Business combinations under common control (BCUCC) are common in Hong Kong. In the absence of a specifically applicable International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) for such combinations, companies applying IFRS account for them in different ways. Based on the Institute’s research findings and stakeholders’ feedback, a majority of Hong Kong-listed companies and companies preparing for listing accounted for BCUCC using a book-value method; other BCUCC are reported using the acquisition method as set out in IFRS 3 Business Combinations.

In August, the Institute’s Standard Setting Department responded to the International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB) discussion paper (DP) which sought feedback from stakeholders on its proposed new accounting model for BCUCC. Our A Plus April 2021 issue article provided an overview of the IASB’s proposals. This article summarizes specific areas and highlights points of our response to the DP. The full response is available on our website.

Selecting the measurement method

We consider that not all BCUCC have the same nature or economic substance. Some are similar to business combinations covered by IFRS 3 while others are not. Therefore, we agree with the IASB’s preliminary views that neither the acquisition method nor a book-value method should be applied to all BCUCC, and welcome the IASB in drawing a clear line for when each measurement method should be applied.

We note that although our respondents expressed mixed views on the IASB’s preliminary views on determining when to use which measurement method, they generally agreed with the overall conclusions that:

We agree with the overall accounting outcomes resulting from the IASB’s proposals on selecting the measurement method, and have the following recommendations:

Applying a book-value method

(a) Pre-combination information

We have significant concerns about the IASB’s preliminary view of prohibiting a receiving company from restating pre-combination information when applying a book-value method, for reasons including the following:

Given the above, we strongly recommend that the IASB provide an accounting policy option for companies to choose whether to restate pre-combination information to cater for the information needs of potential investors and regulators.

(b) Measuring assets and liabilities received

We acknowledge that the IASB’s preliminary views on requiring the receiving company to use the transferred company’s book values to measure assets and liabilities received are in line with the overall thinking of the DP that focuses on the receiving company’s perspective.  However, we consider that there are situations where using the controlling party’s book values would better reflect the economic substance of the transaction and mitigate structuring opportunities. This could be the case when the BCUCC is undertaken solely to hide goodwill and intangible assets related to the transferred company, and any associated impairment losses, arising from a past business combination. Accordingly, we recommend that the IASB provide an accounting policy option for companies to use the controlling party’s book values when such an approach would provide useful information, and require companies to disclose which book values they have used.

This article was contributed by Carmen Ho and Eky Liu CPA, Associate Directors of the Institute’s Standard Setting Department.

We use cookies to give you the best experience of our website. By continuing to browse the site, you agree to the use of cookies for analytics and personalized content. To learn more, visit our privacy policy page. View more
Accept All Cookies