretation for annual periods beginning on or
after 1 January 2005. If an entity applies this
Interpretation for a period beginning before 1 January 2005,
it shall disclose that fact. This Interpretation shall be
applied retrospectively.
APPENDIX
EXAMPLES OF APPLICATION OF
THE CONSENSUS
This appendix is an integral
part of the Interpretation.
A1. This appendix sets out
seven examples of the application of the IFRIC consensus.
The examples do not constitute an exhaustive list; other
fact patterns are possible. Each example assumes that there
are no conditions other than those set out in the facts of
the example that would require the financial instrument to
be classified as a financial liability.
UNCONDITIONAL RIGHT TO
REFUSE REDEMPTION (paragraph 7)
Example 1
Facts
A2. The entity’s charter states
that redemptions are made at the sole discretion of the
entity. The charter does not provide further elaboration or
limitation on that discretion. In its history, the entity
has never refused to redeem members’ shares, although the
governing board has the right to do so.
Classification
A3. The entity has the
unconditional right to refuse redemption and the members’
shares are equity. IAS 32 establishes principles for
classification that are based on the terms of the financial
instrument and notes that a history of, or intention to make,
discretionary payments does not trigger liability
classification. Paragraph AG26 of IAS 32 states:
When preference shares are
non-redeemable, the appropriate classification is
determined by the other rights that attach to them.
Classification is based on an assessment of the
substance of the contractual arrangements and the
definitions of a financial liability and an equity
instrument. When distributions to holders of the
preference shares, whether cumulative or non-cumulative,
are at the discretion of the issuer, the shares are
equity instruments. The classification of a preference
share as an equity instrument or a financial liability
is not affected by, for example:
(a) a history of making
distributions;
(b) an intention to
make distributions in the future;
(c) a possible negative
impact on the price of ordinary shares of the issuer
if distributions are not made (because of
restrictions on paying dividends on the ordinary
shares if dividends are not paid on the preference
shares);
(d) the amount of the
issuer’s reserves;
(e) an issuer’s
expectation of a profit or loss for a period; or
(f) an ability or
inability of the issuer to influence the amount of
its profit or loss for the period.
Example 2
Facts
A4. The entity’s charter states
that redemptions are made at the sole discretion of the
entity. However, the charter further states that approval of
a redemption request is automatic unless the entity is
unable to make payments without violating local regulations
regarding liquidity or reserves.
Classification
A5. The entity does not have
the unconditional right to refuse redemption and the members’
shares are a financial liability. The restrictions described
above are based on the entity’s ability to settle its
liability. They restrict redemptions only if the liquidity
or reserve requirements are not met and then only until such
time as they are met. Hence, they do not, under the
principles established in IAS 32, result in the
classification of the financial instrument as equity.
Paragraph AG25 of IAS 32 states:
Preference shares may be
issued with various rights. In determining whether a
preference share is a financial liability or an equity
instrument, an issuer assesses the particular rights
attaching to the share to determine whether it exhibits
the fundamental characteristic of a financial liability.
For example, a preference share that provides for
redemption on a specific date or at the option of the
holder contains a financial liability because the issuer
has an obligation to transfer financial assets to the
holder of the share. The potential inability of an
issuer to satisfy an obligation to redeem a preference
share when contractually required to do so, whether
because of a lack of funds, a statutory restriction or
insufficient profits or reserves, does not negate the
obligation. [Emphasis added]
PROHIBITIONS AGAINST
REDEMPTION (paragraphs 8 and 9)
Example 3
Facts
A6. A cooperative entity has
issued shares to its members at different dates and for
different amounts in the past as follows:
(a) 1 January 20x1 100 000
shares at CU 10 each (CU 1 000 000);
(b) 1 January 20x2 100 000
shares at CU 20 each (a further CU 2 000 000, so that
the total for shares issued is CU 3 000 000).
Shares are redeemable on demand
at the amount for which they were issued.
A7. The entity’s charter states
that cumulative redemptions cannot exceed 20 per cent of the
highest number of its members’ shares ever outstanding. At
31 December 20x2 the entity has 200 000 of outstanding
shares, which is the highest number of members’ shares ever
outstanding and no shares have been redeemed in the past. On
1 January 20x3 the entity amends its governing charter and
increases the permitted level of cumulative redemptions to
25 per cent of the highest number of its members’ shares
ever outstanding.
Classification
Before the governing charter
is amended
A8. Members’ shares in excess
of the prohibition against redemption are financial
liabilities. The cooperative entity measures this financial
liability at fair value at initial recognition. Because
these shares are redeemable on demand, the cooperative
entity determines the fair value of such financial
liabilities as required by paragraph 49 of IAS 39, which
states: ‘The fair value of a financial liability with a
demand feature (e.g. a demand deposit) is not less than the
amount payable on demand …’ Accordingly, the cooperative
entity classifies as financial liabilities the maximum
amount payable on demand under the redemption provisions.
A9. On 1 January 20x1 the
maximum amount payable under the redemption provisions is 20
000 shares at CU 10 each and accordingly the entity
classifies CU 200 000 as financial liability and CU 800 000
as equity. However, on 1 January 20x2 because of the new
issue of shares at CU 20, the maximum amount payable under
the redemption provisions increases to 40 000 shares at CU
20 each. The issue of additional shares at CU 20 creates a
new liability that is measured on initial recognition at
fair value. The liability after these shares have been
issued is 20 per cent of the total shares in issue (200
000), measured at CU 20, or CU 800 000. This requires
recognition of an additional liability of CU 600 000. In
this example no gain or loss is recognised. Accordingly the
entity now classifies CU 800 000 as financial liabilities
and CU 2 200 000 as equity. This example assumes these
amounts are not changed between 1 January 20x1 and 31
December 20x2.
After the governing charter
is amended
A10. Following the change in
its governing charter the cooperative entity can now be
required to redeem a maximum of 25 per cent of its
outstanding shares or a maximum of 50 000 shares at CU 20
each. Accordingly, on 1 January 20x3 the cooperative entity
classifies as financial liabilities an amount of CU 1 000
000 being the maximum amount payable on demand under the
redemption provisions, as determined in accordance with
paragraph 49 of IAS 39. It therefore transfers on 1 January
20x3 from equity to financial liabilities an amount of CU
200 000, leaving CU 2 000 000 classified as equity. In this
example the entity does not recognise a gain or loss on the
transfer.
Example 4
Facts
A11. Local law governing the
operations of cooperatives, or the terms of the entity’s
governing charter, prohibit an entity from redeeming members’
shares if, by redeeming them, it would reduce paid-in
capital from members’ shares below 75 per cent of the
highest amount of paid-in capital from members’ shares. The
highest amount for a particular cooperative is CU 1 000 000.
At the balance sheet date the balance of paid-in capital is
CU 900 000.
Classification
A12. In this case, CU 750 000
would be classified as equity and CU 150 000 would be
classified as financial liabilities. In addition to the
paragraphs already cited, paragraph 18(b) of IAS 32 states
in part:
... a financial instrument
that gives the holder the right to put it back to the
issuer for cash or another financial asset (a ‘puttable
instrument’) is a financial liability. This is so even
when the amount of cash or other financial assets is
determined on the basis of an index or other item that
has the potential to increase or decrease, or when the
legal form of the puttable instrument gives the holder a
right to a residual interest in the assets of an issuer.
The existence of an option for the holder to put the
instrument back to the issuer for cash or another
financial asset means that the puttable instrument meets
the definition of a financial liability.
A13. The redemption prohibition
described in this example is different from the restrictions
described in paragraphs 19 and AG25 of IAS 32. Those
restrictions are limitations on the ability of the entity to
pay the amount due on a financial liability, i.e. they
prevent payment of the liability only if specified
conditions are met. In contrast, this example describes an
unconditional prohibition on redemptions beyond a specified
amount, regardless of the entity’s ability to redeem members’
shares (e.g. given its cash resources, profits or
distributable reserves). In effect, the prohibition against
redemption prevents the entity from incurring any financial
liability to redeem more than a specified amount of paid-in
capital. Therefore, the portion of shares subject to the
redemption prohibition is not a financial liability. While
each member’s shares may be redeemable individually, a
portion of the total shares outstanding is not redeemable in
any circumstances other than liquidation of the entity.
Example 5
Facts
A14. The facts of this example
are as stated in example 4. In addition, at the balance
sheet date, liquidity requirements imposed in the local
jurisdiction prevent the entity from redeeming any members’
shares unless its holdings of cash and short-term
investments are greater than a specified amount. The effect
of these liquidity requirements at the balance sheet date is
that the entity cannot pay more than CU 50 000 to redeem the
members’ shares.
Classification
A15. As in example 4, the
entity classifies CU 750 000 as equity and CU 150 000 as a
financial liability. This is because the amount classified
as a liability is based on the entity’s unconditional right
to refuse redemption and not on conditional restrictions
that prevent redemption only if liquidity or other
conditions are not met and then only until such time as they
are met. The provisions of paragraphs 19 and AG25 of IAS 32
apply in this case.
Example 6
Facts
A16. The entity’s governing
charter prohibits it from redeeming members’ shares, except
to the extent of proceeds received from the issue of
additional members’ shares to new or existing members during
the preceding three years. Proceeds from issuing members’
shares must be applied to redeem shares for which members
have requested redemption. During the three preceding years,
the proceeds from issuing members’ shares have been CU 12
000 and no member’s shares have been redeemed.
Classification
A17. The entity classifies CU
12 000 of the members’ shares as financial liabilities.
Consistently with the conclusions described in example 4,
members’ shares subject to an unconditional prohibition
against redemption are not financial liabilities. Such an
unconditional prohibition applies to an amount equal to the
proceeds of shares issued before the preceding three years,
and accordingly, this amount is classified as equity.
However, an amount equal to the proceeds from any shares
issued in the preceding three years is not subject to an
unconditional prohibition on redemption. Accordingly,
proceeds from the issue of members’ shares in the preceding
three years give rise to financial liabilities until they
are no longer available for redemption of members’ shares.
As a result the entity has a financial liability equal to
the proceeds of shares issued during the three preceding
years, net of any redemptions during that period.
Example 7
Facts
A18. The entity is a
cooperative bank. Local law governing the operations of
cooperative banks state that at least 50 per cent of the
entity’s total ‘outstanding liabilities’ (a term defined in
the regulations to include members’ share accounts) has to
be in the form of members’ paid-in capital. The effect of
the regulation is that if all of a cooperative’s outstanding
liabilities are in the form of members’ shares, it is able
to redeem them all. On 31 December 20x1 the entity has total
outstanding liabilities of CU 200 000, of which CU 125 000
represent members’ share accounts. The terms of the members’
share accounts permit the holder to redeem them on demand
and there are no limitations on redemption in the entity’s
charter.
Classification
A19. In this example members’
shares are classified as financial liabilities. The
redemption prohibition is similar to the restrictions
described in paragraphs 19 and AG25 of IAS 32. The
restriction is a conditional limitation on the ability of
the entity to pay the amount due on a financial liability,
i.e. they prevent payment of the liability only if specified
conditions are met. More specifically, the entity could be
required to redeem the entire amount of members’ shares (CU
125 000) if it repaid all of its other liabilities (CU 75
000). Consequently, the prohibition against redemption does
not prevent the entity from incurring a financial liability
to redeem more than a specified number of members’ shares or
amount of paid-in capital. It allows the entity only to
defer redemption until a condition is met, i.e. the
repayment of other liabilities. Members’ shares in this
example are not subject to an unconditional prohibition
against redemption and are therefore classified as financial
liabilities.
Previous |
Index |
Next
|