Accounting Standards Update No. 2010-18—Receivables (Topic 310)
保险公司递延保单获取成本研究
保险公司递延保单获取成本研究【摘要】递延保单获取成本是美国财务会计准则委员会（fasb）制定的gaap准则下对保单获取成本进行资本化处理的会计处理方式。
本文基于fasb 关于保险合同取得成本会计的最新规定以及美国国际联合公司的相关应用，对递延保单获取成本的内容，影响因素，会计处理方式及gaap准则的变化进行分析，并对我国保险公司保单获取成本的会计处理提出建议。
【关键词】递延保单获取成本，会计处理，gaap准则，美国国际集团一、保单获取成本的相关背景介绍保单获取成本是保险公司在取得新保险合同初期发生的相关支出，例如佣金费用，保单发放和核保费用等。
由于保单获取成本较高，极大影响着保险公司财务管理和利润衡量，保单获取成本的定义，内容，尤其是会计处理方式对保险公司特别是以长险合同为主的寿险公司有着至关重要的作用。
目前对保单获取成本的处理方式有两种。
国际会计准则和中国会计师准则均将保单获取成本在保单取得初期费用化，而美国会计准则采用资本化处理，将保险合同取得成本确认为资产，即递延保单获取成本，并在保单生效的期限内进行与收入配比的摊销，直至保单终止。
二、递延保单获取成本的计提fasb在2010年10月26日发布最新会计准则—议题944（topic944），对递延保单获取成本的类型和定义做了精确的解释并明确了取得成本的范围。
，fasb将保单获取成本（deferred acquisition cost，简称dac）定义为因成功获取新保险合同而产生的直接相关费用。
议题944实际上是明确缩小了递延保单获取成本的范围，在2011年12月15日议题生效后，保险公司可以通过追溯的方式调整年度内的递延保单获取成本。
以美国最大的保险公司美国国际集团（american international group，简称aig）公司为例，2011年aig公司的保费收入为389.9亿美元，递延保单获取成本为80.19亿美元。
在采用新的会计准则后，aig公司预计税前的递延保单获取成本将会减少49亿美元，税后的股东的所有者权益将会减少33亿美元。
审计学原理英文课件 (17)
17-10
Types of Reports with Unmodified Opinions
1. Unmodified opinion—standard report. This report may be issued only when the auditors have obtained sufficient appropriate audit evidence to conclude the financial statements are not misstated and there is no need to alter the report for situations 2, dard Auditors’ Report: Auditors’ Responsibility Paragraphs
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement.
会计准则的共同框架【外文翻译】
外文翻译原文：A Common Framework for Accounting StandardsIn September 2010,the U.S.Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) completed the first phase of a project that will influence global standards setting for many years to come.Specifically,the Boards converged key portions of their conceptual frameworks.This month’s column will explain what the Boards have done and the significance of their accomplishment.What’s a Conceptual Framework?A conceptu al framework for a set of accounting standards is an explicit declaration of the fundamental concepts on which the set of standards is based.The concepts addressed by conceptual frameworks tend to be general in nature,broad in scope,and stable over time.For example,a conceptual framework typically will identify the kinds of financial statements that reporting entities should prepare (balance sheet,income statement,etc.) and define the basic elements of those financial statements (assets,liabilities,income, expenses,etc.). Having a conceptual framework eliminates the need for a standards setter,such as the FASB or the IASB,to reestablish core concepts each time it develops or updates a standard.Additionally,by consistently referring to a stable conceptual framework,a standards setter is more likely to promulgate standards that are consistent with each other as well as with significant assumptions and constraints. The conceptual framework of U.S.Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) is documented in a series of Statements of Financial Accounting Concepts (SFACs) issued by the FASB.The IASB has documented the conceptual framework of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in its Framework for the Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements.Though similar in some respects,the two frameworks have always been separate and distinct from each other—until recently.As part of theirefforts to converge the specific standards that comprise U.S.GAAP and IFRS,the Boards have begun to converge their conceptual frameworks as well.The FASB-IASB Conceptual Framework ProjectIn October 2004,the FASB and the IASB added a joint conceptual framework project to their agendas.The objective of the project is “to develop an improved common conceptual framework that provides a sound accounting standards.”In other words,the Boards have been working together to replace their separate frameworks with a single framework on which both future U.S.GAAP and future IFRS will be based.Each Board is committed to making the single framework better than either one’s existing framework. The joint conceptual framework project consists of eight phases,designated “A”through “H”:A. Objective and qualitative characteristicsB. Elements and recognitionC. MeasurementD. Reporting entityE. Presentation and disclosure, including financial reporting boundariesF. Framework purpose and status in GAAP hierarchyG. Applicability to the not-for-profit sectorH. Remaining issuesIn July 2006,the FASB and the IASB issued a Preliminary Views (PV) document for Phase A that described the Boards’tentative thoughts on the overall objective of financial reporting and on the necessary and desirable qualitative characteristics of reported financial information.After further deliberations,the Boards issued an Exposure Draft (ED) for Phase A in May 2008 that proposed the first two chapters of a common conceptual framework.Final versions of those two chapters were subsequently issued by the Boards on September 28,2010.The FASB issued the two chapte rs together as SFAC No.8,“Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting—Chapter 1,The Objective of General Purpose Financial Reporting,and Chapter 3,Qualitative Characteristics of Useful Financial Information(a replacement of FASB Concepts Statements No.1 a nd No.2).”(SFACNo.1 was “Objectives of Financial Reporting by Business Enterprises,”and SFAC No.2 was “Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information.”)The Board had previously issued only seven SFACs in its 37-year history—none of them in the past 10 years.The infrequency of SFAC issuance reflects the high degree of stability in the FASB’s conceptual framework over time.But change happens,and the less frequently it happens,the more significant it is when it does happen.For its part,the IASB incorporated the two chapters into a revised version of its framework that it published as The Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting 2010.Previously,the IASB hadn’t made a substantive revision to its framework since 2001. Again,that fact that conceptual frameworks don’t change frequently makes the recent changes by the FASB and the IASB all the more notable.The Objective of General Purpose Financial ReportingChapter 1 of the Boards’common conceptual framework focuses on the overall objective of financial reporting.As stated in SFAC No.8,“The objective of general purpose financial reporting is to provide financial information about the reporting entity that is useful to existing and potential investors, lenders,and other creditors in making decisions about providing resources to the entity.”This is broadly consistent with the FASB’s prior objective as stated in SFAC No.1:“Financial reporting should provide information that is useful to present and potential investors and creditors and other users in making rational investment,credit,and similar decisions.”The newly defined objective is also similar to the IASB’s prior objective of“provid[ing] information about the financial position,performance,and changes in financial position of an entity that is useful to a wide range of users in making economic decisions.”The aspect of the new converged objective that differs most from each Board’s previous objective is the emphasis on “general purpose”financial reporting.Both Boards currently view their standards-setting efforts as directed at the needs of financial-statement users who aren’t in a position to obtain specific information tailored to each user’s individual needs.Qualitative Characteristics of Useful Financial InformationThe FASB and the IASB decided that the second chapter they issued recently willactually be Chapter 3 of their common conceptual framework.The Boards have reserved Chapter 2 for the output of Phase D (the reporting entity phase) of the conceptual framework project.Most of us think of the information in financial statements as being primarily quantitative in nature.But the FASB and the IASB have long recognized that there are certain qualitative characteristics of financial information that affect its usefulness—specifically,how useful it is for making the kinds of economic decisions that users of financial statements make.Accordingly,the Boards have identified such qualitative characteristics in Chapter 3.As outlined above, there are in principle two distinct components to these payments, which are the transaction value at the point of purchase (which is the cost of the resource consumed) and the difference between this value and the actual settlement amount (which is a cost of finance). Yet, in practice, this distinction is rarely made, and the supplier's credit terms are typically rolled up into a single amount. While it would be possible for accounting standards to require the separate calculation of all financing expenses, the current absence of such a requirement means that an entity's operating profit includes suppliers' retum on finance. For the sake of consistency between the income statement and the balance sheet, accounts payable should therefore also be classified as operating. If they were not, measures of retum on capital employed would be artificially low. Conceptually, if financing activity is defined by nature, classifying accounts payable as operating would be the wrong answer, but practically it would at least be intemally consistent.It would not be the wrong answer, however, according to a fianctional perspective on financing activity. Indeed, the absence of a separately reported financing expense can be viewed as evidence that the underlying fiinction is not financing. The case for the functional perspective is stronger still if standard-setters also seek to achieve consistency with the cash flow statement. Consider, for example, an asset retirement obligation. The liability is by nature a source of finance, which results fi-om an operating expense and which increases as financing expenses (interest costs) are incurred. The cash settlement of the liability does not distinguish, however, between the operating andfinancing components of the liability: there is not an operating cash flow separate fi-om a financing cash flow.These concems over measurement reliability might suggest that the gain or loss from revised cash flow estimates should be reported as operating, yet the same would not be tme for a gain or loss from revisions to expected discount rates, which are the capitalised counterpart of the current period's interest costs and so are not candidates for inclusion in operating profit.The Boards have deemed relevance and faithful representation to be the fundamental qualitative characteristics of useful financial information.This reflects the Boards’belief that financial information must exhibit those characteristics in order to be useful for making decisions.Additionally,the Boards have identified comparability,verifiability,timeliness,and understandability as qualitative characteristics that enhance the usefulness of financial information.Such characteristics complement the fundamental characteristics and enhance decision-usefulness when they are present.In short,they are “nice to have”characteristics rather than “must have”ones.(As a matter of personal opinion,I find it somewhat disturbing that the Boards don’t consider understandability to be “fundamental.”)In addition to fundamental and enhancing qualitative characteristics,the Boards have also identified a pervasive constraint:cost. They clearly recognize that if the costs of applying a particular accounting standard would exceed the benefits of doing so,then it makes no sense to impose such a standard on reporting entities.The fundamental characteristics, enhancing characteristics,and pervasive constraint that the Boards have mutually identified represent a blending of concepts that were, for the most part,already present in their prior conceptual frameworks.The earlier frameworks of U.S.GAAP and IFRS,however,differed from each other with regard to relative priorities among the characteristics and the wording used to describe them.A less straightforward case arises if there is a loan of resource but the counterparty is not a bank or other financial institution. Would this change the initial observation regarding the nature of financing activity? A case that can be applied here is a pension obligation, for which the counterparty is employees rather than a bank. Adefined benefit pension plan involves the entity deferring settlement of an amount equal to the service cost, incurring interest costs thereon and then repaying the amount owed in the form of a pension. In principle, employees could accept immediate settlement of services rendered instead of entering a pension agreement, and an entity could achieve this immediate settlement by borrowing, with the net effect that the entity substitutes a bank loan for a pension obligation. Either way, the existence of the liability is associated with fiiture interest costs and repayment of capital, and there is a clear distinction between the expenses relating to operating activity (i.e. the service cost that gives rise to the liability) and the method by which these expenses are financed (either by employees or by the bank). A similar argument can also be made for cases other than pension obligations, such as provisions for deferred tax, where the counterparty providing finance (i.e. accepting deferred settlement) is the govemment. For some other provisions, such as those for asset retirement obligations, a clearly identifiable counterparty might be absent: an entity's current operating activity gives rise to a current obligation to incur future cash outflows, but payment will eventually be made to an entity that is not yet known. The absence of a current counterparty does not, however, change the conclusion that the entity's operating activity is being financed by means of deferred settlement. Interest costs are recognised purely as a consequence of this deferral, and not as a consequence of further operating activity, and the situation is no different in substance from a bank loan: the carrying amount of the provision equals the amount that the entity would need to borrow in order to settle its obligation, and the unwinding of the discount rate is equal to the interest costs that would be incurred on the amount borrowed.What Now?Because the conceptual framework of U.S.GAAP isn’t itself authoritative,the recent revisions to it don’t change authoritative U.S.GAAP as documented in the FASB Accounting Standards Codification(TM).The revisions do change authoritative IFRS,however,because the conceptual framework of IFRS is considered authoritative. Chapter 2 of the common conceptual framework is due to be released by the end of 2010.As noted previously,it will address the concept of the reporting entity (PhaseD).The Boards are also currently working on Phases B (Elements and Recognition) and C (Measurement).Although the conceptual framework project is currently being conducted in parallel with numerous standard-level projects,its successful completion will be essential to the ultimate success of all of the Boards’convergence efforts.As I say in the Convergence Guidebook for Corporate Financial Reporting (Wiley),“If different standard setters disagree on the basic concepts of financial reporting,then it is unlikely that those standard setters will ever agree on specific standards.”Now that the FASB and the IASB have agreed on some portions of a common conceptual framework,we see that the Boards are indeed capable of converging their standards at the conceptual level and are intent on achieving even more conceptual convergence in the years ahead.Source: Pounder, Bruce. A Common Framework for Accounting Standards [J]. Strategic Finance,2010,(11) : 61-64.译文：会计准则的共同框架2010年9月，美国财务会计准则委员会(FASB)和国际会计准则委员会（IASB）完成了一个项目的第一阶段，这个项目将在以后的多年里影响全球标准的制定。
新会计准则主要修改的内容
新会计准则主要修改的内容新会计准则（Accounting Standards Update，ASU）是美国会计准则委员会（Financial Accounting Standards Board，FASB）颁布的指导企业财务报告的准则。
新会计准则旨在提供更清晰、更详细的规定，以提高财务报告的透明度和可比性。
以下是新会计准则主要修改的内容。
1.收入会计准则：新会计准则对收入会计进行了全面修改，以确保企业能够准确报告其收入。
这包括统一收入识别原则、合同履约和收入分配，以及确定各阶段的完成度和计算期间的最终成果。
2.租赁会计准则：新会计准则要求企业将所有租赁合同上的租赁权和租赁义务纳入资产负债表。
这将有助于提高租赁活动的透明度，并使用户能够更好地理解企业的财务状况和风险。
3.金融工具会计准则：新会计准则对金融工具的分类和衡量提出了更清晰的要求。
特别是，它要求企业按其计划持有金融资产的商业模式和资产的现金流特性对其进行分类，并根据公允价值对其进行衡量。
4.减值损失会计准则：新会计准则要求企业更早地识别减值损失，并加强确保减值损失准备金的适当计提。
这有助于更及时地反映企业的潜在风险和不确定性。
5.股份支付会计准则：新会计准则要求企业更全面地披露股份支付计划的相关信息，并对股份支付成本进行更准确和及时的计量。
6.其他有关证券类别的会计准则：新会计准则对其他类型的证券，如衍生品、可转换债券和股东权益工具等，提出了更详细的计量要求和披露要求。
虽然新会计准则的实施可能需要企业进行一些系统和流程的调整，但它将为企业创造更好的机会，提高财务管理和决策的精确性和可靠性。
同时，它还将为投资者提供更准确和全面的信息，以便更好地评估和比较不同企业的财务状况和业绩。
总的来说，新会计准则的修改主要涉及收入会计、租赁会计、金融工具会计、减值损失会计、股份支付会计和其他证券类别的会计。
这些修改旨在提高财务报告的准确性、可比性和透明度，从而为投资者和其他利益相关方提供更好的信息和更大的信任。
中英对照审计准则1101号
中国注册会计师审计准则第1101号——注册会计师的总体目标和审计工作的基本要求（2010年11月1日修订）CHINESE CPA STANDARD ON AUDITING 1101: OVERALL OBJECTIVES OF THE CPA AND THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CONDUCT OF AN AUDIT (as revised November 1st,2010)第一章总则Chapter I General Provisions第一条为了规范注册会计师按照中国注册会计师审计准则（简称审计准则）执行财务报表审计工作，确立注册会计师的总体目标，明确注册会计师为实现总体目标而需要执行审计工作的性质和范围，以及在执行财务报表审计业务时承担的责任，制定本准则。
Article 1 This CPA Standard on Auditing (CSA) is formulated to regulate the conduct of an audit of financial statements by the CPA in accordance with CSAs, set out the overall objectives of the CPA, and explain the nature and scope of an audit designed to enable the CPA to meet those objectives, and the CPA’s overall responsibilities when conducting an audit of financial statements.第二条审计准则适用于注册会计师执行财务报表审计业务。
当执行其他历史财务信息审计业务时，注册会计师可以根据具体情况遵守适用的相关审计准则，以满足此类业务的要求。
会计准则国际趋同 (1)
摘要
2008年国际金融危机爆发以来，全球积极推进国际金融监管框架改革，G20领导人峰会多次倡议建立全球统一的高质量会计准则，要求国际会计准则制定机构IASB改进IFRS。国内外掀起了向IFRS趋同的风潮,IASB也加快了相关准则项目的进程，对一系列重要准则项目进行制定或修改，发布了一系列的征求意见稿，IFRS正经历着重大变革。同时一些主要经济体的会计准则国际趋同进程出现了新的情况和特殊问题。中国于2006年发布了企业会计准则体系，与IFRS实现了实质趋同,并与2010年4月发布了持续趋同路线图，表示将与IFRS保持持续趋同。在此背景下，全球会计准则的国际趋同动态都可能会对我国产生重大影响，应该研究并确定我国会计准则国际趋同的应对举措及策略。
2. 2平衡会计准则的国际趋同与本国特殊需求的矛盾
未来会计准则变迁的主导者将变成IASB这样的国际组织，但IASB很难取得直接的制度收益，缺乏必要的利益激励，每一次的进展需在全球范围内取得共识，从制度的供给与需求来看，会计准则的制度安排很可能滞后于现实环境的需要。同时，如果IASB成为唯一的会计准则供给者，可能因其垄断地位，导致供给质量下降、速度变慢。中国经济发展迅速，并且在经济体制、政治体制和文化领域与欧美等国家相比，有自己的特点，虽然现阶段中国主要是向国际财务报告准则学习借鉴，向国际经验靠拢，但未来国际财务报告准则的发展可能在某些方面会滞后于中国经济发展。所以，中国企业会计准则的制订机构需要调整其角色，一方面它需要充当IASB与中国应用者之间沟通交流的中介，另一方面当中国有现实需求时，继续制订某些具有中国特色的会计准则。目前会计准则的使用者(包括企业、各级政府监管部门、外部审计师等中介机构)对国际化的企业会计准则还不太适应，因此，有必要根据中国的情况，为准则应用者提供更多的具体指引。例如通过培训会计准则的应用者，帮助他们理解支撑具体会计准则的基础性概念和原则，如资产负债观、权益性交易、控制、公允价值等。其次，需要调查和总结这些概念和原则在中国的应用情况和因中国国情带来的特殊问题，将这些结论与IASB和其他国家的准则制订者互动，并利用监管问答或者典型案例分析等形式与准则应用者交流。一方面帮助外国同行了解中国同类经济业务的交易实质和会计处理的选择基础，以实现会计准则的等效目标，另一用中屡次出现的难点问题，初始阶段中国的会计准则可能是偏向规则性的，达成共识后，可以更为原则导向一些。此外，对于一些中国特有的问题或者在中国率先出现的新经济问题，中国的会计准则制订机构可不必等待IASB的研究成果，可率先行动。
英国OFR与美国MDA的比较【文库精品】
英国OFR与美国MD&A的比较======================================================================关键词：经营与财务评述年度报告关键业绩指标 OFR MD&A摘要：在年度报告中提供预测性、战略性、非财务信息越来越来越受到人们的重视，英国OFR的产生正是顺应了这种需求。
本文简单介绍了英国OFR的主要内容并与美国的MD&A进行了比较与分析。
一．什么是OFROFR，英文全称Operating and Financial Review，可译为“经营与财务评述”，是英国年度报告重要组成部分，相当于美国的“管理层讨论与分析” (Management’s Discussion and Analysis ,以下简称MD&A)。
OFR要求高层管理人员对公司的经营目标，实现这些目标的战略，成功应用这些战略的可能性，以及经营管理中用来衡量业绩的关键指标进行讨论和分析并予以披露，以便投资者和其他利益相关者更好地进行决策。
2005年5月10日，ASB正式颁布了报告准则（Reporting Standard-1,以下简称RS1）,规定从2005年4月1日之后开始的财年实行OFR的法定披露。
RS1的目的是为了通过对如何编制OFR做出具体的规定，要求公司根据业务规模的大小和复杂性，提供综合的信息，以帮助信息使用者评估公司采用的战略以及成功应用这些战略的可能性。
RS1给出了OFR中应作披露的各项要点的框架，这样有助于董事根据公司的特定情况，选择最佳的披露方式。
必需的内容包括：（1）对业务、目标和战略的描述；（2）对目前的业绩和未来业务发展的分析；（3）现有的资源、面临的风险和不确定性以及与公司利益相关者的关系；（4）对财务状况的分析包括现在和未来的会计政策、资本结构、财务政策、现金流和流动性相关方面进行讨论；（5）其他内容有：雇员、环境问题、社会和社区问题、公司供应链上的劳动力和原材料供应等因素、股份的发放和回购等。
验资报告英文版(共10篇)
篇一：英文版验资报告英文版验资报告we accepted the appointment to examine the [second] installment of registered capital[second] installment of capital contribution in accordance with the “statement of independent auditing practice pronouncements no.1: verification of capital contribution”. in the course of our examination, we performed examination procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.[amount] contributed by party a and party b. the aforesaid actual capital contribution[currency] [amount] is in the form of cash, [currency] [amount] is in the form of tangible assets, and [currency] [amount] is in the form of know-how. the capital contributed in the form of know-how accounts for % of the registered capital.contributed by party a and [currency] [amount] was contributed by party b, was verified by篇二：验资报告中英文对照天津正通有限责任会计事务所tianjin zhengtong accountant office of limited liability地址：中国天津市和平区赤岩峰道33号add：no. 33, chiyanfeng road，heping district, tianjin ,china 电话：27121541传真：27125659tel：27121541 fax：27125659验资报告capital contribution verification report津正通业验字（2002）第174号verification no. 174 (2002), tianjin zhengtong, china天津市诺德科技发展有限公司（筹）全体股东：to all investor(s) of tianjin nord technology development co., ltd., 我们接受委托，审验了贵公司（筹）截止2002年9月19日止申请设立登记的注册资本实收情况。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
No. 2010-18April 2010Receivables (Topic 310) Effect of a Loan Modification When the Loan Is Partof a Pool That Is Accounted for as a Single Asset a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task ForceThe FASB Accounting Standards Codification™ is the source of authoritative generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities. An Accounting Standards Update is not authoritative; rather, it is a document that communicates how the Accounting Standards Codification is being amended. It also provides other information to help a user of GAAP understand how and why GAAP is changing and when the changes will be effective.For additional copies of this Accounting Standards Update and information on applicable prices and discount rates contact:Order DepartmentFinancial Accounting Standards Board401 Merritt 7PO Box 5116Norwalk, CT 06856-5116Please ask for our Product Code No. ASU2010-18.FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING SERIES (ISSN 0885-9051) is published quarterly by the Financial Accounting Foundation. Periodicals postage paid at Norwalk, CT and at additional mailing offices. The full subscription rate is $230 per year. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Financial Accounting Standards Board, 401 Merritt 7, PO Box 5116, Norwalk, CT 06856-5116. | No. 347An Amendment of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification TMNo. 2010-18April 2010 Receivables (Topic 310) Effect of a Loan Modification When the Loan Is Part of a Pool That Is Accounted for as a Single Asset a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force Accounting Standards UpdateFinancial Accounting Standards Board of the Financial Accounting Foundation401 MERRITT 7, PO BOX 5116, NORWALK, CONNECTICUT 06856-5116Accounting Standards Update 2010-18Receivables (Topic 310)Effect of a Loan Modification When the Loan Is Part of a Pool That Is Accounted for as a Single Asseta consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force April 2010CONTENTSPageNumbersSummary ........................................................................................................... 1–3 Amendments to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification™ ...................... 5–8 Background Information and Basis for Conclusions ........................................ 9–11 Amendments to the XBRL Taxonomy .. (12)SummaryWhy Is the FASB Issuing This Accounting Standards Update (Update)?Recently there has been an increase in the number of modifications of acquired loans that fall under the scope of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification TM Subtopic 310-30, Receivables—Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality.Subtopic 310-30 provides guidance on accounting for acquired loans that have evidence of credit deterioration upon acquisition. Paragraph 310-30-15-6 allows acquired assets with common risk characteristics to be accounted for in the aggregate as a pool. Upon establishment of the pool, the pool becomes the unit of accounting. When loans are accounted for as a pool, the purchase discount is not allocated to individual loans; thus, all of the loans in the pool accrete at a single pool rate (based on cash flow projections for the pool). Under Subtopic 310-30, the impairment analysis also is performed on the pool as a whole as opposed to each individual loan.Paragraphs 310-40-15-4 through 15-12 establish the criteria for evaluating whether a loan modification should be classified as a troubled debt restructuring. Specifically, paragraph 310-40-15-5 states that “a restructuring of a debt constitutes a troubled debt restructuring for purposes of this Subtopic if the creditor for economic or legal reasons related to the debtor’s financial difficulties grants a concession to the debtor that it would not otherwise consider.” Diversity in practice has developed on whether a loan that is part of a pool of loans accounted for as a single asset should be removed from that pool upon a modification that would constitute a troubled debt restructuring. In the view of certain entities, accounting for troubled debt restructuring does not apply to individual loans within a pool, and modified loans should remain within the pool. In the view of other entities, each modified loan should be evaluated against the troubled debt restructuring criteria, and if the loan modification is a troubled debt restructuring, the modified loan should be removed from the pool and accounted for as a separate asset. The objective of the amendments in this Update is to address the diversity in practice regarding such modifications.Who Is Affected by the Amendments in This Update?The amendments in this Update affect any entity that acquires loans subject to Subtopic 310-30, that accounts for some or all of those loans within pools, and that subsequently modifies one or more of those loans after acquisition.What Are the Main Provisions?Accounting GuidanceAs a result of the amendments in this Update, modifications of loans that are accounted for within a pool under Subtopic 310-30 do not result in the removal of those loans from the pool even if the modification of those loans would otherwise be considered a troubled debt restructuring. An entity will continue to be required to consider whether the pool of assets in which the loan is included is impaired if expected cash flows for the pool change.The amendments in this Update do not affect the accounting for loans under the scope of Subtopic 310-30 that are not accounted for within pools. Loans accounted for individually under Subtopic 310-30 continue to be subject to the troubled debt restructuring accounting provisions within Subtopic 310-40, Receivables—Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors.DisclosuresThe amendments in this Update do not require an entity to make additional disclosures. However, the Board currently has on its agenda a project on credit loss disclosures and is expected to consider whether to require additional disclosures for modifications of loans that are accounted for within pools.How Do the Main Provisions Differ from Current U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and Why Are They an Improvement?The amendments in this Update improve comparability by eliminating diversity in practice about the treatment of modifications of loans accounted for within pools under Subtopic 310-30. Furthermore, the amendments clarify guidance about maintaining the integrity of a pool as the unit of accounting for acquired loans with credit deterioration.When Will the Amendments Be Effective?The amendments in this Update are effective for modifications of loans accounted for within pools under Subtopic 310-30 occurring in the first interim or annual period ending on or after July 15, 2010. The amendments are to be applied prospectively. Early application is permitted.Upon initial adoption of the guidance in this Update, an entity may make a one-time election to terminate accounting for loans as a pool under Subtopic 310-30. This election may be applied on a pool-by-pool basis and does not preclude anentity from applying pool accounting to subsequent acquisitions of loans with credit deterioration.How Do the Provisions Compare with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)?No similar issue exists under IFRS because IFRS does not have guidance on troubled debt restructurings.Amendments to theFASB Accounting Standards Codification TM Introduction1. The Accounting Standards Codification is amended as described in paragraphs 2–10. In some cases, not only are the amended paragraphs shown but also the preceding and following paragraphs are shown to put the change in context. Terms from the Master Glossary are in bold type. Added text is underlined, and deleted text is struck out.Amendments to Topic 3102. Amend paragraph 310-30-15-6, with a link to transition paragraph 310-10-65-1,as follows:Receivables—Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit QualityScope and Scope Exceptions310-30-15-6For purposes of applying the recognition, measurement, and disclosure provisions of this Subtopic for loans that are not accounted for as debt securities, investors may aggregate loans acquired in the same fiscal quarter that have common risk characteristics and thereby use a composite interest rate and expectation of cash flows expected to be collected for the pool. It is not intended for this aggregation to be analogized for purposes other than this Subtopic. To be eligible for aggregation, each loan first should be determined individually to meet the scope criteria of paragraph 310-30-15-2. After determining that certain acquired loans are within the scope as defined in that paragraph, the investor may evaluate whether such loans have common risk characteristics, thus permitting the aggregation of such loans into one or more pools. The aggregation shall be based on common risk characteristics that include similar credit risk or risk ratings, and one or more predominant risk characteristics. A portion of the total cost of acquired assets shall be assigned to each individual asset unit of accounting acquired on the basis of its relative fair payments receivable over the investor’s initial investment (whether accretable yield or nonaccretable difference) for a specific loan or a pool of loans with one set of common risk characteristics shall not be considered available to offsetchanges in cash flows expected to be collected from a different loan or an assembled pool of loans with another set of common risk characteristics.3. Amend paragraph 310-30-35-13, with a link to transition paragraph 310-10-65-1,as follows:Subsequent Measurement310-30-35-13 The guidance in this paragraph applies only to loans accounted for as individual loans. See paragraphs 310-30-40-1 through 40-2 for guidance on derecognition of pooled loans. If an investor subsequently refinances or restructures the loan, other than through a troubled debt restructuring, the refinanced or restructured loan shall not be accounted for as a new loan, and this Subtopic, including paragraphs 310-30-35-8 through 35-11, continues to apply. See Subtopic 310-40 for guidance on troubled debt restructurings.4. Amend paragraph 310-30-40-1, with a link to transition paragraph 310-10-65-1,as follows:Derecognition310-30-40-1 Once a pool of loans is assembled, the integrity of the pool shall be maintained. A loan shall be removed from a pool of loans only if either of the following conditions is met:a. The the investor sells, forecloses, or otherwise receives assets insatisfaction of the loan, orloan.b. The the loan is written off, and it shall be removed at its carryingamount.off.A refinancing or restructuring of a loan shall not result in the removal of a loan from a pool.5. Add paragraph 310-30-40-2, with a link to transition paragraph 310-10-65-1,as follows:310-30-40-2A loan removed from a pool in accordance with the preceding paragraph shall be removed at its carrying amount. See paragraph 310-30-35-15 for further guidance on removing a loan from a pool.6. Amend paragraph 310-40-15-11, with a link to transition paragraph 310-10-65-1,as follows:Receivables—Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors Scope and Scope Exceptions310-40-15-11 For purposes of this Subtopic, none of the following are considered troubled debt restructurings:a. Changes in lease agreements (for guidance, see Topic 840)b. Changes in employment-related agreements, for example, pensionplans and deferred compensation contractsc. Unless they involve an agreement between debtor and creditor torestructure, either of the following:1. Debtors’ failures to pay trade accounts according to their terms2. Creditors’ delays in taking legal action to collect overdue amountsof interest and principal.d. Modifications of loans within a pool accounted for in accordance withSubtopic 310-30 (see paragraph 310-30-15-6)e. Changes in expected cash flows of a pool of loans accounted for inaccordance with Subtopic 310-30 (see paragraph 310-30-15-6) resultingfrom the modification of one or more loans within the pool.7. Add paragraph 310-10-65-1 and its related heading as follows:> Transition Related to Accounting Standards Update No. 2010-18, Receivables (Topic 310): Effect of a Loan Modification When the Loan Is Part of a Pool That Is Accounted for as a Single Asset310-10-65-1The following represents the transition and effective date information related to Accounting Standards Update No. 2010-18, Receivables (Topic 310): Effect of a Loan Modification When the Loan Is Part of a Pool That Is Accounted for as a Single Asset:a. An entity shall apply the pending content that links to this paragraphprospectively for any modification of a loan (or loans) accounted forwithin a pool occurring in interim or annual periods ending on or afterJuly 15, 2010.b. Upon adoption of the pending content that links to this paragraph, anentity may make a one-time election to prospectively terminateaccounting for loans as a pool. An entity shall apply this election on apool-by-pool basis. In addition, this election does not preclude an entityfrom accounting for future loan acquisitions as a pooled unit ofaccounting in accordance with paragraph 310-30-15-6.c. Earlier application of the pending content that links to this paragraph ispermitted.d. An entity shall provide the disclosures in paragraphs 250-10-50-1through 50-3 in the period the entity adopts the pending content thatlinks to this paragraph.8. Amend paragraph 310-10-00-1, by adding the following item to the table, as follows:310-10-00-1 The following table identifies the changes made to this Subtopic.9. Amend paragraph 310-30-00-1, by adding the following items to the table, as follows:310-30-00-1 The following table identifies the changes made to this Subtopic.10. Amend paragraph 310-40-00-1, by adding the following item to the table, as follows:310-40-00-1 The following table identifies the changes made to this Subtopic. The amendments in this Update were adopted by the unanimous vote of the five members of the Financial Accounting Standards Board:Robert H. Herz, Chairman Thomas J. Linsmeier Leslie F. Seidman Marc A. Siegel Lawrence W. SmithBackground Information andBasis for ConclusionsIntroductionBC1. The following summarizes the Task Force’s considerations in reaching the conclusions in this Update. It includes the Board’s basis for ratifying the Task Force consensus when needed to supplement the Task Force’s considerations. It also includes reasons for accepting certain approaches and rejecting others. Individual Task Force and Board members gave greater weight to some factors than to others.Background Information and ConclusionsBC2. Diversity in practice has developed about whether a loan that is part of a pool of loans accounted for as a single asset should be removed from that pool upon a modification that would constitute a troubled debt restructuring. Some entities have not evaluated such modifications under the troubled debt restructuring guidance and have retained the modified loans that remain within the pool. Other entities have evaluated such modifications against the troubled debt restructuring criteria and have removed a loan from the pool if the loan modification is a troubled debt restructuring. The objective of the amendments in this Update is to address the diversity in practice about such modifications.BC3. At the November 19, 2009 EITF meeting, the Task Force reached a consensus-for-exposure on EITF Issue No. 09-I, “Effect of a Loan Modification When the Loan Is Part of a Pool That Is Accounted for as a Single Asset.” A proposed Accounting Standards Update (proposed Update) was issued on December 17, 2009, with a comment period that ended on February 12, 2010. Eleven comment letters were received on the proposed Update.BC4. The Task Force concluded that an entity should not apply the accounting guidance on troubled debt restructurings to loans accounted for within a pool that were initially acquired with credit deterioration. Once a pool is established, individual loans should not be removed from the pool unless the entity sells, forecloses, or otherwise receives assets in satisfaction of the loan or upon write-off of the loan in accordance with paragraph 310-30-40-1. In the Task Force’s view, the pool is the unit of accounting, and the pool as a whole cannot be considered a troubled debt restructuring. A troubled debt restructuring is a continuation of the prior loan rather than the creation of a new loan and, accordingly, assets have not been received to satisfy the loan. Substantially all respondents agreed with the Task Force’s conclusion.BC5. The Task Force also noted that to the extent that modifications within a pool caused deterioration in the cash flows expected from the pool, an impairment of the pool would occur under Section 310-30-35. That fact mitigates concerns that not considering these modifications to be troubled debt restructurings could result in delayed recognition of loan impairments.BC6. The proposed Update asked respondents whether the Task Force should provide guidance on how the carrying value of a loan should be determined upon removal of a loan from a pool when applying Subtopic 310-30. Responses were mixed on whether additional guidance was necessary. The Task Force concluded that further guidance was not necessary because paragraph 310-30-35-15, which states that loans should be removed from the pool in a way that does not impact the accretable yield of the pool, provides a sufficient principle. The Task Force also noted that constituents appeared to be applying reasonable methodologies in making that determination.BC7. The Task Force decided not to require any recurring disclosures for modified loans that continue to be accounted for as a pool under Subtopic 310-30. The Task Force noted that the Board currently has on its agenda a project on credit loss disclosures and that the Board is expected to consider whether additional disclosures should be provided for modifications of loans including those accounted for within a pool under Subtopic 310-30.Transition and Effective DateBC8. The Task Force decided to permit a one-time election to terminate pool accounting on a pool-by-pool basis so that entities that currently evaluate loan modifications within pools for troubled debt restructuring accounting would not have to change their current accounting process. The Task Force also noted that pool accounting is elective in general, so permitting this one-time election does not significantly affect comparability with other entities.BC9. The Task Force decided that the amendments in this Update should be effective prospectively. The Task Force considered retrospective application but decided that it would be impracticable for entities that had been removing modified loans that were considered troubled debt restructurings from a pool to put those loans back into the pool.Benefits and CostsBC10. The objective of financial reporting is to provide information that is useful to present and potential investors, creditors, donors, and other capital market participants in making rational investment, credit, and similar resource allocation decisions. However, the benefits of providing information for that purpose should justify the related costs. Present and potential investors, creditors, donors, andother users of financial information benefit from improvements in financial reporting, while the costs to implement new guidance are borne primarily by present investors. The Task Force’s assessment of the costs and benefits of issuing new guidance is unavoidably more qualitative than quantitative because there is no method to objectively measure the costs to implement new guidance or to quantify the value of improved information in financial statements.BC11. The Task Force believes that the amendments in this Update will not involve significant costs because they do not require an analysis of when a modification of a loan within a pool is a troubled debt restructuring and, thus, do not require a calculation of the amount of the loan to be removed from the pool. The guidance in the amendments in this Update will benefit financial statement users by reducing diversity in practice.Amendments to the XBRL TaxonomyThere are no proposed amendments to the XBRL taxonomy as a result of the amendments in this Update.。