EITF effort to clarify business combinations guidance delayed.
FASB's Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) recently determined that it needs to further revise a proposed amendment to U.S. GAAP intended to clear up an aspect of the business combinations standard. The EITF is trying to resolve an apparent conflict between Table of ASC 805, Business Combinations, and ASC 606, Revenue From Contracts With Customers. The EITF plans to review the near-finished draft at its meeting this month, FASB Technical Director Sue Cosper said at the end of FASB's July 25 weekly meeting. “Since we drafted the ASU [Accounting Standards Update], we have gotten a number of observations from EITF members on some unintended consequences that they've observed from the application of that ASU,” Cosper told FASB. “As a result, we decided, upon consultation with EITF members, to defer issuance.” FASB members did not make any public remarks after Cosper's announcement. A FASB spokesperson said the board had questions regarding how the proposed amendments would affect financial reporting.
Credit unions, community banks to get more time to implement credit loss standard.
FASB agreed to clarify its new accounting standard requiring earlier recognition of credit losses to ensure that community banks and credit unions have extra time to comply with it compared to larger financial institutions. That was the board's objective all along, FASB Chairman Russell Golden said, but the nuances of the language in Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, suggested that the smaller, less complex financial institutions did not have the lead time that the accounting board envisioned. “We intended to give these financial institutions longer,” Golden said. “There's confusion out there, and we need to correct that confusion so that the board's intent in the original document is appropriately reflected at the transition date for these financial institutions.” FASB plans to release the proposed wording change in August or September for a 30-day comment period.
The nuances of the language in Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2016-13 suggested that the smaller, less complex financial institutions did not have the lead time that the accounting board envisioned.