|
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1725/2003 of 29 September
2003 adopting certain international accounting standards
in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the
European Parliament and of the Council.
Content |
|
- |
This SIC contains
amendments resulting from the adoption of Commission
Regulation (EC) No. 2238/2004 of 29 December 2004.
Consolidation - special purpose entities
Paragraph 11 of IAS 1 (revised
2004), presentation of
financial statements, requires that financial statements
should not be described as complying with International
Accounting Standards unless they comply with all the
requirements of each applicable standard and each applicable
interpretation issued by the Standing Interpretations
Committee. SIC interpretations are not intended to apply to
immaterial items.
Reference: IAS
27 Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements
Issue
1. An entity may be created to accomplish a narrow and
well-defined objective (e.g. to effect a lease, research and
development activities or a securitisation of financial assets).
Such a special purpose entity ("SPE") may take the form of a
corporation, trust, partnership or unincorporated entity. SPEs
often are created with legal arrangements that impose strict
and sometimes permanent limits on the decision-making powers
of their governing board, trustee or management over the
operations of the SPE. Frequently, these provisions specify
that the policy guiding the ongoing activities of the SPE
cannot be modified, other than perhaps by its creator or
sponsor (i.e. they operate on "autopilot").
2. The sponsor (or enterprise on whose behalf the SPE was
created) frequently transfers assets to the SPE, obtains the
right to use assets held by the SPE or performs services for
the SPE, while other parties ("capital providers") may provide
the funding to the SPE. An enterprise that engages in
transactions with an SPE (frequently the creator or sponsor)
may in substance control the SPE.
3. A beneficial interest in an SPE may, for example, take
the form of a debt instrument, an equity instrument, a
participation right, a residual interest or a lease. Some
beneficial interests may simply provide the holder with a
fixed or stated rate of return, while others give the holder
rights or access to other future economic benefits of the
SPE's activities. In most cases, the creator or sponsor (or
the enterprise on whose behalf the SPE was created) retains a
significant beneficial interest in the SPE's activities, even
though it may own little or none of the SPE's equity.
4. IAS 27 requires the consolidation of entities that are
controlled by the reporting enterprise. However, the standard
does not provide explicit guidance on the consolidation of
SPEs.
5. The issue is under what circumstances an enterprise
should consolidate an SPE.
6. This interpretation does not apply to post-employment
benefit plans or equity compensation plans.
7. A transfer of assets from an enterprise to an SPE may
qualify as a sale by that enterprise. Even if the transfer
does qualify as a sale, the provisions of IAS 27 and this
interpretation may mean that the enterprise should consolidate
the SPE. This interpretation does not address the
circumstances in which sale treatment should apply for the
enterprise or the elimination of the consequences of such a
sale upon consolidation.
Consensus
8. An SPE should be consolidated when the substance of the
relationship between an enterprise and the SPE indicates that
the SPE is controlled by that enterprise.
9. In the context of
an SPE, control may arise through the predetermination of the
activities of the SPE (operating on “autopilot”) or
otherwise. IAS 27.13 indicates several circumstances which
result in control even in cases where an entity owns one half
or less of the voting power of another entity. Similarly,
control may exist even in cases where an entity owns little or
none of the SPE’s equity. The application of the control
concept requires, in each case, judgement in the context of
all relevant factors.
10. In addition to
the situations described in IAS 27.13, the following
circumstances, for example, may indicate a relationship in
which an entity controls an SPE and consequently should
consolidate the SPE (additional guidance is provided in the
Appendix to this Interpretation):
(a) in substance,
the activities of the SPE are being conducted on behalf of the
entity according to its specific business needs so that the
entity obtains benefits from the SPE’s operation;
(b) in substance,
the entity has the decision-making powers to obtain the
majority of the benefits of the activities of the SPE or, by
setting up an “autopilot” mechanism, the entity has
delegated these decision-making powers;
(c) in substance,
the entity has rights to obtain the majority of the benefits
of the SPE and therefore may be exposed to risks incident to
the activities of the SPE; or
(d) in substance,
the entity retains the majority of the residual or ownership
risks related to the SPE or its assets in order to obtain
benefits from its activities.
11. [Deleted]
Date of consensus: June 1998.
Effective date: This interpretation becomes effective for
annual financial periods beginning on or after 1 July 1999;
earlier application is encouraged. Changes in accounting
policies should be accounted for according to the transition
requirements of IAS 8.46.
Previous |
Index |
Next
|