-

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2086/2004 of 19 November 2004 amended by Regulation (EC) No 1725/2003, Regulation (EC) No 1751/2005,  Regulation (EC) No 1864/2005, Regulation (EC) No 1910/2005 and Regulation (EC) No 2106/2005 

Content

-

Held-to-Maturity Investments

AG16. An entity does not have a positive intention to hold to maturity an investment in a financial asset with a fixed maturity if:

(a) the entity intends to hold the financial asset for an undefined period;

(b) the entity stands ready to sell the financial asset (other than if a situation arises that is non-recurring and could not have been reasonably anticipated by the entity) in response to changes in market interest rates or risks, liquidity needs, changes in the availability of and the yield on alternative investments, changes in financing sources and terms or changes in foreign currency risk;

or

(c) the issuer has a right to settle the financial asset at an amount significantly below its amortised cost.

AG17. A debt instrument with a variable interest rate can satisfy the criteria for a held-to-maturity investment. Equity instruments cannot be held-to-maturity investments either because they have an indefinite life (such as ordinary shares) or because the amounts the holder may receive can vary in a manner that is not predetermined (such as for share options, warrants and similar rights). With respect to the definition of held-to-maturity investments, fixed or determinable payments and fixed maturity mean that a contractual arrangement defines the amounts and dates of payments to the holder, such as interest and principal payments. A significant risk of non-payment does not preclude classification of a financial asset as held to maturity as long as its contractual payments are fixed or determinable and the other criteria for that classification are met. If the terms of a perpetual debt instrument provide for interest payments for an indefinite period, the instrument cannot be classified as held to maturity because there is no maturity date.

AG18. The criteria for classification as a held-to-maturity investment are met for a financial asset that is callable by the issuer if the holder intends and is able to hold it until it is called or until maturity and the holder would recover substantially all of its carrying amount. The call option of the issuer, if exercised, simply accelerates the asset’s maturity. However, if the financial asset is callable on a basis that would result in the holder not recovering substantially all of its carrying amount, the financial asset cannot be classified as a held-to-maturity investment. The entity considers any premium paid and capitalised transaction costs in determining whether the carrying amount would be substantially recovered.

AG19. A financial asset that is puttable (ie the holder has the right to require that the issuer repay or redeem the financial asset before maturity) cannot be classified as a held-to-maturity investment because paying for a put feature in a financial asset is inconsistent with expressing an intention to hold the financial asset until maturity.

AG20. For most financial assets, fair value is a more appropriate measure than amortised cost. The held-to-maturity classification is an exception, but only if the entity has a positive intention and the ability to hold the investment to maturity. When an entity’s actions cast doubt on its intention and ability to hold such investments to maturity, paragraph 9 precludes the use of the exception for a reasonable period of time.

AG21. A disaster scenario that is only remotely possible, such as a run on a bank or a similar situation affecting an insurer, is not something that is assessed by an entity in deciding whether it has the positive intention and ability to hold an investment to maturity.

AG22. Sales before maturity could satisfy the condition in paragraph 9 — and therefore not raise a question about the entity’s intention to hold other investments to maturity — if they are attributable to any of the following:

(a) a significant deterioration in the issuer’s creditworthiness. For example, a sale following a downgrade in a credit rating by an external rating agency would not necessarily raise a question about the entity’s intention to hold other investments to maturity if the downgrade provides evidence of a significant deterioration in the issuer’s creditworthiness judged by reference to the credit rating at initial recognition. Similarly, if an entity uses internal ratings for assessing exposures, changes in those internal ratings may help to identify issuers for which there has been a significant deterioration in creditworthiness, provided the entity’s approach to assigning internal ratings and changes in those ratings give a consistent, reliable and objective measure of the credit quality of the issuers. If there is evidence that a financial asset is impaired (see paragraphs 58 and 59), the deterioration in creditworthiness is often regarded as significant.

(b) a change in tax law that eliminates or significantly reduces the tax-exempt status of interest on the held-tomaturity investment (but not a change in tax law that revises the marginal tax rates applicable to interest income).

(c) a major business combination or major disposition (such as a sale of a segment) that necessitates the sale or transfer of held-to-maturity investments to maintain the entity’s existing interest rate risk position or credit risk policy (although the business combination is an event within the entity’s control, the changes to its investment portfolio to maintain an interest rate risk position or credit risk policy may be consequential rather than anticipated).

(d) a change in statutory or regulatory requirements significantly modifying either what constitutes a permissible investment or the maximum level of particular types of investments, thereby causing an entity to dispose of a held-to-maturity investment.

(e) a significant increase in the industry’s regulatory capital requirements that causes the entity to downsize by selling held-to-maturity investments.

(f) a significant increase in the risk weights of held-to-maturity investments used for regulatory risk-based capital purposes.

AG23. An entity does not have a demonstrated ability to hold to maturity an investment in a financial asset with a fixed maturity if:

(a) it does not have the financial resources available to continue to finance the investment until maturity;

or

(b) it is subject to an existing legal or other constraint that could frustrate its intention to hold the financial asset to maturity. (However, an issuer’s call option does not necessarily frustrate an entity’s intention to hold a financial asset to maturity — see paragraph AG18.)

AG24. Circumstances other than those described in paragraphs AG16-AG23 can indicate that an entity does not have a positive intention or the ability to hold an investment to maturity.

AG25. An entity assesses its intention and ability to hold its held-to-maturity investments to maturity not only when those financial assets are initially recognised, but also at each subsequent balance sheet date.

Loans and Receivables

AG26. Any non-derivative financial asset with fixed or determinable payments (including loan assets, trade receivables, investments in debt instruments and deposits held in banks) could potentially meet the definition of loans and receivables. However, a financial asset that is quoted in an active market (such as a quoted debt instrument, see paragraph AG71) does not qualify for classification as a loan or receivable. Financial assets that do not meet the definition of loans and receivables may be classified as held-to-maturity investments if they meet the conditions for that classification (see paragraphs 9 and AG16-AG25). On initial recognition of a financial asset that would otherwise be classified as a loan or receivable, an entity may designate it as a financial asset at fair value through profit or loss, or available for sale.

Previous | Index | Next