IFRS NEWS FEBRUARY 2019 - PWC

Page created by Louise Powell
 
CONTINUE READING
IFRS NEWS FEBRUARY 2019 - PWC
www.inform.pwc.com

IFRS news
February 2019

                                     IFRS 15 for the                         However, there might be limited
                                                                             circumstances where the licence
                                     software industry –                     and updates are combined into a
                                     PwC In brief                            single performance obligation.

                                     At a glance                             The determination of whether
This month's issues:
                                                                             licence and updates are separate
                                     It has long been understood that        performance obligations requires
•   IFRS 15 for the software
                                     the software industry would be one      judgement. It is common for
    industry – PwC In brief
                                     of the industries more significantly    updates to improve the
•   In transition - the latest on
                                     affected by the adoption of IFRS 15.    effectiveness of software. However,
    IFRS 17 implementation - Jan
                                     This is because current guidance        for the updates to be combined
    2019
                                     under IFRS, in particular for           with the licence, they should
                                     licence revenue, is limited, and        fundamentally change the
                                     many entities have historically         functionality of the software or be
                                     looked to develop accounting            essential to its functionality. A
                                     policies based on industry-specific     combination of a number of factors
                                     US GAAP which has now been              should be considered, including:
                                     superseded. In depth 2014-02 on         Nature of software – Software that
                                     revenue recognition for software        can function on its own without
                                     sets out some of the key changes as     updates is likely a performance
                                     a result of the standard.               obligation that is separate from the
                                     The implementation of IFRS 15 in        updates. There might be limited
                                     the software industry is proving to     cases where the updates are
                                     be a challenge, as expected. Even if    essential to the customer’s ability
                                     there is no significant change to the   to benefit the licence because of the
                                     pattern of revenue recognition,         function of the software or the
                                     management will need to make a          industry in which it operates.
                                     number of new judgements and
                                     estimates. One of the most              Significance of updates – Updates
                                     significant changes that affects the    that change the functionality of the
                                     industry is the recognition of more     software might indicate that such
                                     revenue ‘upfront’ in the scenario       updates significantly modify the
                                     where software is delivered and         licence. This might be the case for
                                     control passes to the customer.         any significant update to the
                                     This document provides additional       software, but this factor should be
                                     insight into some of the key            considered, along with the other
                                     judgements facing the industry          indicators about the nature or
                                     during the implementation phase.        frequency of the updates, to
                                                                             determine if such an update is
                                     Judgements and estimates                essential to the functionality of the
                                     Determining whether a                   software.
                                     licence is distinct
                                                                             Frequency and acceptance of
                                     Software licences are commonly          updates – Frequent updates might
                                     sold in a bundle that includes          indicate that the updates are
                                     updates, also known as post-            essential to the operation of the
                                     contract customer support (‘PCS’).      software; however, management
                                     It is common that the software is a     should consider not only the
                                     distinct ‘right to use’ licence, with   frequency but also whether the
                                     revenue recognised at the point in      customers accept the updates.
                                     time when it is transferred, while
                                     the PCS is delivered over time.
                                                                                                  PwC | IFRS news | 1
Updates that are made available      This could be an indication that      An entity might use the renewal
but not used might indicate that     the vendor’s activities do not        price to determine the amount to
the software is functional           transfer anything to the customer,    be allocated to the software if
without updates.                     and so they do not represent a        certain criteria are met and the
                                     separate performance obligation.      outcome faithfully represents the
If a licence and updates are         However, there might be               price if the software was sold
combined, the outcome is             circumstances in which the            separately. For example, assume
generally a performance              implementation activities provide     that an entity sells licensed
obligation that is delivered over    a separate benefit to the customer    software and maintenance to a
time. Example 55 in IFRS 15          that can be used with another         customer for C1.1m, and it
provides an illustration of this     service (such as software provided    regularly sells PCS for C1m and it
approach. There might be other       by another supplier), in which case   licenses software on a stand-alone
performance obligations              they do represent a separate          basis for between C0.5m and C5m.
included as part the PCS package     performance obligation.               It would not be appropriate to
that require separate                                                      apply the residual approach and
identification. However, they are    Estimating stand-alone                allocate C0.1m to the software.
often delivered over time and        selling price                         This is because the residual
over a similar period as the                                               approach results in a nominal
combined service of software and     In software arrangements, entities allocation of selling price to the
updates; and, in practice, any       will often provide multiple distinct software licence, which does not
allocation of transaction price      goods and services (for example,      faithfully reflect the stand-alone
would not have a significant         licences and updates) together as a selling price.
effect on the timing and amount      single package, and they will need
of revenue recognised.               to allocate the transaction price     Contract term and
                                     based on the relative stand-alone     termination penalties
Set-up and integration               selling prices of those distinct
activities                           goods and services. In many cases, The contract term is the period
                                     the stand-alone selling price will    during which the parties to the
Arrangements involving software      not be directly observable, and so    contract have present and
often include a promise to           it must be estimated. IFRS 15 does enforceable rights and obligations.
provide implementation support,      not prescribe a specific method to Determining the contract term
such as data conversion, software    estimate, but the allocation should could significantly affect the
design or development, and           faithfully represent the price if the accounting for software
customisation. Entities need to      items were sold separately.           transferred at the beginning of the
apply judgement to determine                                               licence. This is because the
whether such activities are          The most appropriate approach to portion of revenue allocated to the
accounted for as a separate          estimating stand-alone prices will licence for the entire contractual
performance obligation and           depend on facts and circumstances term is recognised when the
when revenue should be               including the extent of observable licence is transferred to the
recognised (that is, at a point in   selling-price information. We         customer. If that contract term is
time when the service is             believe that it is acceptable to use  shorter, it will decrease the
complete, or over time as the        a range of prices when                amount of revenue recognised
service is performed). Example       determining the stand-alone           upfront.
11 in IFRS 15 provides an            selling prices, provided that the     Entities need to consider
illustration of this judgement in    range reflects the reasonable         termination clauses when
the context of software that is a    pricing of each item as if it were    assessing the contract term. If an
‘right of use’ licence.              priced on a stand-alone basis for     entity enters into a contract for a
                                     similar customers.                    term of several years, but that
Software as a service (SAAS)                                               contract can be terminated early
arrangements also often include      It is common for entities to only     for no compensation, the contract
implementation services. It          sell software and PCS as a            might, in substance, be a shorter-
might be more challenging to         package, or to only sell              term contract with a right to
conclude that the customer is        maintenance separately as a           renew. Management should assess
receiving a separate service in      renewal. IFRS 15 only permits the a renewal to determine if it
the context of an SAAS               use of a residual approach in         provides a material right similar to
arrangement. The service often       limited circumstances.                other types of customer option. In
involves configuring the                                                   contrast, a contract that can be
customer’s system to interact                                              terminated early, but requires
with the vendor’s software to                                              payment of a substantive
enable it to provide the service.                                          termination penalty, is likely to
                                                                           have a contract term equal to the
                                                                           stated term.

                                                                                                 PwC | IFRS news | 2
We believe that termination           In contrast, if a licensor provides,   It also might split the initial
penalties could take various          for an incremental fee, additional     commission into two components:
forms, including cash payments        or incremental rights that the         one reflecting an amount
(which might be paid upfront) or      customer did not previously            commensurate with the renewal
the transfer of an asset to the       control, the customer is likely        commission; and the remainder
vendor. Judgement should be           exercising an option to acquire        treated as an upfront commission
applied in determining whether a      additional rights.                     that is amortised over the
termination penalty is                                                       estimated customer life. Other
substantive. A payment need not       Capitalising and amortising            approaches could also be
be labelled a ‘termination            commissions                            acceptable if they are consistent
penalty’ for it to create                                                    with the pattern of transfer of the
enforceable rights and                IFRS 15 requires entities to           services related to the asset. For
obligations. A substantive            capitalise incremental costs of        example, where there is a term
termination penalty might exist       obtaining a contract (for example,     licence, and a large proportion of
if a customer gives up, with no       sales commissions) in most             revenue is recognised upfront, it
right to a refund, the rights to a    situations. The asset is both          might be appropriate to recognise
licence that it has already paid a    assessed for impairment and            a similar proportion of
significant upfront fee to obtain.    amortised on a systematic basis        commission upfront.
                                      that is consistent with the transfer
Distinguishing usage-based            of the related services.               Determining the contract
royalties from additional             Determining the amortisation
rights                                period can be complex, because it      Previous revenue guidance did not
                                      does not necessarily reflect the       provide explicit guidance on
Many software licence                 length of the contract period. In      identifying a contract, but this is
arrangements include a variable       particular, where there are            an important step in applying
fee linked to usage of the            anticipated renewals, the              IFRS 15. This might cause an
software. Entities will need to       amortisation period should             entity to change the way that it
distinguish between fees              include anticipated renewals,          thinks about contracting. For
representing a usage-based            unless the entity also incurs a        example, an entity might conclude
royalty (a form of variable           commensurate cost for renewals.        that there is a contract in place
consideration) and an option to                                              before a signed legal agreement
acquire additional goods or           Assessing whether costs incurred       exists, whereas historically this
services. A usage-based royalty is    for contract renewals are              might not have been the case. This
recognised when the usage             ‘commensurate with’ costs              could affect the accounting
occurs or the performance             incurred for the initial contract      conclusion as well as disclosures
obligation is satisfied, whichever    could require judgement. The           about remaining performance
is later. Fees received when an       assessment should not be based         obligations.
option to acquire additional          on the level of effort required to     A contract can be written, oral, or
rights is exercised are recognised    obtain the initial and renewal         implied by an entity’s customary
when the additional rights are        contracts. Instead, it should          business practices. Generally, any
transferred; however, at contract     generally be based on whether the      agreement that creates legally
inception, management would           initial and renewal commissions        enforceable rights and obligations
need to assess whether the            are reasonably proportional to the     meets the definition of a contract.
option provides a material right.     respective contract values.            Sometimes, the parties will enter
If it does, revenue might be                                                 into amendments or ‘side
recognised later, because a           Where renewal commissions are          agreements’ to a contract that
portion of the transaction price is   paid but are not commensurate          either change the terms (for
allocated to the option and           with initial commissions, the          example, contract term) of, or add
deferred until the option is          initial commission should be           to, the rights and obligations of
exercised or expires.                 amortised over a period longer         that contract (for example,
Judgement might be required to        than the initial contract term. An     providing customers with options
distinguish between a usage-          entity might amortise the initial      or discounts), or change the
based royalty and an option to        commission over the average            substance of the arrangement. All
acquire additional goods or           customer life of five years and        of these items have implications
services. If a licensor is entitled   expense renewal commissions as         for revenue recognition; therefore,
to additional consideration based     incurred.                              understanding the entire contract,
on the usage of software to which                                            including any amendments, is
the customer already has rights,                                             critical to the accounting
without providing any additional                                             conclusion. See the discussion on
or incremental rights, the fee is                                            ‘contract term’ above.
generally a usage-based royalty.

                                                                                                    PwC | IFRS news | 3
Principal versus agent                 (for example, future                  It is essential that entities update
                                      maintenance periods). IFRS 15          their accounting policies and
It is common for software             requires these to be disclosed,        disclosures on significant
entities to enter into                in addition to an explanation of       judgements and estimates to
arrangements that involve two or      what comprises accrued and             reflect the application of IFRS 15.
more unrelated parties that           deferred revenue (contract
contribute to providing a             liabilities and contract assets)       IFRS 15 also requires a number
specified good or service to a        and over what period the               of new disclosures, relating to
customer. For example, software       services have been, or will be,        significant judgements that are
entities might sell third party       performed.                             applied, which supplement IAS 1.
software, hardware or services in                                            These include disclosing
addition to their own products        IAS 1 requires entities to disclose    judgements made in applying the
and services. Management needs        certain information about              standard which significantly
to determine whether the entity       significant judgements and             affect the determination of the
is a principal or agent separately    estimates. Management might            amount and timing of revenue
for each specified good or service    conclude that the judgements           from contracts with customers,
promised to a customer. This will     and estimates made in the              in particular when performance
determine whether or not              application of IFRS 15 result in       obligations are satisfied and the
revenue is presented gross (when      similar accounting to previous         transaction price and its
acting as principal) or presented     GAAP, but the thought process is       allocation to performance
net (when acting as agent).           likely to be different.                obligations.

Disclosures                           This might mean that the               When does this apply?
                                      judgements and estimates
In software arrangements, often       disclosed are different.               IFRS 15 applies for entities with
there can be contract                                                        financial years beginning on or
deliverables that are not yet                                                after 1 January 2018.
billed

In transition - the latest on IFRS 17 implementation - Jan 2019

IASB proposes to further                •   Expand the scope for the risk      The Board expects to publish an
amend IFRS 17                               mitigation exemption for           Exposure Draft of the
                                            insurance contracts with           amendments to IFRS 17 around
IASB agrees to propose certain              direct participation features      the end of the first half of 2019,
further amendments to IFRS 17               to reinsurance contracts held      to be in a position to finalise
to better reflect the economics of          that are used to mitigate          amendments such that 1 January
insurance contracts                         financial risk. However, the       2022 remains as the proposed
                                            Board will not expand the          effective date of IFRS 17.
At a glance                                 scope of the variable fee
                                            approach to reinsurance            The views in this In transition
On 23 January 2019 the IASB                 contracts issued or held; and      are based on our observations
continued its discussions on            •   Require consideration of the       from the 23 January 2019
IFRS 17/ It tentatively agreed to           existence of an investment         meeting, and they might differ in
propose amendments to IFRS 17               return service in allocating       some respects from the official
to:                                         the CSM using coverage units.      minutes of the meeting to be
                                                                               published by the IASB at a later
•   Require allocation of               The Staff plans to bring papers        date.
    insurance acquisition cash          on the remaining
    flows to anticipated future         implementation concerns and            Background
    renewals;                           challenges to the Board during
•   Require recognition of a gain       the first quarter of 2019. At a        1. In connection with the
    in profit or loss when an           future meeting the Board plans         issuance of IFRS 17, the IASB
    insurer recognises losses on        to consider the package of all the     established a transition resource
    onerous underlying insurance        proposed amendments to ensure          working group (‘TRG’) to provide
    contracts at initial                that they comply with the criteria     a public forum for stakeholders
    recognition, to the extent that     the Board agreed in October            to follow the discussion of
    a reinsurance contract held         2018 and will consider the need        questions raised on
    covers the losses of each           for additional disclosures as a        implementation of the new
    contract on a proportionate         consequence of the proposed            standard.
    basis;                              amendments.

                                                                                                  PwC | IFRS news | 4
2. Since the issuance of the         The Board noted that limiting the         Overview of items discussed
standard, IASB staff have also       deferral to one year would minimise       during the January IASB
been engaged in a variety of         disruption to entities that are           Board meeting
activities with stakeholders to      furthest advanced in
follow the implementation of         implementation, address users’            5. Continuing with the discussions
IFRS 17. At the IASB meeting on      concerns that adoption of IFRS 17         of concerns and implementation
24 October, the Board agreed to      and IFRS 9 should not be                  challenges raised by IFRS 17
explore potential amendments to      significantly delayed, and provide a      stakeholders, at the January 2019
IFRS 17 based on a list of           clear signal to the industry that it      meeting the Board evaluated 5 of
implementation issues and            should not stop implementation            the 25 concerns and
concerns compiled by the staff.      projects.                                 implementation challenges
The Board noted that the criteria                                              reported in October 2018, noting
sets a high hurdle for change,       4. In December 2018 the IASB              that the remaining six issues plus
and any amendments suggested         continued discussions of the              the question postponed in
would need to be narrow in           concerns and implementation               December would be discussed
scope and deliberated quickly to     challenges raised by stakeholders of      further in the first quarter for 2019
avoid significant delays in the      IFRS 17. The IASB agreed to               aiming for issuance of an exposure
effective date.                      propose one narrow-scope                  draft containing the proposed
                                     amendment to require presentation         changes around the end of first half
3. In November 2018, the IASB        of insurance contracts on the             this year.
Board agreed to start the process    balance sheet at the portfolio level
to amend IFRS 17 to defer the        rather than at the grouping level         6. Below is the summary of the
mandatory effective date of IFRS     used for contract measurement             decisions reached by the IASB in
17 by one year. Subject to IASB      purposes. The other eleven                this meeting on potential
due process, entities will be        implementation challenges                 amendment of the standard
required to apply IFRS 17 for        discussed in this meeting did not         applying the evaluation criteria
annual periods beginning on or       result in any proposed                    agreed in October 2018.
after 1 January 2022.                amendments.

                                    Concerns and implementation
Staff paper                                                                    IASB decision
                                    challenges

Insurance acquisition cash          Insurance acquition cash flows directly
flows for renewals outside the      attributable to newly issued contracts
                                                                               Amend
contract Boundary (Staff paper      that economically anticipates future
2A)                                 renewals outside the contract boundary

Reinsurance contracts held -        Losses from onerous underlying
onerous underlying insurance        insurance contracts that are covered by
                                                                               Amend
contracts (Staff paper 2B and       proportionate reinsurance contracts
2C)                                 held

                                    Reinsurance contracts ineligible for the
                                    variable fee approach
Reinsurance contracts held -
underlying insurance contracts
                                                                               Not Amend
with direct participation           Limitation of risk mitigation exemption
features (Staff paper 2D)           for insurance contracts with direct
                                    participation features

Recognition of the contractual      Amortisation of the contractual service
service margin in profit or loss    margin for contracts under the general
                                                                               Amend
in the general model (Staff         model that include an investment
paper 2E)                           return service

                                                                                                    PwC | IFRS news | 5
16. The Staff noted that             18. Under IFRS 17 as currently        The staff paper noted these
subsequent to publication of the     written, when entities use            concerns and recommended to not
staff papers several stakeholders    derivatives to mitigate the           expand the scope of the VFA to
have reached out expressing          financial risks arising from          reinsurance contracts issued or
concerns that the expanded           insurance contracts and certain       held and instead amend the risk
scope only applies to                criteria are met, an entity is        mitigation exception.
proportionate reinsurance            permitted to recognise changes in
contracts. The Board agreed with     financial risk in profit or loss      Recognition of the
the staff’s explanation of the       instead of adjusting the CSM as is    contractual service margin in
limited scope of the proposed        normally required under the           profit or loss in the general
amendment, noting that for           variable fee approach (‘VFA’) for     model
proportionate contracts there is a   participating contracts. This
direct linkage between the           exception was included to allow       21. The Board agreed to propose
reinsurance and underlying           entities to avoid the accounting      an amendment so that in the
contracts on inception. That is,     mismatch that would otherwise         general model, the CSM is
claims are reimbursed as a           result and better reflect the net     allocated on the basis of coverage
specified percentage of the          economics of an entity’s decision     units that are determined by
claims incurred. One member          to hedge the financial risk           considering both insurance
noted that the Board is being        inherent in the participating         coverage and ‘investment return
pragmatic in this proposed           contracts, for example minimum        service.’ An ‘investment return
amendment as the loss on the         return guarantees. The staff          service’ can only exist where an
underlying contract could be due     papers note that some reinsurance     investment component is present.
to cash flows other than claims,     held may act in the same              However, the staff noted that the
Several Board member agreed          mitigating way as derivatives, and    existence of an investment
with the rationale for restricting   therefore the same accounting         component will not automatically
the amendment to proportionate       election should apply when an         mean that an investment return
reinsurance contracts but that       entity purchases reinsurance for      service is present. The staff noted
the term by ‘proportionate’          this financial risk mitigation        that the ‘investment return
should be included either in the     purpose.                              service’ is different from asset
defined terms in the standard or                                           management services performed
more explanation given in the        19. In its December 2018 Board        in conjunction with a participating
basis for conclusions.               meeting the IASB agreed to            contract subject to the VFA
                                     discuss the retrospective             because for non-VFA contracts the
Risk mitigation exception to         application of the risk mitigation    entity is not managing assets on
the variable fee approach            exemption on transition at a          behalf of the policyholders (i.e.
                                     future meeting. The IASB did not      not providing asset management
17. The Board agreed to amend        have that discussion at this          services). Instead it is providing
IFRS 17 to expand the scope of       meeting, but is expected to discuss   the policyholder with access to an
the risk mitigation exception for    it in the upcoming months.            investment return that would not
insurance contracts with direct                                            otherwise be available to the
participation features so that it    Explanation of the scope of           policyholder because of the
applies not only when derivatives    the variable fee approach             amounts invested, liquidity,
are used, but also when entities                                           complexity or expertise.
use reinsurance contracts to         20. The VFA applies to contracts
mitigate the financial risks in      that meet the definition of           22. Under the proposal, an entity
these contracts. In order to be      insurance contracts with direct       would be required to use
eligible for this exception, the     participation features, where the     judgement, consistently applied,
conditions outlined in the           entity promises an investment         in deciding whether an investment
current standard must be met for     return based on underlying items      return service exists; no objectives
reinsurance contracts.               less a variable fee. IFRS 17 notes    or criteria for that determination
                                     that neither reinsurance contracts    will be included in the standard.
                                     held nor reinsurance contracts
                                     issued are eligible for the VFA.
                                     Some stakeholders raised
                                     concerns that accounting
                                     mismatches will occur when
                                     underlying contracts are
                                     accounted for under the VFA and
                                     the reinsurance held contract is
                                     accounted for under the general
                                     measurement model.

                                                                                                  PwC | IFRS news | 6
The investment return service        25. Board members also                  •   Modified retrospective
would end when the entity has        expressed some concern with how             approach
made all investment related          the ‘relative weighting of benefits’    •   Loans and other forms of credit
payments to the policyholder         and ‘pattern of delivery’ on ‘a             that transfer insurance risk
under the contract. The              systematic and rational basis’
assessment of the relative           would be interpreted, noting that       29. The staff’s preliminary views
weighting of the benefits            there was much room for                 in the papers for the October
provided by the insurance            judgement. However, they also           Board meeting are that the
coverage and the investment          acknowledged that other areas of        following remaining issues may
return services and their pattern    the standard also require similar       not meet the criteria for
of delivery would not be             judgements and so the staff should      amendment:
prescribed but instead would be      exercise care and not be too
determined on a systematic and       prescriptive in this amendment.         •   Level of aggregation
rational basis by management. In                                             •   OCI on FV transition approach
addition, cash flows relating to     26. In summary, the Board               •   Date of initial application of
fulfilling the investment return     acknowledged that the                       comparatives
service (but excluding               introduction of investment return       •   Optionality on transition
gains/losses on any investments)     services will have a significant        •   Retrospective application of
would be included in the             impact on the pattern of profit             risk mitigation exception on
measurement of the insurance         recognition where such                      transition (Deferred from
contract. For the determination      components exist. Significant               December 2018 Board
of PAA eligibility, an entity        judgement is required in                    meeting)
should consider both the             determining the existence of an
insurance coverage and any           investment return service, the
investment return service.           weighting of components and the
                                     pattern of delivery, with all
23. The Board is proposing the       needing to be applied consistently.
above changes based on               Board members suggested that
stakeholder feedback at the May      this amendment may require
2018 TRG and through various         additional disclosures, which the
other outreach that some             staff will consider at a future date.
contracts that do not meet the
VFA criteria nevertheless            Future expected discussions
provide investment-related
services or other services. They     27. The Board noted that
agreed that investment services      discussions on the remaining
should be reflected in the           implementation challenges and
coverage units that are used to      concerns will continue in future
allocate CSM over the period of      Board meetings, with
the services provided.               deliberations expected to be
                                     completed in the first quarter of
24. However, some Board              2019. The Staff propose to bring
members expressed some               back a summary of all suggested
concern with how the definition      amendments and assess the total
for such services would be           package of amendments against
interpreted, including the words     the criteria previously agreed to
‘providing the policyholder with     and consider the need for any
access to an investment return’      amendments in the disclosures as
and thought that perhaps the         a consequence of the proposed
staff should consider adding         amendments.
some wording in drafting, even if
only in the basis for conclusions,   28. In its papers for the October
to clarify the meaning. Board        2018 Board meeting the IASB staff
members also discussed whether       presented 25 identified
some guidance should be              implementation challenges. Of the
provided on how to evaluate and      remaining concerns to be
account for situations where an      discussed at a future meeting, the
investment return service might      staff’s preliminary views in the
be inconsequential or de             papers for the October Board
minimis, or only manifests itself    meeting indicate that it might be
in remote scenarios.                 possible to potentially amend
                                     IFRS 17 for the following issues in
                                     a way that meets the criteria for                              PwC | IFRS news | 7
                                     amendment:
Order now:
Manual of accounting - IFRS 2019
(Two-volume set)

Key updates includes:

•   Amendments to IAS 19, ‘Employee benefits’
    - Plan amendments , curtailment or settlement
•   Annual improvements 2015 – 2017
•   Amendments to IFRS 9, ‘Financial instruments’
    - Prepayment features with negative compensation
•   Amendments to IAS 28, 'Investments in associates'
    -Long term interests in associates and joint ventures
•   Revised conceptual framework issued in March 2018

For more information visit www.pwc.com/manual

                                                            PwC | IFRS news | 8
Contacts

Revenue recognition, liabilities and other areas
E:katja.van.der.kuij@pwc.com                                       E:hugo.van.den.ende@pwc.com
T: +31 (0) 88 792 4087                                             T: + 31 (0) 88 792 5283

Financial instruments and financial services

E: kees-jan.de.vries@pwc.com                                     E: geert.c.wognum@pwc.com
T: +31 (0) 88 792 4922                                           T: +31 (0) 88 792 2159

 Business combinations and adoption of IFRS

E: maarten.hartman@pwc.com                                      E: renick.van.oosterbosch@pwc.com
T: +31 (0) 88 792 5191                                          T: +31 (0) 88 792 4057

 Insurance

E: jeroen.tuithof@pwc.com
T:+31 (0) 88 792 6715

This content is for general information purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional advisors.
© 2018 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved. PwC refers to the UK member firm, and may sometimes refer to the PwC network. Each member firm is a separate legal entity. Please
see www.pwc.com/structure for further details.
180126-165332-KR-OS
You can also read