Accounting Outlook 2016 - KPMG

Loading...
Accounting Outlook

August 2016

Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan kpmg.com/id

IFRS

International Financial Reporting Standards

IAS

International Accounting Standards

IFRIC

International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee

PSAK

Pernyataan Standar Akuntansi Keuangan

ISAK

Interpretasi Standar Akuntansi Keuangan

Accounting Outlook is provided as a general overview of Indonesian Financial Accounting Standards. It is not intended as professional advice. We recommend that you consult with your KPMG professional should you have specific concerns or questions regarding the new Standards and Interpretations.The descriptive and summary text used in this publication are not intended to substitute for the actual wording of PSAK and ISAK pronouncements and exposure drafts, IFRS pronouncements, or any other actual or potential accounting literature. Companies applying Indonesian Financial Accounting Standards should use the texts of relevant laws, regulations, and accounting requirements. Each company should consider its particular needs and circumstances, and consult with accounting and legal advisors. © 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Contents 1

Interpretation of Financial Accounting Standards No 30 provides clarity

5

ISAK 31 - Clarifying the scope of PSAK 13

7

Accounting for agricultural activity - PSAK 69 and amendments to PSAK 16

10

Standards and interpretations effective in 2016 and beyond

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Interpretation of Financial Accounting Standards No 30 provides clarity For every levy imposed by a government, businesses need to know when to recognize a liability and in which period should the corresponding expense be recorded. ISAK 30: “Levies” provides guidance on the accounting for levies. What does the interpretation cover? ISAK 30 addresses the accounting for an obligation to pay a levy within the scope of PSAK 57: “Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets”. It also addresses the accounting for an obligation to pay a levy whose timing and amount is certain. ISAK 30, however, does not address the accounting for the costs that arise from recognizing such an obligation to pay a levy. Entities should apply other PSAKs and/ or ISAKs to determine whether the recognition of a liability for such an obligation to pay a levy gives rise to an asset or an expense.

1

The term ‘levy’ is defined A levy is an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits that is imposed by governments on entities in accordance with legislation (i.e. laws and/or regulations), other than: a. those outflows of resources that are within the scope of other PSAKs and/or ISAKs (such as income taxes that are within the scope of PSAK 46: “Income Taxes”); and b. fines or other penalties that are imposed for breaches of legislation. The key word is ‘imposed’, which implies a unilateral assessment, and thus levies do not arise from executory contracts or other contractual arrangements. ‘Government’ refers to governments, and government agencies and similar bodies, whether local or national or international (which is the same definition as in PSAK 61: “Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance” and PSAK 7: “Related Party Disclosures”).

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Recognition principles The interpretation confirms that an entity recognizes a liability for an obligation to pay a levy when – and only when – the triggering event specified in the legislation occurs. An entity does not recognize a liability at an earlier date, even if it has no realistic opportunity to avoid the triggering event. For example, if an entity is liable to pay a levy if it generates revenues in a specific market on 1 January 2017, then it does not recognize a liability on 31 December 2016 – even if it is economically compelled to operate in 2017 and it prepares financial statements on a going concern basis. The timing of the liability recognition will depend on the precise wording of the relevant legislation.

Questions

Addressed by ISAK 30

What is the obligating event that gives rise to the recognition of a liability to pay a levy?

The obligating event that gives rise to a liability to pay a levy is the activity that triggers the payment of the levy, as identified by the legislation.

Does economic compulsion to continue to operate in a future period create a constructive obligation to pay a levy that will be triggered by operating in that future period?

An entity does not have a present constructive obligation to pay a levy that will be triggered by operating in a future period as a result of the entity being economically compelled to continue to operate in that future period.

Does the going concern assumption imply that an entity has a present obligation to pay a levy that will be triggered by operating in a future period?

The preparation of financial statements under the going concern assumption does not imply that an entity has a present obligation to pay a levy that will be triggered by operating in a future period.

Does the recognition of a liability to pay a levy arise at a point in time or does it, in some circumstances, arise progressively over time?

• If a levy is a single amount payable when a specific event occurs, then the amount is recognized in full when the specified event occurs. No amount is anticipated or deferred. • The liability to pay a levy is recognized progressively if the obligating event occurs over a period of time (i.e. if the activity that triggers the payment of the levy, as identified by the legislation, occurs over a period of time). For example, if the obligating event is the generation of revenue over a period of time, the corresponding liability is recognized as the entity generates that revenue.

What is the obligating event that gives rise to the If an obligation to pay a levy is triggered when a minimum threshold is recognition of a liability to pay a levy that is triggered reached, the liability that arises from that obligation shall be recognized if a minimum threshold is reached? when that minimum activity threshold is reached. Are the principles for recognizing a liability to pay a levy in the annual financial statements and in the interim financial report the same?

The same recognition principles apply in the interim financial statements as in the annual financial statements, even if this results in uneven charges over the course of the year.

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Accounting Outlook 2

Illustrative examples The following timelines indicate the points at which a liability is recognized for annual and interim reporting periods based on the circumstances described. The circumstances described do not necessarily reflect the actual legislation applicable for similar levies in Indonesia. The examples use an annual reporting period that ends on 31 December and assume the levy is payable on 1 January of the following year. Example 1 - A levy is triggered in full if the entity operates as a bank at a specified date Entity A is a bank and has an annual reporting period that ends on 31 December. In accordance with legislation, a levy is triggered in full only if an entity still operates as a bank at the end of the annual reporting period; should the entity cease its operation before the end of the annual reporting period, no levy is imposed on the entity. The amount of the levy is calculated by reference to the amounts in the statement of financial position of the entity at the end of the annual reporting. The end of the annual reporting period of Entity A is 31 December 2016.

  No liability liability recognized No recognized

1 January 2016

Q1

Q2

Q3

31December 2016 31December

No entry

No entry

No entry

2016 Liability is recognized

Example 2 – Levy triggered if the entity generates revenue in a specified period A levy is triggered in full as soon as the entity generates any amount of revenue in an annual period. The amount of the levy is calculated as 2% of total revenues for the preceding annual period. The entity generated revenue of CU (“Currency Unit”) 100 in the annual period ended 31 December 2015, and in 2016 starts to generate revenue on 3 January.

 

3 January 2016

No liability recognized No  aadditional dditional  liability   recognized  

1 January 2016

Q1

Q2

Q3

Liability of CU 2 is recognized

No entry

No entry

31December 2016 Total liability of CU 2 is recognized for the year

Q1 and full-year liability of CU 2 = (2% of prior year revenues of CU 100) recognized on 3 January 2016

3

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Example 3 – Levy triggered if the entity generates revenues above a minimum threshold A levy is triggered if the entity generates revenues above CU 50 in an annual period. The amount of the levy is determined at a rate of 2% by reference to all revenues generated by the entity in the annual period – i.e. including the first CU 50. In the annual period ending 31 December 2016, the entity reaches revenue of CU 50 on 17 July 2016. The entity generates a further CU 20 of revenue between 17 July 2016 – 30 September 2016, and another CU 30 in the last quarter.

 

17July July 2016 17 2016

No liability recognized No liability recognized

1 January 2016

Progressive recognition Progressive recognition of of additional amount of additional amount of the the liability liability

Q1

Q2

No entry

No entry

Q3 Liability of CU 1.4 is recognized

31December 2016 Total liability of CU 2 is recognized for the year

Q3 Liability of CU 1.4 = (2% of CU 50) recognized on 17 July 2016 + (2% of CU 20) recognized during the remainder of Q3 – 2016. Full year liability of CU 2 = (2% of CU 50) recognized on 17 July 2016 + (2% of CU 20) recognized during the remainder of Q3 – 2016 + (2% of CU 30) recognized during Q4 - 2016.

Application criteria for ISAK 30 ISAK 30 clarifies: • What subject matters meet the definition of a levy • When a liability for a levy is to be recognized; and • Whether the recording of a liability results in a corresponding expense or an asset Impact on the financial statements Certain items that historically would be treated as income tax fall within the definition of a levy under this interpretation (e.g. taxes that are imposed on revenue). Effective date and transition ISAK 30 is effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2016 and requires retrospective application.

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Accounting Outlook 4

ISAK 31 – Clarifying the scope of PSAK 13 PSAK 13: “Investment Property” narrowly defines its scope to only include land and/ or buildings held to earn rentals, capital appreciation, or both. In light of emerging business models involving structures that are held to earn rentals, questions arise as to whether entities may apply PSAK 13 to account for such structures. ISAK 31: “Interpretation of the Scope of Investment Property” was issued to clarify the scope of PSAK 13 with respect to the following.

5

Broadening the scope? How should we account for a structure that lacks the physical characteristics of a building (e.g. a telecommunication tower, or a billboard) and is used to lease virtual space to tenants to generate rental income? Should the scope of PSAK 13 be narrowly interpreted, so that it applies only to land and/ or buildings? How else should the boundaries of PSAK 13 be defined, and should the indicators be based on analysis of the assets’ physical characteristics or on the business model and the way the assets are used? Background ISAK 31 was issued in response to a divergence in practice in the accounting treatment for certain assets that are not land and/or buildings as defined in PSAK 13, but that are similarly used to earn rentals and/or capital appreciation. The issues originally surfaced in connection with leased space on telecommunication towers where telecommunications operators install their antennae. The tower owner also provides some basic services to the telecommunication operators, such as maintenance services. Similar accounting issues are also applicable for other types of structures, such as fuel storage tanks or advertising billboards, that are neither land nor buildings, per se, but are held to generate rentals.

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Some liken such structures to buildings, and may elect to measure their carrying amount using the PSAK 13 fair value model, whereby changes in fair value are recognized in profit or loss. Others argue that such structures are similar to property, plant and equipment (“PP&E”), where an option to measure using the revaluation model is also available under PSAK 16: “Property, Plant and Equipment”; in this case, changes in fair value are recognized in other comprehensive income, and the depreciation charges of the PP&E are recognized in profit or loss. Another logical argument against fair value accounting of assets such as telecommunication towers is that the perspective of their value is one of “outsidebasis”, not “inside-basis”, i.e.: a. towers are generally not bought and sold on an individual basis in the market, but rather through mergers and acquisitions of companies owning the tower portfolios, and b. tower companies intend to hold the towers until the end of their economic life. Such diversity of practice detracts the comparability of the entities’ financial performance and financial ratios (e.g. the EBITDA and the interest coverage ratio). For that reason, determining the scope of PSAK 13, and whether or not it can be broadened to include those structures, is a key question. IAS 40, from which PSAK 13 was adopted, does not elucidate as to why the scope of investment property is confined to land and/or buildings, other than an explanation that the characteristics of these properties differ significantly from owner-occupied properties, such that the current value of such properties and the changes therein are relevant to the users of financial statements. This issue has been escalated to regional and international standard setting forums, and has been discussed by the IFRS Interpretation Committee (“IFRIC”), and was eventually passed on to the IASB. The IFRIC is concerned that such structures may not qualify as buildings because they lack the features usually associated with a building, such as walls, floors and a roof. The IFRIC also is concerned that it will be difficult to reconsider the scope of IAS 40 without considering the impact on similar assets, e.g. fuel storage tanks and advertising billboards (IFRIC Update – July 2013). In December 2014, IASB decided not to proceed further with discussions on this matter, on the basis that: a. there appeared to be limited demand for fair value accounting for a structure that lacks the physical characteristics of a building, and b. the diversity in practice did not appear to be pervasive, i.e. only confined to Indonesia.

Interpretation ISAK 31 clarifies that investment property as defined in PSAK 13 refers to structures that have physical characteristics that are usually associated with a building, e.g. walls, floors and a roof. PSAK 13, allows treatment as an investment property only if the asset meets the definition of property as defined in PSAK, i.e. if it is land or a building—or part of a building—or both. PSAK 13 is premised upon this notion and an interpretation of PSAK 13 may not deviate from this concept. The original intent for the scope of PSAK 13 was to confine it to real property, primarily because of the undue effort that would be required to measure the fair values of other types of non-financial assets. Attempting to broaden that scope will have the unintended consequence of allowing fair value accounting or disclosures for all non-financial assets. In the absence of an alternative accounting model that would accommodate accounting treatments for structures other than real property, ISAK 31 is intended to bring the discussion back to the definition of property under PSAK 13. Effective date and transition ISAK 31 is effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2017. Early adoption is permitted. ISAK 31 includes a transition provision that in substance is a prospective catch-up approach based on the analysis as of 1 January 2016. As of that date: 1. If it does not meet the definition of building and was previously accounted for as investment property under the cost model, an entity is required to reclassify the assets to PP&E as of 1 January 2016 and apply the cost model under PSAK 16. 2. If it does not meet the definition of building and was previously accounted for as investment property under fair value model, an entity is required to reclassify the assets to PP&E as of 1 January 2016 and: ——

If subsequently measured under the cost model (PSAK 16), retrospective application is required by adjusting the retained earnings for the cumulative effect of the change as of 1 January 2016*;

——

If subsequently measured under the revaluation model (PSAK 16), retrospective application is required by adjusting the retained earnings and revaluation surplus (part of equity) for the cumulative effect of the change as of 1 January 2016*.

*The financial statements for periods prior to 1 January 2016 need not be restated for the application of this principle.

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Accounting Outlook 6

Accounting for agricultural activity - PSAK 69 and amendments to PSAK 16 PSAK 69: “Agriculture” introduces the accounting treatment for certain agricultural activities. PSAK 69 was issued concurrently with the Amendments to PSAK 16: “Agriculture: Bearer Plants”. Both standards adopt the equivalent standard in IFRS i.e. the amended IAS 41 and IAS 16 (the June 2014 version). The IASB issued the amendments to IAS 41 and IAS 16 in response to concerns by some constituents that the fair value model is not appropriate for measuring bearer plants that are no longer undergoing biological transformation – e.g. palm-oil trees bearing fruit.

7

Scope and definitions PSAK 69 sets out the accounting treatment for biological assets, except for bearer plants, during the period of biological transformation and for the initial measurement of agricultural produce at the point of harvest. Thereafter, PSAK 14: “Inventories” or other applicable standards are applied. PSAK 69 does not deal with the accounting for processing of agricultural produce after harvest. Having been excluded from the scope of PSAK 69, bearer plants are now included in the scope of the amended PSAK 16. Thus the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosures of bearer plants follow existing requirements of PSAK 16.

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Definitions: Agricultural activity is defined as the management of the biological transformation of biological assets for sale, into agricultural produce or into additional biological assets. Biological transformation comprises the processes of growth, degeneration, production and procreation that cause qualitative or quantitative changes in a biological asset. Biological asset is a living animal or plant. Agricultural produce is the harvested product of biological assets.

Determining whether an asset is a biological asset or inventory sometimes depends on the purpose for which the asset is held. For example, fertilized eggs held for hatching chicks are biological assets, while eggs held for sale are inventory. The following are examples of biological assets, agricultural produce and products that are the result of processing after harvesting:

Biological Assets

Agricultural Produce

Products That Are The Result Of Processing After Harvest

Dairy cattle

Milk

Cheese

Oil palms

Harvested fruit

Palm oil

Land owned by and used for agricultural activity is subject to the recognition and measurement principles of PSAK 16 and ISAK 25: “Land Rights”. Land that is leased out for the purposes of agricultural activity is treated as investment property by the land owner and is accounted for in accordance with PSAK 13. Recognition and measurement A biological asset is recognized only when: a. the entity controls the asset as a result of past events; b. it embodies probable future economic benefits; and c. the fair value or cost can be measured reliably. Biological assets are measured at fair value less costs to sell from initial recognition of biological assets up to the point of harvest. Gains or losses on the initial recognition of fair value of biological assets or changes in fair value less costs to sell of biological assets are recognized in profit or loss in the period in which they arise. Similarly, agricultural produce at the point of harvest is measured at its fair value less costs to sell at the point of harvest. The produce or harvest from a biological asset is inventory. The harvested produce is transferred to inventory at fair value less costs to sell; it is thereafter accounted for in accordance with PSAK 14. However, if the produce is still growing or still attached to the biological asset, its value forms part of the value of the biological asset. For practical expedience, PSAK 69 allows measurement at cost if: ——

cost approximates fair value, in situations where little biological transformation has taken place since the initial cost was incurred (for example, for fruit tree seedlings planted immediately before the end of the reporting period); or

——

the impact of the biological transformation on price is not expected to be material (for example, for the initial growth in a 30-year pine plantation cycle).

Bearer plants that are excluded from the scope of PSAK 69 are plants that: a. are used in the supply of agricultural produce; b. are expected to bear produce for more than one period; and c. have a remote likelihood of being sold as agricultural produce. Bearer plants are considered as no longer undergoing significant biological transformation, and thus are accounted for in the same way as self-constructed items of property, plant and equipment during construction. For example, palm oil trees meet the definition of bearer plant and thus are to be accounted for in accordance with PSAK 16.

PSAK 69 includes a presumption that fair value of a biological asset can be measured reliably. That presumption can be rebutted only on initial recognition in rare cases where market-determined prices or values are not available and alternative estimates of fair value are clearly considered as unreliable. In such cases, the biological asset is measured at its cost less accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses. An impairment test would be required whenever impairment indicators manifest.

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Accounting Outlook 8

In determining fair value, contract prices are not necessarily relevant, because fair value should reflect the latest market prices. At the inception of the contract, the contract price would be the best estimate of the future market price and would therefore be a relevant price to use in a cash flow model. Subsequently, historical contract prices may bear no relevance to the current fair value of the biological asset. Therefore, the fair value of a biological asset or its agricultural produce is not influenced by the existence of a contract unless contract prices represent current market prices. Costs to sell include commissions to brokers and dealers, levies by regulatory agencies and commodity exchanges, and transfer taxes and duties. Costs to sell exclude transport and other costs necessary to get assets to the market. Such costs are deducted in determining fair value (that is, fair value is the market price less transportation and other costs necessary to get an asset to market). How it works – the interaction between PSAK 69 and the Amendments to PSAK 16

In this illustrative example, palm oil plants are considered as bearer plants on the basis that these assets are mature, and are the means for production of agricultural produce over several reporting periods until their useful lives expire. By reference to the standards, PT ABC accounts for the palm oil plants and the produce growing on them separately. PT ABC may elect to measure the palm oil plants at their cost of 700, and the produce is measured at its fair value of 100. Disclosures PSAK 69 requires detailed disclosures that include a reconciliation of changes in the carrying amount of the biological assets, and quantitative disclosures of the volumes produced or sold in a period, either in the financial statements, or elsewhere in the information published along with the financial statements. When biological assets are measured at cost because fair value cannot be estimated reliably, detailed additional disclosures are required, including an explanation as to why the fair value cannot be measured reliably. The disclosure requirements of PSAK 68:”Fair Value Measurement” apply for each class of biological assets measured at fair value less costs to sell. Challenges ahead Measuring the fair value of produce on bearer plants will present some challenges. For example, it would be difficult to determine the fair value of biological assets or agricultural produce at the point of harvest for entities that hold large plantation areas at different locations that are affected by varying levels of plant maturity, yield profile, locality, fertility of soil, etc., as these inputs come into consideration in measuring the fair value.

  Produce  

Example: • PT ABC owns a palm oil plantation • The palm oil plants and the produce together have a fair value of 2,000 • The historical cost of the palm oil plants is 700 • The fair value of the produce on palm oil plants is 100

9

Effective date and transition PSAK 69 and Amendments to PSAK 16 are effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2018. These standards are applied retrospectively. Early adoption is permitted. Upon applying the Amendments to PSAK 16, the bearer plants’ fair value at the beginning of the earliest period presented is considered their deemed cost at that date.

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Standards and interpretations effective in 2016 and beyond The tables below provide a snapshot of new standards issued up to 31 December 2015. A majority of the standards/interpretations were adopted from IFRS with minimal modifications (primarily relating to the effective date of the standards). Standards/Interpretations No

Source

Description

Effective 1 January 2016 ISAK 30

Levies

IFRIC 21

Sub topic: Consolidation suites Amendments to PSAK 4

Equity Method in Separate Financial Statements

Amendments to IAS 27

Amendments to PSAK 15

Investment Entities - Applying the Consolidation Exception

Amendments to IAS 28

Amendments to PSAK 65

Investment Entities - Applying the Consolidation Exception

Amendments to IFRS 10

Amendments to PSAK 66

Accounting for Acquisition of Interests in Joint Operations

Amendments to IFRS 11

Amendments to PSAK 67

Investment Entities - Applying the Consolidation Exception

Amendments to IFRS 12

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Accounting Outlook 10

Standards/Interpretations No

Source

Description

Effective 1 January 2016 (Continued) Subtopic: Acceptable methods of depreciation/amortization Amendments to PSAK 16

Clarification of Acceptable Methods of Depreciation and Amortization

Amendments to IAS 16

Amendments to PSAK 19

Clarification of Acceptable Methods of Depreciation and Amortization

Amendments to IAS 38

Annual Improvements 2015: Adopting IFRS Annual Improvements (“AI”) Cycle 2010 - 2012 PSAK 5

Operating Segments

IFRS 8 – AI Cycle 2010 - 2012

PSAK 7

Related Parties

IAS 24 – AI Cycle 2010 - 2012

PSAK 16

Property, Plant and Equipment

IAS 16 – AI Cycle 2010 - 2012

PSAK 19

Intangible Assets

IAS 38 – AI Cycle 2010 - 2012

PSAK 22

Business Combination

IFRS 3 – AI Cycle 2010 - 2012

PSAK 53

Share-based Payments

IFRS 2 – AI Cycle 2010 - 2012

Annual Improvements 2015: Adopting IFRS Annual Improvements (“AI”) Cycle 2011 – 2013 PSAK 13

Investment Property

IAS 40 – AI Cycle 2011 - 2013

PSAK 22

Business Combination

IFRS 3 – AI Cycle 2011 - 2013

PSAK 68

Fair Value Measurement

IFRS 13 – AI Cycle 2011 - 2013

Annual Improvements 2015: Editorial correction PSAK 25

Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors

N/A

Interpretation of the Scope of Investment Property (PSAK 13)

N/A - Locally developed interpretation. No IFRIC/SIC equivalent.

Effective 1 January 2017 ISAK 31

Subtopic: Disclosure Initiatives Amendments to PSAK 1

Disclosure Initiatives

Amendments to IAS 1

Agriculture

IAS 41

Agriculture - Bearer Plants

Amendments to IAS 16

Effective 1 January 2018 PSAK 69 Subtopic: Agriculture Amendments to PSAK 16

11

© 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

© 2016 Siddharta & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of thefirm KPMG network © 2016 SiddhartaWidjaja Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member of the KPMGofnetwork of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

Accounting Outlook 12

Contact us Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan Registered Public Accountants 33rd Floor Wisma GKBI 28, Jl. Jend Sudirman Jakarta 10210 Indonesia T : +62 (0) 21 574 2333 / 2888 F : +62 (0) 21 574 1777 / 2777 Department of Professional Practice Cameron Pejman Technical Advisor [email protected] Thomas Thrasher Technical Advisor [email protected] Budi Susanto Partner [email protected] Cahyadi Muliono Partner [email protected] Indra Wijaya Director [email protected]

kpmg.com/id

The information contained herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation. © 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan – Registered Public Accountants, an Indonesian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International.

Loading...

Accounting Outlook 2016 - KPMG

Accounting Outlook August 2016 Siddharta Widjaja & Rekan kpmg.com/id IFRS International Financial Reporting Standards IAS International Account...

12MB Sizes 10 Downloads 19 Views

Recommend Documents

Accounting Outlook November 2014 - KPMG
PSAK 65. PSAK 67. PSAK 4 (2013 Revision). Investment in Associates & Joint Arrangements which are classified as “Joint

Chief Tax Officer Outlook - KPMG
business. CTOs and other tax leaders are expected to align tax with business goals, drive strategic value, increase tran

2016) - KPMG
Oct 10, 2016 - 30 September 2016, adapting tax self-assessments in respect of corporate income tax prepayments (forms ..

2016 Fintech100 - KPMG
Oct 17, 2016 - to their best advantage and driving disruption within the financial services industry. These companies ha

Banking Accounting Advisory - KPMG
Front Office or. Accounting. Policy functions. • Corporates'. Treasury functions. • New business. • Confidence in

Investing in Cambodia 2016 - KPMG
Content. Cambodia Market Overview. 02. • Market Overview. 03. • Cambodia Securities Exchange (CSX). 05. KPMG Introdu

Venture Pulse Q3 2016 - KPMG
Oct 13, 2016 - Tencent and Intel Capital investing actively. EUROPE Q3'16 DEAL ACTIVITY RISES, BUT. FUNDING DROPS BELOW

International Energy Outlook 2016 - EIA
case and, alternatively, a Low Oil Price case. The resulting projections—and the uncertainty associated with internati

Outlook for e-commerce in Hong Kong - KPMG
Outlook for e-commerce in Hong Kong gs1hk.org kpmg.com/cn. CEO and Consumer Perspectives. In association with .... Sport

Estudo KPMG de inovação 2016 - Exago
como a gestão de ideias, estratégia de inovação, orçamento de inovação, ... de inovação que definem claramente o tipo de