DOCSLIB.ORG

A Practical Guide to Applying IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Practical Guide to Applying IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements Under control? A practical guide to applying IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements February 2017 Under control? A practical guide to IFRS 10 Contents Introduction 4 1 Overview 6 1.1 Summary of IFRS 10’s main requirements 7 1.2 Areas where IFRS 10 can affect the scope of consolidation 9 1.3 IFRS 10 in the context of the overall ‘consolidation package’ 10 1.4 Effective date and Transition of IFRS 10 11 2 Scope and consolidation exemptions 12 2.1 Scope of IFRS 10 13 2.2 Consolidation exceptions and exemptions 14 3 The control definition and guidance 16 3.1 The practical implications of the control definition 18 3.2 The three key elements of control in more detail 19 3.3 Purpose and design of investee 30 3.4 Situations where the control assessment is unclear 31 3.5 Summary of the control assessment process 32 3.6 Continuous assessment 33 Under control? A practical guide to IFRS 10 4 Applying the control model in specific circumstances 34 4.1 Majority holdings in an investee 35 4.2 Large minority holdings in an investee 36 4.3 Potential voting rights 40 4.4 Special purpose and structured entities 43 4.5 Principal-agent situations 50 4.6 Franchises 58 5 Consolidation procedures 60 5.1 The consolidation process 61 5.2 Changes in non-controlling interests 71 5.3 Losing control of a subsidiary 73 6 Investment Entities 76 6.1 Definition of an investment entity 77 6.2 Applying the definition 81 6.3 Accounting treatment for an investment entity 86 Appendix – Disclosures under IFRS 12: Understanding the requirements 92 Introduction Assessing when one entity controls another (in other words, when a parent-subsidiary relationship exists) is essential to the preparation of financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The control assessment determines which entities are consolidated in a parent’s financial statements and therefore affects a group’s reported results, cash flows and financial position – and the activities that are ‘on’ and ‘off’ the group’s balance sheet. Under IFRS, this control assessment is accounted for in accordance with IFRS 10 ‘Consolidated financial statements’. Under control? A practical guide to IFRS 10 IFRS 10 was issued in May 2011, and was part of a package of changes addressing different levels of involvement with other entities. IFRS 10 redefines ‘control’ and provides extensive guidance on applying the definition. IFRS 10 applies both to traditional entities and to special The Guide is organised as follows: purpose (or structured) entities and replaced the corresponding • Section 1 provides an overview of IFRS 10 and areas requirements of both IAS 27 ‘Consolidated and Separate where IFRS 10 can impact the scope of consolidation. It Financial Statements’ (IAS 27) (2008) and SIC-12 ‘Consolidation also explains how IFRS 10 fits into the overall package of – Special Purpose Entities’ (SIC-12). Standards on involvement with other entities. It is unusual for IFRS 10 to affect the scope of consolidation • Section 2 explains the scope of IFRS 10 from an investor in simple situations involving control through ownership of a and investee perspective, and the situations in which a majority of the voting power in an investee. However, more parent entity is exempt from presenting consolidated complex and borderline control assessments need to be financial statements. reviewed carefully. • Section 3 sets out IFRS 10’s control definition and its key The member firms within Grant Thornton International Ltd elements, and identifies key practical issues in applying the (‘GTIL’) have gained extensive insights into the application of guidance. IFRS 10. GTIL, through its IFRS team, develops general • Section 4 discusses the specific situations and types of guidance that supports its member firms’ commitment to high investee for which IFRS 10 can affect control conclusions quality, consistent application of IFRS. We are pleased to share and the scope of consolidation in practice. these insights by publishing ‘Under Control? A Practical Guide to • Section 5 discusses consolidation procedures and the Applying IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements’ (the Guide). requirements on changes in ownership and loss of control. • Section 6 explains the consolidation exception for Using the Guide investment entities. The Guide has been written to assist management in applying • Appendix A summarises the disclosure requirements in IFRS 10. More specifically it aims to assist in: IFRS 12 ‘Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities’ and • understanding IFRS 10’s requirements provides selected application examples. • identifying situations in which IFRS 10 can impact control Grant Thornton International Ltd assessments February 2017 • identifying and addressing the key practical application issues and judgements. When applying IFRS 10, complex and borderline control assessments need to be reviewed carefully. February 2017 5 1 Overview IFRS 10 establishes a single, control-based model for assessing control and determining the scope of consolidation. It applies to all entities, including ‘structured entities’, which were previously referred to as ‘special purpose entities’ under SIC-12. Under control? A practical guide to IFRS 10 This section summarises IFRS 10’s main requirements, provides insights into areas where IFRS 10 most often impacts consolidation assessments and explains how IFRS 10 fits into the broader ‘consolidation package’. 1.1 Summary of IFRS 10’s main requirements Summary of IFRS 10’s main requirements IFRS 10 establishes principles for the presentation and preparation of consolidated financial statements. To meet this objective it: • requires an entity that controls another (a parent) to present consolidated financial Objective statements (subject to limited exemptions – see below) • defines ‘control’, and confirms control as the basis for consolidation • provides guidance on how to apply the definition • provides guidance on preparing consolidated financial statements. IFRS 10 applies to all entities (including structured entities) except long-term employment benefit plans within the scope of IAS 19 ‘Employee Benefits’. A parent that is itself a subsidiary of another entity (an intermediate parent) need not present consolidated financial statements if it meets strict conditions, including that: • none of its owners object • its shares/debt instruments are not traded in a public market Scope and exemptions • a higher-level parent produces publicly-available IFRS consolidated financial statements. A parent that is an investment entity must not present consolidated financial statements if it is required to measure all of it subsidiaries at fair value through profit or loss. IFRS 10 applies only to consolidated financial statements. Requirements on preparing separate financial statements are retained in IAS 27. An investor controls an investee when it is exposed, or has rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee and has the ability to affect those returns through its power over the investee. Control requires: Control definition • power over the investee • exposure, or rights, to variable returns • ability to use power to affect returns. February 2017 7 Under control? A practical guide to IFRS 10 Summary of IFRS 10’s main requirements IFRS 10 includes additional guidance on the elements of the control definition and their interaction, including: • purpose and design of the investee • the ‘relevant activities’ of an investee • whether the rights of the investor give it the current ability to direct the relevant activities Applying the • whether the investor is exposed, or has rights, to variable returns. control definition IFRS 10 includes guidance on more difficult control assessments including: • agency relationships • control over structured entities • potential voting rights • control without a majority of voting rights. IFRS 10 retains established principles on consolidation procedures, including • elimination of intra-group transactions and the parent’s investment: • uniform accounting policies Preparing consolidated • the need for financial statements used in consolidation to have the same reporting date financial statements • the allocation of comprehensive income and equity to non-controlling interests • accounting for changes in ownership interests without loss of control • accounting for losing control of a subsidiary. IFRS 10 came into effect for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2013. Transition was mainly retrospective but was subject to reliefs for situations in which: • the control assessment was the same as under IAS 27 (2008) Effective date and transition • a fully retrospective consolidation or de-consolidation would be impracticable. Early adoption was permitted as long as the other standards in the consolidation package were adopted at the same time. IFRS 10 does not include any disclosure requirements but an entity that applies Disclosures IFRS 10 is also required to apply IFRS 12 – which sets out comprehensive disclosure principles. Terminology – ‘special purpose entities’ (SPEs) and ‘structured entities’ The Guide makes extensive references to ‘special purpose entities’ (SPEs). These references are used to broadly describe entities which used to be considered within the scope of SIC-12. SIC-12 described SPEs only in general terms, so deciding whether a particular entity is an SPE required judgement. IFRS 10 does not refer to SPEs, but instead refers to entities that have been designed so that voting or similar rights
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Business Combinations and Consolidated Financial Reporting
    Business Combinations and Consolidated Financial Reporting Business Combinations and Consolidated Financial Reporting Copyright 2014 by DELTACPE LLC All rights reserved. No part of this course may be reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. The author is not engaged by this text or any accompanying lecture or electronic media in the rendering of legal, tax, accounting, or similar professional services. While the legal, tax, and accounting issues discussed in this material have been reviewed with sources believed to be reliable, concepts discussed can be affected by changes in the law or in the interpretation of such laws since this text was printed. For that reason, the accuracy and completeness of this information and the author's opinions based thereon cannot be guaranteed. In addition, state or local tax laws and procedural rules may have a material impact on the general discussion. As a result, the strategies suggested may not be suitable for every individual. Before taking any action, all references and citations should be checked and updated accordingly. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert advice is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. —-From a Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations. All numerical values in this course are examples subject to change.
    [Show full text]
  • Monthly Ranking of Brokerage Firms 01/09/2018 - 30/09/2018
    Month: 2018-09 Monthly Ranking of Brokerage Firms 01/09/2018 - 30/09/2018 EGX Information Center - Monthly Ranking of Brokerage Firms Page 1 Issued on : 01/10/2018 01/09/2018 - 30/09/2018 Brokerage Firms in Terms of Value Traded (Main Market - OTC - NILEX) Volume Value Traded % of # of # Brokerage Firm Traded (LE) Total Trades (Share) 1 Financial Brokerage Group 6,722,889,142 17.7% 641,074,707 46,480 2 Commercial International Brokerage company (CIBC) 2,897,758,232 7.6% 446,497,430 58,700 3 Beltone Securities Brokerage 2,434,066,653 6.4% 382,741,289 32,793 4 Pharos Securities 2,360,244,245 6.2% 242,045,477 17,047 5 Arab African International Securities 2,344,724,462 6.2% 147,489,664 10,106 6 Hermes Securities Brokerage 2,154,876,769 5.7% 778,888,588 55,347 7 Arqaam Securities Brokerage 1,752,661,044 4.6% 143,967,772 27,418 8 Pioneers Securities 1,343,291,915 3.5% 534,035,101 57,215 9 Mubasher International For Securities 965,250,854 2.5% 362,095,597 41,397 10 Naeem Brokerage 945,885,668 2.5% 315,440,142 25,466 11 Sigma Securities Brokerage 934,307,496 2.5% 321,416,657 31,886 12 HSBC Securities Egypt S.A.E 859,787,800 2.3% 24,591,458 7,176 13 HC Brokerage 727,084,286 1.9% 120,338,782 19,027 14 Arabeya Online Securities 718,347,298 1.9% 335,448,129 33,686 15 Prime Securities Brokerage 602,869,331 1.6% 122,262,766 11,786 16 Shuaa securities 599,308,708 1.6% 180,864,539 15,334 17 Egyptian Arabian Company(Themar) 480,005,229 1.3% 183,291,230 20,275 18 Ifa Securities Brokerage 401,523,234 1.1% 221,943,955 8,319 19 Metro Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Share Capital
    SHARE CAPITAL CAPITAL STRUCTURE The table below sets out details relating to our share capital as at the Latest Practicable Date. Authorised share capital(1): 3,600,000,000. Common Shares 7,200,000,000. Class A Preferred Shares Issued, fully paid or credited as fully paid(2): 3,256,724,482. Common Shares in issue 2,108,579,606. Class A Preferred Shares in issue 12. Golden Shares in issue Notes: (1) The By-laws authorise the issue of shares forming part of the authorised share capital of the Common Shares and the Class A Preferred Shares by the Board without any further approval by Shareholders. (2) Including 47,375,394 Common Shares and 99,649,571 Class A Preferred Shares in treasury. TWO CLASSES OF SHARES Our share capital is currently divided into two classes of shares: (i) Common Shares and (ii) Preferred Shares. The two classes of Shares were first issued at the time of our incorporation on 11 January 1943. The Preferred Shares are further divided into Class A Preferred Shares and Golden Shares. All of the issued Shares are registered shares with no nominal value. In accordance with our privatisation deed, the Shareholders’ meeting held after the privatisation approved the introduction of the Golden Share to be exclusively owned by the Brazilian Government which carried special veto rights over certain matters specified in the By-laws. After subsequent share splits, there are now 12 Golden Shares in issue. All of the Golden Shares are owned by the Brazilian Government. For more information on the rights attached to the Golden Shares, please refer to “Voting rights” below.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021-2022 Biennial BUDGET 2021 - 2022 CITY of GOLDEN, COLORADO BUDGET and CAPITAL PROGRAMS
    CITY OF GOLDEN 2021-2022 Biennial BUDGET 2021 - 2022 CITY OF GOLDEN, COLORADO BUDGET AND CAPITAL PROGRAMS 2021 – 2022 Golden Downtown General Improvement District Budget 2021-2022 Downtown Development Authority Budget 2021 Budget Adopted by Resolution of the Golden City Council on December 3, 2020 2019 GOLDEN CITY COUNCIL Laura Weinberg, Mayor Robert Reed, Ward I Paul Haseman, Ward II Jim Dale, Ward III Bill Fisher, Ward IV JJ Trout, District I Casey Brown, Mayor Pro-Tem District II Submitted by: Jason Slowinski City Manager 2021Ͳ2022CITYOFGOLDENBIENNIALBUDGET TABLEOFCONTENTS INTRODUCTION BudgetMessage...................................................................................................................1 BudgetCalendar..................................................................................................................15 CitizensBudgetAdvisoryCommitteeMessage...................................................................17 GFOADistinguishedBudgetPresentationAward................................................................19 ϮϬϮϭͲϮϬϮϮBudgetSummaryFundTypeDescriptions.........................................................20 ϮϬϮϭͲϮϬϮϮFundStructureChart.........................................................................................24 ϮϬϮϭBudgetSummaryRevenueandExpenditureChartofallFunds.................................25 ϮϬϮϮBudgetSummaryRevenueandExpenditureChartofallFunds.................................26 ϮϬϮϭBudgetSummary–ByFundType.............................................................................27
    [Show full text]
  • Close, Consolidate and Report
    Close, Consolidate and Report Point of view on Enabling Technologies December 2016 © 2016 Deloitte The Netherlands 1 Introduction Finance Organization of the future Wheel of Finance The future of Finance: As we look at What does the future hold for the the future of Finance, it’s important to Finance function? Today’s Finance consider two things: How Finance organizations are more then ever under delivers value to the organization, and pressure to deliver value to the business what enables the Finance function to do and in parallel operate within a highly so. cost-efficient and most-effective delivery model. The introduction of new Digital How Finance delivers value: In our technologies is likely to be the view, Finance delivers value through most important factor impacting the three types of services: Operational Finance function. Finance, Business Finance and Specialized Finance. Think transactional, Digital technologies radically transform strategic and highly specialized. how the business and it’s Finance function delivers value. Digital Finance What enables Finance: Underpinning utilizes disruptive technology, data, these three services are what we call innovation, and people to elevate and Finance enablers. These enablers differentiate the capabilities of the include the organizational structure and Finance function. Digital requires the Finance team’s talent; the organizations to think and act differently information, systems and data available in order to generate value. to the Finance group, and the processes and policies that enable the Finance The ability of CFOs to leverage Digital team to monitor risk and stay on top of technologies to position their future regulatory obligations. Finance function will determine the future of their organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Limited but Not Lost: a Comment on the ECJ's Golden Share Decisions
    Fordham Law Review Volume 72 Issue 5 Article 35 2004 Limited But Not Lost: A Comment on the ECJ's Golden Share Decisions Christine O'Grady Putek Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Christine O'Grady Putek, Limited But Not Lost: A Comment on the ECJ's Golden Share Decisions, 72 Fordham L. Rev. 2219 (2004). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol72/iss5/35 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMMENT LIMITED BUT NOT LOST: A COMMENT ON THE ECJ'S GOLDEN SHARE DECISIONS Christine O'Grady Putek* INTRODUCTION Consider the following scenario:' Remo is a large industrialized nation with a widget manufacturer, Well-Known Co. ("WK") which has a strong international reputation, and is uniquely identified with Remo. WK is an important provider of jobs in southern Remo. Because of WK's importance to Remo, for both economic and national pride reasons, Remo has a special law (the "WK law"), which gives the government of southern Remo a degree of control over WK, all in the name of protection of the company from unwanted foreign takeovers and of other national interests, such as employment. The law caps the number of voting shares that any one investor may own, and gives the government of Southern Remo influence over key company decisions by allowing it to appoint half the board of directors.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Combinations and Changes in Ownership Interests
    25263 bd IFRS3 IAS27:25263 IFRS3/IAS27 bd 4/7/08 10:02 Page a Business combinations and changes in ownership interests A guide to the revised IFRS 3 and IAS 27 Audit.Tax.Consulting.Financial Advisory. 25263 bd IFRS3 IAS27:25263 IFRS3/IAS27 bd 4/7/08 10:02 Page b Contacts Global IFRS leadership team IFRS global office Global IFRS leader Ken Wild [email protected] IFRS centres of excellence Americas Robert Uhl [email protected] Asia Pacific Hong Kong Melbourne Stephen Taylor Bruce Porter [email protected] [email protected] Europe-Africa Copenhagen Johannesburg London Paris Jan Peter Larsen Graeme Berry Veronica Poole Laurence Rivat [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Deloitte’s www.iasplus.com website provides comprehensive information about international financial reporting in general and IASB activities in particular. Unique features include: • daily news about financial reporting globally. • summaries of all Standards, Interpretations and proposals. • many IFRS-related publications available for download. • model IFRS financial statements and checklists. • an electronic library of several hundred IFRS resources. • all Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu comment letters to the IASB. • links to several hundred international accounting websites. • e-learning modules for each IAS and IFRS – at no charge. • complete history of adoption of IFRSs in Europe and information about adoptions of IFRSs elsewhere around the world. • updates on developments in national accounting standards. 25263 bd IFRS3 IAS27:25263 IFRS3/IAS27 bd 4/7/08 10:02 Page c Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Summary of major changes 1 1.2 Convergence of IFRSs and US GAAP 3 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Assertions, the Golden Share Was Not a Condition Ofthe 1997 Enron/PGE Merger Transaction" and in Fact, PGE Did Not Create T
    assertions, the golden share was not a condition ofthe 1997 Enron/PGE merger transaction" and in fact, PGE did not create this golden share mechanism until after Enron declared bankruptcy. Once Enron declared bankruptcy in 2001, PGE worked with S&P to develop a structure to avoid future downgrades ofPGE's bond ratings. PGE opted to issue one share with special voting rights with respect to any voluntary action by PGE regarding bankruptcy. PGE chose the holder ofthe share; neither the Oregon Public Utility Commission ("OPUC") nor its staff directly selected the shareholder. In 2002, OPUC approved PGE's application seeking authority to issue the single share of $1.00 par value Junior Preferred Stock in order to further insulate PGE from the effects of the Enron bankruptcy. 80 Thus, CPB is mistaken when it claims: "In fact ... as the DPS Staffs Policy Panel testified on cross-examination by the CPB, it was the existence of a golden share provision that was the entire reason why Portland was not dragged into the Enron bankruptcy" (CPB JB at 17). This misses the key point: because the so-called "golden share" provision in Oregon was not implemented until after Enron filed for bankruptcy protection. what the case actually shows is that state regulators have the means and ability, even after a holding company bankruptcy, to work cooperatively with a utility to protect itself from the effects of a parent's bankruptcy. Staff's third and final example claims that an LPE mechanism was required as a condition of the Mid-American Holding Company C'Mid-American") and PacitiCorp merger 79 In the merger order, POE was directed to maintain its own long-term debt ratings and preferred stock ratings for as long as it had preferred stock outstanding; to maintain the common equity portion of its capital structure at 48 G/o or higher unless a different level was approved; and to file information and disclosure notices for affiliated interest transactions.
    [Show full text]
  • Accrual and Deferral Handout
    Name Principles of Financial Accounting I Adjusting the Accounts "Cash" Basis vs. "Accrual" Basis: Cash Accrual Revenue Expenses Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) require using the basis. Why make Adjusting Journal Entries?____________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ Recall previous "promises." New Promise: Every adjusting entry will have ______________________ Balance Sheet and one_________________________________________________________ effect. INCOME STATEMENT attempts to accomplish: ____________________________________________ ESSENTIALS OF CONCEPT 1. 2. 3. I. Identifying accounts to be adjusted: Accruals and Deferrals A. Perhaps the best way to distinguish deferrals and accruals is the timing of cash changing hands: CA$H accruals deferrals cash AFTER event cash BEFORE event Deferrals have been recorded; accruals have not. B. Definitions An ACCRUAL is an expense or a revenue . Examples of accruals: Expense: Revenue: Copyright © 1999 by M. Ray Gregg. All Rights reserved. A DEFERRAL is a already paid or of a revenue . Examples of deferrals: Expense: Revenue: II. Accruals A. Expenses 1. Example Salaries increase as employees work each day, yet, for convenience, salaries are recorded when . Since the cash is paid the event, salaries are an example of . The adjusting entry necessary when payday and the end of the fiscal period are on different days would be: 2. Decision tree conclusion If this is the entry required for this , other accrued expense items must follow a similar format: B. Revenue 1. Example Your CPA firm is auditing a client's records; the engagement begins in mid-November and lasts through the end of February. Each day as work is being performed, revenue is earned. Since the cash will not be collected until completion of the engagement (after the event), this is an example of .
    [Show full text]
  • Publication 538, Accounting Periods and Methods
    Userid: CPM Schema: tipx Leadpct: 100% Pt. size: 10 Draft Ok to Print AH XSL/XML Fileid: … ons/P538/201901/A/XML/Cycle04/source (Init. & Date) _______ Page 1 of 21 15:46 - 28-Feb-2019 The type and rule above prints on all proofs including departmental reproduction proofs. MUST be removed before printing. Department of the Treasury Contents Internal Revenue Service Future Developments ....................... 1 Publication 538 Introduction .............................. 1 (Rev. January 2019) Photographs of Missing Children .............. 2 Cat. No. 15068G Accounting Periods ........................ 2 Calendar Year .......................... 2 Fiscal Year ............................. 3 Accounting Short Tax Year .......................... 3 Improper Tax Year ....................... 4 Periods and Change in Tax Year ...................... 4 Individuals ............................. 4 Partnerships, S Corporations, and Personal Methods Service Corporations (PSCs) .............. 5 Corporations (Other Than S Corporations and PSCs) .............................. 7 Accounting Methods ....................... 8 Cash Method ........................... 8 Accrual Method ........................ 10 Inventories ............................ 13 Change in Accounting Method .............. 18 How To Get Tax Help ...................... 19 Future Developments For the latest information about developments related to Pub. 538, such as legislation enacted after it was published, go to IRS.gov/Pub538. What’s New Small business taxpayers. Effective for tax years beginning
    [Show full text]
  • Training Material on Extensible Business Reporting Langauge (XBRL)
    Training Material on Extensible Business Reporting Langauge (XBRL) Prepared By: XBRL INDIA DISCLAIMER 1. The material contained herein is for private circulation and reference purposes only. 2. The views expressed in the background material should not be construed as the views of the XBRL India, or any of its Committee or Board of Directors. 3. The copyrights in respect of the material included in the Background Material rest with XBRL India. Published by : Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL), India Website www.xbrl.org/in Printed by : Sahitya Bhawan Publications, Hospital Road, Agra - 282 003. FOREWORD In the recent times, XBRL has emerged as a popular, effective, alternative for effective reporting and analysis and being recognized as a global standard for exchanging business information. XBRL is now in India with a bang, presenting a lot of professional opportunities for Chartered A ccountants. The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, the premier accounting and auditing standards setting body in India, recognizing the importance of XBRL in the reporting requirements, in the year 2007 had taken a lead on XBRL by constituting a group comprising of the regulators viz. SEBI/RBI/IRDA/MCA for undertaking the Development and promotion of XBRL in India. Now, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, the regulators of companies in India vide circular No. 09/ 2011 dated 31st March, 2011, has mandated the filing of financial statements in XBRL formats for the year ended 31st March, 2011, covering more than 25000 Companies in their first phase of implementation. The circular, however, does not cover in its ambit Banking, Insurance, NBFCs and Power Sector Companies for filing their Financial Statements in XBRL formats.
    [Show full text]
  • Lack of Proportionality Between Ownership and Control: Overview and Issues for Discussion
    LACK OF PROPORTIONALITY BETWEEN OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL: OVERVIEW AND ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Issued by the OECD Steering Group on Corporate Governance, December 2007 At its meeting on 14 November 2007 the Steering Group on Corporate Governance agreed on a common position based on the OECD Principles of Corporate Governance about the issue of whether there should be proportionality between ownership and control (also known as one-share-one-vote) in listed companies. Corporate Affairs Division, Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2 rue André-Pascal, Paris 75116, France www.oecd.org/daf/corporate-affairs/ 2 Lack of proportionality between ownership and control TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................. 4 Summary of main findings ........................................................................................................................... 4 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................. 5 LACK OF PROPORTIONALITY BETWEEN OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL: OVERVIEW AND ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]