top button
Flag Notify
    Connect to us
      Facebook Login
      Site Registration

Facebook Login
Site Registration

What is the difference Between IFRS and Canadian GAAP?

+1 vote
64 views
What is the difference Between IFRS and Canadian GAAP?
posted Sep 27, 2017 by Swati Tyagi

Share this question
Facebook Share Button Twitter Share Button LinkedIn Share Button

1 Answer

0 votes

Consolidation

Under IFRS, an entity (including a special purpose entity (SPE)) is consolidated based solely on control, which is evidenced by the power to govern the financial and operating policies of an entity to obtain benefit. When assessing control under IFRS, all relevant factors are considered, including qualitative and quantitative aspects.

Canadian GAAP determines consolidation of an entity using two different frameworks: the variable interest entity (VIE) and voting control models. The consolidation of a VIE under Canadian GAAP is based on whether the Bank is exposed to the majority of the VIE’s expected losses or residual returns, or both and considered to be the primary beneficiary.

The differences in the criteria for consolidation between IFRS and Canadian GAAP have resulted in certain SPEs being consolidated under IFRS that were not previously consolidated under Canadian GAAP.

Derecognition

Canadian GAAP uses a control-based model to assess derecognition, while IFRS primarily focuses on whether risks and rewards have been substantially transferred. As a result of the differences in the derecognition criteria between IFRS and Canadian GAAP, the Bank’s insured residential mortgage securitizations through the Canadian Government’s Canada Mortgage Bond (CMB) Programs do not meet the derecognition criteria under IFRS. Additionally, mortgages securitized and retained as mortgage-backed securities (MBS), currently classified as available-for-sale (AFS) on the Bank’s balance sheet under Canadian GAAP, would be reclassified to residential mortgages under IFRS.

Employee benefits

IFRS requires an entity to make an accounting policy choice regarding the treatment of actuarial gains and losses, subsequent to the transition date. Under IFRS, actuarial gains and losses may either be:

  • Deferred and amortized, subject to certain provisions (corridor approach);
  • Immediately recognized in profit or loss; or
  • Immediately recognized in other comprehensive income without subsequent recycling to income.
  • Under current Canadian GAAP, the Bank follows the corridor approach in recognizing actuarial gains and losses under its defined
  • benefit plans. The Bank has finalized its decision under IFRS to adopt the corridor approach.

Furthermore, under IFRS, the defined benefit obligation and plan assets are measured at the balance sheet date while under Canadian GAAP, the Bank applied a measurement date of two or three months prior to the financial reporting date. IFRS also requires the use of fair value for determining the expected return on plan assets. The Bank used a market-related value under Canadian GAAP.

IFRS will result in different values for plan assets and benefit obligations due to changes in actuarial assumptions applicable for the different measurement dates. In addition the use of fair value versus market-related value will also result in different plan asset values. Plan asset values and benefit obligations impact future employee benefit expenses.

The effects of changes in foreign exchange rates

IFRS requires that the functional currency for each foreign operation be determined based on the primary economic environment in which the entity operates. IFRS distinguishes primary factors to be considered in determining the functional currency of foreign operations while Canadian GAAP does not place any priority on any factors for consideration. This has resulted in a change in functional currency of certain subsidiaries on transition to IFRS.

Share-based payments

IFRS requires cash-settled (i.e., liability-classified) awards to be remeasured at each reporting date based on changes in fair value of the liability as compared to intrinsic value under Canadian GAAP. This results in measurement differences between IFRS and Canadian GAAP. Furthermore, under IFRS, forfeitures are required to be estimated on the grant date and included in the measurement of the liability. However, under Canadian GAAP, forfeitures may be recognized either as they occur, or estimated on initial recognition. The Bank currently recognizes forfeitures as they occur.

Impairment of goodwill

IFRS uses a one-step approach for impairment testing of non-financial assets by comparing the asset’s carrying value to its recoverable amount. The recoverable amount is the higher of fair value less costs to sell, and value in use. Canadian GAAP however, uses a two-step approach for impairment testing: first comparing an asset’s carrying value with undiscounted future cash flows to determine whether impairment exists; and then measuring any impairment by comparing the asset’s carrying value with its fair value.

IFRS requires that goodwill be allocated and tested for impairment at the level of cash generating unit (CGU) or group of CGUs. Under IFRS, each CGU or group of CGUs to which goodwill is allocated should represent the lowest level within the entity at which goodwill is monitored for internal management purposes. The Bank, based on its analysis, has concluded that under IFRS the level at which goodwill is tested is the same as under Canadian GAAP. Goodwill has been tested for impairment upon transition to IFRS on November 1, 2010 and no impairment was determined.

answer Oct 3, 2017 by Ati Kumar
Contact Us
+91 9880187415
sales@queryhome.net
support@queryhome.net
#280, 3rd floor, 5th Main
6th Sector, HSR Layout
Bangalore-560102
Karnataka INDIA.
QUERY HOME
...