Objective of
IAS 29
IFRS are principles-based standards.
IAS 29 does not specifically state its objective.
Paragraph 2 states:
‘In a
hyperinflationary economy, reporting of operating results and financial
position in
the local currency without restatement
is not useful.’
The closest IAS 29 comes to stating its objective is
in Paragraph 7:
‘In a
hyperinflationary economy, financial statements, whether they are based on
a historical
cost approach or a current cost approach, are useful only if they are
expressed in
terms of the measuring unit current at the end of the reporting
period.’
Paragraph 8 states:
‘The
financial statements of an entity whose functional currency is the currency of
a
hyperinflationary economy, whether they are based on a historical cost approach
or a current
cost approach, shall be stated in terms of the measuring unit current
at the end of
the reporting period.’
The reason IAS 29 does not specifically state its objective
is because Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power as
originally authorized in the original Framework (1989), Par 104 (a) was not understood
at the IASC in 1989 and is still (2013) not understood at the IASB, Big Four
accounting companies, national accounting standard setters and by historical cost
accountants in general. An important reason for this is the fact that
non-monetary items were only split in constant real value non-monetary items
and variable real value non-monetary items in the book Real Value Accounting published in 2005.
Which items have to be measured in units of constant
purchasing power to maintain the constant purchasing power of capital constant
as authorized in Par 104 (a) in 1989? The split is not important to know during
hyperinflation because all non-monetary items, variable and constant items, are
measured in units of constant purchasing power during hyperinflation. The split
is thus not necessary during hyperinflation to achieve capital maintenance in
units of constant purchasing power. IAS 29 was also authorized in 1989.
Another reason is the fact that the ineffective “restatement”
model was very much in vogue as from the 1970´s and is still the stated model
in IAS 29. It is the model most accountants believe will result in making
financial statements ‘more meaningful’ during
hyperinflation. The term Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing
Power is not used by the IASB or accountants in general with reference to IAS
29.
The IASB Staff Paper 20 for the IFRIC meeting dated
22-23 January 2013 very surprisingly states:
‘10. Under
current IFRS, there is no particular guidance on how to prepare financial
statements stated in constant purchasing power units.’
The complete lack of understanding of Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant
Purchasing Power at the IASB is very evident in the above statement.
PricewaterhouseCoopers states in Understanding IAS 29 (2006)
Objectives of
IAS 29
‘The IAS 29
approach is to restate all balances recorded in the financial statements
(including comparative numbers) to the year-end general purchasing power of the
functional currency.’
Objective of
IAS 29
The objective
of IAS 29 is to implement Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing
Power during hyperinflation as authorized in IFRS in the
Conceptual Framework (2010), Par 4.59 (a) as follows: ‘Financial capital maintenance can be measured in either nominal
monetary units or units of constant
purchasing power.’
Unfortunately IAS 29 does not result in Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant
Purchasing Power because of the use of the monthly
published CPI. There are at least 365 different price levels in a year during
hyperinflation. IAS 29 only recognizes 12. This obviously results in the destruction of part of the real value of current year profits. This is remedied with the use of the generally
available Daily CPI. No-one currently (2013) uses the Daily CPI with IAS 29. Because
it is not currently widely used, the IASB regards the use of the Daily CPI with
IAS 29 as irrelevant. The fact that it was used by every company and every
accountant in Brazil for 30 years as well as over more than 45 years in Chile
as well as in other Latin American countries for decades is completely ignored
by the IASB because of their complete lack of understanding of Capital
Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power and their complete resistance
to learn what it is about.
Brazil used daily
indices supplied by different governments during the 30 years of very high
and hyperinflation from 1964 to 1994 with great success. The best and most
successful daily index used in Brazil was the Unidade Real de Valor which was almost entirely based on the daily
USD exchange rate with the Brazilian currency (which explains its success
during hyperinflation). Because of the complete lack of understanding of
Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power at the IASB and by
the global accounting profession, the great success of using daily indices in
South American countries was completely ignored by the accounting profession and
the IASB and still is.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
No comments:
Post a Comment