PBE IPSAS 41

1. The objective of this Standard is to establish principles for the financial reporting of financial assets and financial liabilities that will present relevant and useful information to users of financial statements for their assessment of the amounts, timing and uncertainty of an entity’s future cash flows.

1.1 This Standard applies to Tier 1 and Tier 2 public benefit entities.

2. This Standard shall be applied by all entities to all types of financial instruments except:

1. Those interests in controlled entities, associates and joint ventures that are accounted for in accordance with PBE IPSAS 34 Separate Financial Statements, PBE IPSAS 35 Consolidated Financial Statements or PBE IPSAS 36 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures. However, in some cases, PBE IPSAS 34, PBE IPSAS 35 or PBE IPSAS 36 require or permit an entity to account for an interest in a controlled entity, associate or joint venture in accordance with some or all of the requirements of this Standard. Entities shall also apply this Standard to derivatives on an interest in a controlled entity, associate or joint venture unless the derivative meets the definition of an equity instrument of the entity in PBE IPSAS 28 Financial Instruments: Presentation.

2. Rights and obligations under leases to which PBE IPSAS 13 Leases applies. However:

   1. Finance lease receivables (i.e., net investments in finance leases) and operating lease receivables recognised by a lessor are subject to the derecognition and impairment requirements of this Standard;

   2. Lease liabilities recognised by a lessee are subject to the derecognition requirements in paragraph 35 of this Standard; and

   3. Derivatives that are embedded in leases are subject to the embedded derivatives requirements of this Standard.

3. Employers’ rights and obligations under employee benefit plans, to which PBE IPSAS 39 Employee Benefits applies.

4. Financial instruments issued by the entity that meet the definition of an equity instrument in PBE IPSAS 28 (including options and warrants) or that are required to be classified as an equity instrument in accordance with paragraphs 15 and 16 or paragraphs 17 and 18 of PBE IPSAS 28. However, the holder of such equity instruments shall apply this Standard to those instruments, unless they meet the exception in (a).

5. Rights and obligations arising under:

   1. An insurance contract, other than an issuer’s rights and obligations arising under an insurance contract that meets the definition of a financial guarantee contract in paragraph 9; or

   2. A contract that is within the scope of PBE IFRS 4 Insurance Contracts because it contains a discretionary participation feature. This Standard applies to a derivative that is embedded in an insurance contract if the derivative is not itself an insurance contract (see paragraphs 47–53 and paragraphs AG99– AG106 of this Standard). An entity applies this Standard to financial guarantee contracts, but shall apply PBE IFRS 4 if the issuer elects to apply that standard in recognising and measuring them. Notwithstanding (i) above, an entity may apply this Standard to other insurance contracts which involve the transfer of financial risk.

6. Any forward contract between an acquirer and a selling shareholder to buy or sell an acquired operation that will result in a PBE combination within the scope of PBE IPSAS 40 PBE Combinations at a future acquisition date. The term of the forward contract should not exceed a reasonable period normally necessary to obtain any required approvals and to complete the transaction.

7. Loan commitments other than those loan commitments described in paragraph 4. However, an issuer of loan commitments shall apply the impairment requirements of this Standard to loan commitments that are not otherwise within the scope of this Standard. Also, all loan commitments are subject to the derecognition requirements of this Standard.

8. Financial instruments, contracts and obligations under share-based payment transactions to which the relevant international or national accounting standard dealing with share-based payment applies, except for contracts within the scope of paragraphs 5–8 of this Standard to which this Standard applies.

9. Rights to payments to reimburse the entity for expenditure that it is required to make to settle a liability that it recognises as a provision in accordance with PBE IPSAS 19 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, or for which, in an earlier period, it recognised a provision in accordance with PBE IPSAS 19.

10. The initial recognition and initial measurement of rights and obligations arising from non- exchange revenue transactions, to which PBE IPSAS 23 Revenue from Non-Exchange Transactions applies, except as described in paragraph AG6.

11. Rights and obligations under service concession arrangements to which PBE IPSAS 32 Service Concession Arrangements: Grantor applies. However, financial liabilities recognised by a grantor under the financial liability model are subject to the derecognition provisions of this Standard (see paragraphs 35–38 and Appendix A paragraphs AG39–AG47).

3. The impairment requirements of this Standard shall be applied to those rights arising from PBE IPSAS 9 Revenue from Exchange Transactions and PBE IPSAS 23 transactions which give rise to financial instruments for the purposes of recognising impairment gains or losses.

4. The following loan commitments are within the scope of this Standard:

1. Loan commitments that the entity designates as financial liabilities at fair value through surplus or deficit (see paragraph 46). An entity that has a past practice of selling the assets resulting from its loan commitments shortly after origination shall apply this Standard to all its loan commitments in the same class.

2. Loan commitments that can be settled net in cash or by delivering or issuing another financial instrument. These loan commitments are derivatives. A loan commitment is not regarded as settled net merely because the loan is paid out in instalments (for example, a mortgage construction loan that is paid out in instalments in line with the progress of construction).

3. Commitments to provide a loan at a below-market interest rate (see paragraph 45(d)).

5. This Standard shall be applied to those contracts to buy or sell a non-financial item that can be settled net in cash or another financial instrument, or by exchanging financial instruments, as if the contracts were financial instruments, with the exception of contracts that were entered into and continue to be held for the purpose of the receipt or delivery of a non-financial item in accordance with the entity’s expected purchase, sale or usage requirements. However, this Standard shall be applied to those contracts that an entity designates as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraph 6.

6. A contract to buy or sell a non-financial item that can be settled net in cash or another financial instrument, or by exchanging financial instruments, as if the contract was a financial instrument, may be irrevocably designated as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit even if it was entered into for the purpose of the receipt or delivery of a non-financial item in accordance with the entity’s expected purchase, sale or usage requirements. This designation is available only at inception of the contract and only if it eliminates or significantly reduces a recognition inconsistency (sometimes referred to as an ‘accounting mismatch’) that would otherwise arise from not recognising that contract because it is excluded from the scope of this Standard (see paragraph 5).

7. There are various ways in which a contract to buy or sell a non-financial item can be settled net in cash or another financial instrument or by exchanging financial instruments. These include:

1. When the terms of the contract permit either party to settle it net in cash or another financial instrument or by exchanging financial instruments;

2. When the ability to settle net in cash or another financial instrument, or by exchanging financial instruments, is not explicit in the terms of the contract, but the entity has a practice of settling similar contracts net in cash or another financial instrument or by exchanging financial instruments (whether with the counterparty, by entering into offsetting contracts or by selling the contract before its exercise or lapse);

3. When, for similar contracts, the entity has a practice of taking delivery of the underlying and selling it within a short period after delivery for the purpose of generating a profit from short-term fluctuations in price or dealer’s margin; and

4. When the non-financial item that is the subject of the contract is readily convertible to cash.

A contract to which (b) or (c) applies is not entered into for the purpose of the receipt or delivery of the non-financial item in accordance with the entity’s expected purchase, sale or usage requirements and, accordingly, is within the scope of this Standard. Other contracts to which paragraph 5 applies are evaluated to determine whether they were entered into and continue to be held for the purpose of the receipt or delivery of the non-financial item in accordance with the entity’s expected purchase, sale or usage requirements and, accordingly, whether they are within the scope of this Standard.

8. A written option to buy or sell a non-financial item that can be settled net in cash or another financial instrument, or by exchanging financial instruments, in accordance with paragraph 7(a) or 7(d) is within the scope of this Standard. Such a contract cannot be entered into for the purpose of the receipt or delivery of the non-financial item in accordance with the entity’s expected purchase, sale or usage requirements.

9. The following terms are used in this Standard with the meanings specified:

12-month expected credit losses are the portion of lifetime expected credit losses that represent the expected credit losses that result from default events on a financial instrument that are possible within the 12 months after the reporting date.

The amortised cost of a financial asset or financial liability is the amount at which the financial asset or financial liability is measured at initial recognition minus the principal repayments, plus or minus the cumulative amortisation using the effective interest method of any difference between that initial amount and the maturity amount and, for financial assets, adjusted for any loss allowance.

Credit-adjusted effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts the estimated future cash payments or receipts through the expected life of the financial asset to the amortised cost of a financial asset that is a purchased or originated credit-impaired financial asset. When calculating the credit-adjusted effective interest rate, an entity shall estimate the expected cash flows by considering all contractual terms of the financial asset (for example, prepayment, extension, call and similar options) and expected credit losses. The calculation includes all fees and points paid or received between parties to the contract that are an integral part of the effective interest rate (see paragraphs AG156–AG158), transaction costs, and all other premiums or discounts. There is a presumption that the cash flows and the expected life of a group of similar financial instruments can be estimated reliably. However, in those rare cases when it is not possible to reliably estimate the cash flows or the remaining life of a financial instrument (or group of financial instruments), the entity shall use the contractual cash flows over the full contractual term of the financial instrument (or group of financial instruments).

A credit-impaired financial asset is a financial asset that is credit-impaired when one or more events that have a detrimental impact on the estimated future cash flows of that financial asset have occurred. Evidence that a financial asset is credit-impaired include observable data about the following events:

1. Significant financial difficulty of the issuer or the borrower;

2. A breach of contract, such as a default or past due event;

3. The lender(s) of the borrower, for economic or contractual reasons relating to the borrower’s financial difficulty, having granted to the borrower a concession(s) that the lender(s) would not otherwise consider;

4. It is becoming probable that the borrower will enter bankruptcy or other financial reorganisation;

5. The disappearance of an active market for that financial asset because of financial difficulties; or

6. The purchase or origination of a financial asset at a deep discount that reflects the incurred credit losses.

It may not be possible to identify a single discrete event—instead, the combined effect of several events may have caused financial assets to become credit-impaired.

Credit loss is the difference between all contractual cash flows that are due to an entity in accordance with the contract and all the cash flows that the entity expects to receive (i.e., all cash shortfalls), discounted at the original effective interest rate (or credit-adjusted effective interest rate for purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets). An entity shall estimate cash flows by considering all contractual terms of the financial instrument (for example, prepayment, extension, call and similar options) through the expected life of that financial instrument. The cash flows that are considered shall include cash flows from the sale of collateral held or other credit enhancements that are integral to the contractual terms. There is a presumption that the expected life of a financial instrument can be estimated reliably. However, in those rare cases when it is not possible to reliably estimate the expected life of a financial instrument, the entity shall use the remaining contractual term of the financial instrument.

Derecognition is the removal of a previously recognised financial asset or financial liability from an entity’s statement of financial position.

A derivative is a financial instrument or other contract within the scope of this Standard with all three of the following characteristics.

1. Its value changes in response to the change in a specified interest rate, financial instrument price, commodity price, foreign exchange rate, index of prices or rates, credit rating or credit index, or other variable, provided in the case of a non-financial variable that the variable is not specific to a party to the contract (sometimes called the ‘underlying’).

2. It requires no initial net investment or an initial net investment that is smaller than would be required for other types of contracts that would be expected to have a similar response to changes in market factors.

3. It is settled at a future date.

Dividends or similar distributions are distributions to holders of equity instruments in proportion to their holdings of a particular class of capital.

The effective interest method is the method that is used in the calculation of the amortised cost of a financial asset or a financial liability and in the allocation and recognition of the interest revenue or interest expense in surplus or deficit over the relevant period.

The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash payments or receipts through the expected life of the financial asset or financial liability to the gross carrying amount of a financial asset or to the amortised cost of a financial liability. When calculating the effective interest rate, an entity shall estimate the expected cash flows by considering all the contractual terms of the financial instrument (for example, prepayment, extension, call and similar options) but shall not consider the expected credit losses. The calculation includes all fees and points paid or received between parties to the contract that are an integral part of the effective interest rate (see paragraphs AG156–AG158), transaction costs, and all other premiums or discounts. There is a presumption that the cash flows and the expected life of a group of similar financial instruments can be estimated reliably. However, in those rare cases when it is not possible to reliably estimate the cash flows or the expected life of a financial instrument (or group of financial instruments), the entity shall use the contractual cash flows over the full contractual term of the financial instrument (or group of financial instruments).

An expected credit loss is the weighted average of credit losses with the respective risks of a default occurring as the weights.

A financial guarantee contract is a contract that requires the issuer to make specified payments to reimburse the holder for a loss it incurs because a specified debtor fails to make payment when due in accordance with the original or modified terms of a debt instrument.

A financial liability at fair value through surplus or deficit is a financial liability that meets one of the following conditions.

1. It meets the definition of held for trading.

2. Upon initial recognition it is designated by the entity as at fair value through surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraph 46 or 51.

3. It is designated either upon initial recognition or subsequently as at fair value through surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraph 152.

A firm commitment is a binding agreement for the exchange of a specified quantity of resources at a specified price on a specified future date or dates.

A forecast transaction is an uncommitted but anticipated future transaction.

The gross carrying amount of a financial asset is the amortised cost of a financial asset, before adjusting for any loss allowance.

The hedge ratio is the relationship between the quantity of the hedging instrument and the quantity of the hedged item in terms of their relative weighting.

A held for trading financial instrument is a financial asset or financial liability that:

1. Is acquired or incurred principally for the purpose of selling or repurchasing it in the near term;

2. On initial recognition is part of a portfolio of identified financial instruments that are managed together and for which there is evidence of a recent actual pattern of short-term profit-taking; or

3. Is a derivative (except for a derivative that is a financial guarantee contract or a designated and effective hedging instrument).

An impairment gain or loss is recognised in surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraph 80 and arises from applying the impairment requirements in paragraphs 73–93.

Lifetime expected credit losses are the expected credit losses that result from all possible default events over the expected life of a financial instrument.

A loss allowance is the allowance for expected credit losses on financial assets measured in accordance with paragraph 40 and lease receivables, the accumulated impairment amount for financial assets measured in accordance with paragraph 41 and the provision for expected credit losses on loan commitments and financial guarantee contracts.

A modification gain or loss is the amount arising from adjusting the gross carrying amount of a financial asset to reflect the renegotiated or modified contractual cash flows. The entity recalculates the gross carrying amount of a financial asset as the present value of the estimated future cash payments or receipts through the expected life of the renegotiated or modified financial asset that are discounted at the financial asset’s original effective interest rate (or the original credit-adjusted effective interest rate for purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets) or, when applicable, the revised effective interest rate calculated in accordance with paragraph 139. When estimating the expected cash flows of a financial asset, an entity shall consider all contractual terms of the financial asset (for example, prepayment, call and similar options) but shall not consider the expected credit losses, unless the financial asset is a purchased or originated credit-impaired financial asset, in which case an entity shall also consider the initial expected credit losses that were considered when calculating the original credit-adjusted effective interest rate.

A financial asset is past due when a counterparty has failed to make a payment when that payment was contractually due.

A purchased or originated credit-impaired financial asset is credit-impaired on initial recognition.

The reclassification date is the first day of the first reporting period following the change in management model that results in an entity reclassifying financial assets.

A regular way purchase or sale is a purchase or sale of a financial asset under a contract whose terms require delivery of the asset within the time frame established generally by regulation or convention in the marketplace concerned.

Transaction costs are incremental costs that are directly attributable to the acquisition, issue or disposal of a financial asset or financial liability (see paragraph AG163). An incremental cost is one that would not have been incurred if the entity had not acquired, issued or disposed of the financial instrument.

Terms defined in other PBE Standards are used in this Standard with the same meaning as in those Standards, and are reproduced in the Glossary of Defined Terms published separately. The following terms are defined in either PBE IPSAS 28 or PBE IPSAS 30 Financial Instruments: Disclosures: credit risk,¹ currency risk, liquidity risk, market risk, equity instrument, financial asset, financial instrument, financial liability and puttable instrument.

10. An entity shall recognise a financial asset or a financial liability in its statement of financial position when, and only when, the entity becomes party to the contractual provisions of the instrument (see paragraphs AG15 and AG16). When an entity first recognises a financial asset, it shall classify it in accordance with paragraphs 39–44 and measure it in accordance with paragraphs 57 and 59. When an entity first recognises a financial liability, it shall classify it in accordance with paragraphs 45 and 46 and measure it in accordance with paragraph 57.

11. A regular way purchase or sale of financial assets shall be recognised and derecognised, as applicable, using trade date accounting or settlement date accounting (see paragraphs AG17–AG20).

12. In consolidated financial statements, paragraphs 13–20, AG15 and AG21–AG38 are applied at a consolidated level. Hence, an entity first consolidates all controlled entities in accordance with PBE IPSAS 35 and then applies those paragraphs to the resulting economic entity.

13. Before evaluating whether, and to what extent, derecognition is appropriate under paragraphs 14– 20, an entity determines whether those paragraphs should be applied to a part of a financial asset (or a part of a group of similar financial assets) or a financial asset (or a group of similar financial assets) in its entirety, as follows.

1. Paragraphs 14–20 are applied to a part of a financial asset (or a part of a group of similar financial assets) if, and only if, the part being considered for derecognition meets one of the following three conditions.

   1. The part comprises only specifically identified cash flows from a financial asset (or a group of similar financial assets). For example, when an entity enters into an interest rate strip whereby the counterparty obtains the right to the interest cash flows, but not the principal cash flows from a debt instrument, paragraphs 14–20 are applied to the interest cash flows.

   2. The part comprises only a fully proportionate (pro rata) share of the cash flows from a financial asset (or a group of similar financial assets). For example, when an entity enters into an arrangement whereby the counterparty obtains the rights to a 90 per cent share of all cash flows of a debt instrument, paragraphs 14–20 are applied to 90 per cent of those cash flows. If there is more than one counterparty, each counterparty is not required to have a proportionate share of the cash flows provided that the transferring entity has a fully proportionate share.

   3. The part comprises only a fully proportionate (pro rata) share of specifically identified cash flows from a financial asset (or a group of similar financial assets). For example, when an entity enters into an arrangement whereby the counterparty obtains the rights to a 90 per cent share of interest cash flows from a financial asset, paragraphs 14–20 are applied to 90 per cent of those interest cash flows. If there is more than one counterparty, each counterparty is not required to have a proportionate share of the specifically identified cash flows provided that the transferring entity has a fully proportionate share.

2. In all other cases, paragraphs 14–20 are applied to the financial asset in its entirety (or to the group of similar financial assets in their entirety). For example, when an entity transfers the rights to the first or the last 90 per cent of cash collections from a financial asset (or a group of financial assets), or (ii) the rights to 90 per cent of the cash flows from a group of receivables, but provides a guarantee to compensate the buyer for any credit losses up to 8 per cent of the principal amount of the receivables, paragraphs 14–20 are applied to the financial asset (or a group of similar financial assets) in its entirety.

In paragraphs 14–23, the term ‘financial asset’ refers to either a part of a financial asset (or a part of a group of similar financial assets) as identified in (a) above or, otherwise, a financial asset (or a group of similar financial assets) in its entirety.

14. An entity shall derecognise a financial asset when, and only when:

1. The contractual rights to the cash flows from the financial asset expire or are waived, or

2. It transfers the financial asset as set out in paragraphs 15 and 16 and the transfer qualifies for derecognition in accordance with paragraph 17.

(See paragraph 11 for regular way sales of financial assets.)

15. An entity transfers a financial asset if, and only if, it either:

1. Transfers the contractual rights to receive the cash flows of the financial asset, or

2. Retains the contractual rights to receive the cash flows of the financial asset, but assumes a contractual obligation to pay the cash flows to one or more recipients in an arrangement that meets the conditions in paragraph 16.

16. When an entity retains the contractual rights to receive the cash flows of a financial asset (the ‘original asset’), but assumes a contractual obligation to pay those cash flows to one or more entities (the ‘eventual recipients’), the entity treats the transaction as a transfer of a financial asset if, and only if, all of the following three conditions are met.

1. The entity has no obligation to pay amounts to the eventual recipients unless it collects equivalent amounts from the original asset. Short-term advances by the entity with the right of full recovery of the amount lent plus accrued interest at market rates do not violate this condition.

2. The entity is prohibited by the terms of the transfer contract from selling or pledging the original asset other than as security to the eventual recipients for the obligation to pay them cash flows.

3. The entity has an obligation to remit any cash flows it collects on behalf of the eventual recipients without material delay. In addition, the entity is not entitled to reinvest such cash flows, except for investments in cash or cash equivalents (as defined in PBE IPSAS 2 Cash Flow Statements) during the short settlement period from the collection date to the date of required remittance to the eventual recipients, and interest earned on such investments is passed to the eventual recipients.

17. When an entity transfers a financial asset (see paragraph 15), it shall evaluate the extent to which it retains the risks and rewards of ownership of the financial asset. In this case:

1. If the entity transfers substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the financial asset, the entity shall derecognise the financial asset and recognise separately as assets or liabilities any rights and obligations created or retained in the transfer.

2. If the entity retains substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the financial asset, the entity shall continue to recognise the financial asset.

3. If the entity neither transfers nor retains substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the financial asset, the entity shall determine whether it has retained control of the financial asset. In this case:

   1. If the entity has not retained control, it shall derecognise the financial asset and recognise separately as assets or liabilities any rights and obligations created or retained in the transfer.

   2. If the entity has retained control, it shall continue to recognise the financial asset to the extent of its continuing involvement in the financial asset (see paragraph 27).

18. The transfer of risks and rewards (see paragraph 17) is evaluated by comparing the entity’s exposure, before and after the transfer, with the variability in the amounts and timing of the net cash flows of the transferred asset. An entity has retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of a financial asset if its exposure to the variability in the present value of the future net cash flows from the financial asset does not change significantly as a result of the transfer (e.g., because the entity has sold a financial asset subject to an agreement to buy it back at a fixed price or the sale price plus a lender’s return). An entity has transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of a financial asset if its exposure to such variability is no longer significant in relation to the total variability in the present value of the future net cash flows associated with the financial asset (e.g., because the entity has sold a financial asset subject only to an option to buy it back at its fair value at the time of repurchase or has transferred a fully proportionate share of the cash flows from a larger financial asset in an arrangement, such as a loan sub- participation, that meets the conditions in paragraph 16).

19. Often it will be obvious whether the entity has transferred or retained substantially all risks and rewards of ownership and there will be no need to perform any computations. In other cases, it will be necessary to compute and compare the entity’s exposure to the variability in the present value of the future net cash flows before and after the transfer. The computation and comparison are made using as the discount rate an appropriate current market interest rate. All reasonably possible variability in net cash flows is considered, with greater weight being given to those outcomes that are more likely to occur.

20. Whether the entity has retained control (see paragraph 17(c)) of the transferred asset depends on the transferee’s ability to sell the asset. If the transferee has the practical ability to sell the asset in its entirety to an unrelated third party and is able to exercise that ability unilaterally and without needing to impose additional restrictions on the transfer, the entity has not retained control. In all other cases, the entity has retained control.

21. If an entity transfers a financial asset in a transfer that qualifies for derecognition in its entirety and retains the right to service the financial asset for a fee, it shall recognise either a servicing asset or a servicing liability for that servicing contract. If the fee to be received is not expected to compensate the entity adequately for performing the servicing, a servicing liability for the servicing obligation shall be recognised at its fair value. If the fee to be received is expected to be more than adequate compensation for the servicing, a servicing asset shall be recognised for the servicing right at an amount determined on the basis of an allocation of the carrying amount of the larger financial asset in accordance with paragraph 24.

22. If, as a result of a transfer, a financial asset is derecognised in its entirety but the transfer results in the entity obtaining a new financial asset or assuming a new financial liability, or a servicing liability, the entity shall recognise the new financial asset, financial liability or servicing liability at fair value.

23. On derecognition of a financial asset in its entirety, the difference between:

1. The carrying amount (measured at the date of derecognition); and

2. The consideration received (including any new asset obtained less any new liability assumed) shall be recognised in surplus or deficit.

24. If the transferred asset is part of a larger financial asset (e.g., when an entity transfers interest cash flows that are part of a debt instrument, see paragraph 13(a)) and the part transferred qualifies for derecognition in its entirety, the previous carrying amount of the larger financial asset shall be allocated between the part that continues to be recognised and the part that is derecognised, on the basis of the relative fair values of those parts on the date of the transfer. For this purpose, a retained servicing asset shall be treated as a part that continues to be recognised. The difference between:

1. The carrying amount (measured at the date of derecognition) allocated to the part derecognised; and

2. The consideration received for the part derecognised (including any new asset obtained less any new liability assumed)

shall be recognised in surplus or deficit.

25. When an entity allocates the previous carrying amount of a larger financial asset between the part that continues to be recognised and the part that is derecognised, the fair value of the part that continues to be recognised needs to be measured. When the entity has a history of selling parts similar to the part that continues to be recognised or other market transactions exist for such parts, recent prices of actual transactions provide the best estimate of its fair value. When there are no price quotes or recent market transactions to support the fair value of the part that continues to be recognised, the best estimate of the fair value is the difference between the fair value of the larger financial asset as a whole and the consideration received from the transferee for the part that is derecognised.

26. If a transfer does not result in derecognition because the entity has retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the transferred asset, the entity shall continue to recognise the transferred asset in its entirety and shall recognise a financial liability for the consideration received. In subsequent periods, the entity shall recognise any revenue on the transferred asset and any expense incurred on the financial liability.

27. If an entity neither transfers nor retains substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of a transferred asset, and retains control of the transferred asset, the entity continues to recognise the transferred asset to the extent of its continuing involvement. The extent of the entity’s continuing involvement in the transferred asset is the extent to which it is exposed to changes in the value of the transferred asset. For example:

1. When the entity’s continuing involvement takes the form of guaranteeing the transferred asset, the extent of the entity’s continuing involvement is the lower of (i) the amount of the asset and (ii) the maximum amount of the consideration received that the entity could be required to repay (‘the guarantee amount’).

2. When the entity’s continuing involvement takes the form of a written or purchased option (or both) on the transferred asset, the extent of the entity’s continuing involvement is the amount of the transferred asset that the entity may repurchase. However, in the case of a written put option on an asset that is measured at fair value, the extent of the entity’s continuing involvement is limited to the lower of the fair value of the transferred asset and the option exercise price (see paragraph AG34).

3. When the entity’s continuing involvement takes the form of a cash-settled option or similar provision on the transferred asset, the extent of the entity’s continuing involvement is measured in the same way as that which results from non-cash settled options as set out in (b) above.

28. When an entity continues to recognise an asset to the extent of its continuing involvement, the entity also recognises an associated liability. Despite the other measurement requirements in this Standard, the transferred asset and the associated liability are measured on a basis that reflects the rights and obligations that the entity has retained. The associated liability is measured in such a way that the net carrying amount of the transferred asset and the associated liability is:

1. The amortised cost of the rights and obligations retained by the entity, if the transferred asset is measured at amortised cost, or

2. Equal to the fair value of the rights and obligations retained by the entity when measured on a stand-alone basis, if the transferred asset is measured at fair value.

29. The entity shall continue to recognise any revenue arising on the transferred asset to the extent of its continuing involvement and shall recognise any expense incurred on the associated liability.

30. For the purpose of subsequent measurement, recognised changes in the fair value of the transferred asset and the associated liability are accounted for consistently with each other in accordance with paragraph 101, and shall not be offset.

31. If an entity’s continuing involvement is in only a part of a financial asset (e.g., when an entity retains an option to repurchase part of a transferred asset, or retains a residual interest that does not result in the retention of substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership and the entity retains control), the entity allocates the previous carrying amount of the financial asset between the part it continues to recognise under continuing involvement, and the part it no longer recognises on the basis of the relative fair values of those parts on the date of the transfer. For this purpose, the requirements of paragraph 25 apply. The difference between:

1. The carrying amount (measured at the date of derecognition) allocated to the part that is no longer recognised; and

2. The consideration received for the part no longer recognised shall be recognised in surplus or deficit.

32. If the transferred asset is measured at amortised cost, the option in this Standard to designate a financial liability as at fair value through surplus or deficit is not applicable to the associated liability.

33. If a transferred asset continues to be recognised, the asset and the associated liability shall not be offset. Similarly, the entity shall not offset any revenue arising from the transferred asset with any expense incurred on the associated liability (see paragraph 47 of PBE IPSAS 28).

34. If a transferor provides non-cash collateral (such as debt or equity instruments) to the transferee, the accounting for the collateral by the transferor and the transferee depends on whether the transferee has the right to sell or repledge the collateral and on whether the transferor has defaulted. The transferor and transferee shall account for the collateral as follows:

1. If the transferee has the right by contract or custom to sell or repledge the collateral, then the transferor shall reclassify that asset in its statement of financial position (e.g., as a loaned asset, pledged equity instruments or repurchase receivable) separately from other assets.

2. If the transferee sells collateral pledged to it, it shall recognise the proceeds from the sale and a liability measured at fair value for its obligation to return the collateral.

3. If the transferor defaults under the terms of the contract and is no longer entitled to redeem the collateral, it shall derecognise the collateral, and the transferee shall recognise the collateral as its asset initially measured at fair value or, if it has already sold the collateral, derecognise its obligation to return the collateral.

4. Except as provided in (c), the transferor shall continue to carry the collateral as its asset, and the transferee shall not recognise the collateral as an asset.

35. An entity shall remove a financial liability (or a part of a financial liability) from its statement of financial position when, and only when, it is extinguished—i.e., when the obligation specified in the contract is discharged, waived, cancelled or expires.

36. An exchange between an existing borrower and lender of debt instruments with substantially different terms shall be accounted for as an extinguishment of the original financial liability and the recognition of a new financial liability. Similarly, a substantial modification of the terms of an existing financial liability or a part of it (whether or not attributable to the financial difficulty of the debtor) shall be accounted for as an extinguishment of the original financial liability and the recognition of a new financial liability.

37. The difference between the carrying amount of a financial liability (or part of a financial liability) extinguished or transferred to another party and the consideration paid, including any non-cash assets transferred or liabilities assumed, shall be recognised in surplus or deficit. Where an obligation is waived by the lender or assumed by a third party as part of a non-exchange transaction, an entity applies PBE IPSAS 23.

38. If an entity repurchases a part of a financial liability, the entity shall allocate the previous carrying amount of the financial liability between the part that continues to be recognised and the part that is derecognised based on the relative fair values of those parts on the date of the repurchase. The difference between (a) the carrying amount allocated to the part derecognised and (b) the consideration paid, including any non- cash assets transferred or liabilities assumed, for the part derecognised shall be recognised in surplus or deficit.

39. Unless paragraph 44 applies, an entity shall classify financial assets as subsequently measured at amortised cost, fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense or fair value through surplus or deficit on the basis of both:

1. The entity’s management model for financial assets and

2. The contractual cash flow characteristics of the financial asset.

40. A financial asset shall be measured at amortised cost if both of the following conditions are met:

1. The financial asset is held within a management model whose objective is to hold financial assets in order to collect contractual cash flows and

2. The contractual terms of the financial asset give rise on specified dates to cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding.

Paragraphs AG48–AG88 provide guidance on how to apply these conditions.

41. A financial asset shall be measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense if both of the following conditions are met:

1. The financial asset is held within a management model whose objective is achieved by both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets and

2. The contractual terms of the financial asset give rise on specified dates to cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding.

Paragraphs AG48–AG88 provide guidance on how to apply these conditions.

42. For the purpose of applying paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b):

1. Principal is the fair value of the financial asset at initial recognition. Paragraph AG64 provides additional guidance on the meaning of principal.

2. Interest consists of consideration for the time value of money, for the credit risk associated with the principal amount outstanding during a particular period of time and for other basic lending risks and costs, as well as a profit margin. Paragraphs AG63 and AG67–AG71 provide additional guidance on the meaning of interest, including the meaning of the time value of money.

43. A financial asset shall be measured at fair value through surplus or deficit unless it is measured at amortised cost in accordance with paragraph 40 or at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41. However, an entity may make an irrevocable election at initial recognition for particular investments in equity instruments that would otherwise be measured at fair value through surplus or deficit to present subsequent changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense (see paragraphs 106–107).

44. Despite paragraphs 39–43, an entity may, at initial recognition, irrevocably designate a financial asset as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if doing so eliminates or significantly reduces a measurement or recognition inconsistency (sometimes referred to as an ‘accounting mismatch’) that would otherwise arise from measuring assets or liabilities or recognising the gains and losses on them on different bases (see paragraphs AG91–AG94).

45. An entity shall classify all financial liabilities as subsequently measured at amortised cost, except for:

1. Financial liabilities at fair value through surplus or deficit. Such liabilities, including derivatives that are liabilities, shall be subsequently measured at fair value.

2. Financial liabilities that arise when a transfer of a financial asset does not qualify for derecognition or when the continuing involvement approach applies. Paragraphs 26 and 28 apply to the measurement of such financial liabilities.

3. Financial guarantee contracts. After initial recognition, an issuer of such a contract shall (unless paragraph 45(a) or (b) applies) subsequently measure it at the higher of:

   1. The amount of the loss allowance determined in accordance with paragraphs 73–93; and

   2. The amount initially recognised (see paragraph 57) less, when appropriate, the cumulative amount of amortisation recognised in accordance with the principles of PBE IPSAS 9.

4. Commitments to provide a loan at a below-market interest rate. An issuer of such a commitment shall (unless paragraph 45(a) applies) subsequently measure it at the higher of:

   1. The amount of the loss allowance determined in accordance with paragraphs 73–93; and

   2. The amount initially recognised (see paragraph 57) less, when appropriate, the cumulative amount of amortisation recognised in accordance with the principles of PBE IPSAS 9.

5. Contingent consideration recognised by an acquirer in a PBE combination to which PBE IPSAS 40 applies. Such contingent consideration shall subsequently be measured at fair value with changes recognised in surplus or deficit.

46. An entity may, at initial recognition, irrevocably designate a financial liability as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit when permitted by paragraph 51, or when doing so results in more relevant information, because either:

1. It eliminates or significantly reduces a measurement or recognition inconsistency (sometimes referred to as ‘an accounting mismatch’) that would otherwise arise from measuring assets or liabilities or recognising the gains and losses on them on different bases (see paragraphs AG91–AG94); or

2. A group of financial liabilities or financial assets and financial liabilities is managed and its performance is evaluated on a fair value basis, in accordance with a documented risk management or investment strategy, and information about the group is provided internally on that basis to the entity’s key management personnel (as defined in PBE IPSAS 20 Related Party Disclosures), for example, the entity’s governing body and chief executive officer (see paragraphs AG95–AG98).

47. An embedded derivative is a component of a hybrid contract that also includes a non-derivative host— with the effect that some of the cash flows of the combined instrument vary in a way similar to a stand- alone derivative. An embedded derivative causes some or all of the cash flows that otherwise would be required by the contract to be modified according to a specified interest rate, financial instrument price, commodity price, foreign exchange rate, index of prices or rates, credit rating or credit index, or other variable, provided in the case of a non-financial variable that the variable is not specific to a party to the contract. A derivative that is attached to a financial instrument but is contractually transferable independently of that instrument, or has a different counterparty, is not an embedded derivative, but a separate financial instrument.

48. If a hybrid contract contains a host that is an asset within the scope of this Standard, an entity shall apply the requirements in paragraphs 39–44 to the entire hybrid contract.

49. If a hybrid contract contains a host that is not an asset within the scope of this Standard, an embedded derivative shall be separated from the host and accounted for as a derivative under this Standard if, and only if:

1. The economic characteristics and risks of the embedded derivative are not closely related to the economic characteristics and risks of the host (see paragraphs AG103 and AG106);

2. A separate instrument with the same terms as the embedded derivative would meet the definition of a derivative; and

3. The hybrid contract is not measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognised in surplus or deficit (i.e., a derivative that is embedded in a financial liability at fair value through surplus or deficit is not separated).

50. If an embedded derivative is separated, the host contract shall be accounted for in accordance with the appropriate Standards. This Standard does not address whether an embedded derivative shall be presented separately in the statement of financial position.

51. Despite paragraphs 49 and 50, if a contract contains one or more embedded derivatives and the host is not an asset within the scope of this Standard, an entity may designate the entire hybrid contract as at fair value through surplus or deficit unless:

1. The embedded derivative(s) do(es) not significantly modify the cash flows that otherwise would be required by the contract; or

2. It is clear with little or no analysis when a similar hybrid instrument is first considered that separation of the embedded derivative(s) is prohibited, such as a prepayment option embedded in a loan that permits the holder to prepay the loan for approximately its amortised cost.

52. If an entity is required by this Standard to separate an embedded derivative from its host, but is unable to measure the embedded derivative separately either at acquisition or at the end of a subsequent financial reporting period, it shall designate the entire hybrid contract as at fair value through surplus or deficit.

53. If an entity is unable to measure reliably the fair value of an embedded derivative on the basis of its terms and conditions, the fair value of the embedded derivative is the difference between the fair value of the hybrid contract and the fair value of the host. If the entity is unable to measure the fair value of the embedded derivative using this method, paragraph 52 applies and the hybrid contract is designated as at fair value through surplus or deficit.

54. When, and only when, an entity changes its management model financial assets it shall reclassify all affected financial assets in accordance with paragraphs 39–43. See paragraphs 94–100, AG111– AG113 and AG220–AG221 for additional guidance on reclassifying financial assets.

55. An entity shall not reclassify any financial liability.

56. The following changes in circumstances are not reclassifications for the purposes of paragraphs 54–55:

1. An item that was previously a designated and effective hedging instrument in a cash flow hedge or net investment hedge no longer qualifies as such;

2. An item becomes a designated and effective hedging instrument in a cash flow hedge or net investment hedge; and

3. Changes in measurement in accordance with paragraphs 152–155.

57. Except for short-term receivables and payables within the scope of paragraph 60, at initial recognition, an entity shall measure a financial asset or financial liability at its fair value plus or minus, in the case of a financial asset or financial liability not at fair value through surplus or deficit, transaction costs that are directly attributable to the acquisition or issue of the financial asset or financial liability.

58. However, if the fair value of the financial asset or financial liability at initial recognition differs from the transaction price, an entity shall apply paragraph AG117.

59. When an entity uses settlement date accounting for an asset that is subsequently measured at amortised cost, the asset is recognised initially at its fair value on the trade date (see paragraphs AG17–AG20).

60. Despite the requirement in paragraph 57, at initial recognition, an entity may measure short-term receivables and payables at the original invoice amount if the effect of discounting is immaterial.

61. After initial recognition, an entity shall measure a financial asset in accordance with paragraphs 39- 44 at:

1. Amortised cost;

2. Fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense; or

3. Fair value through surplus or deficit.

62. An entity shall apply the impairment requirements in 73–93 to financial assets that are measured at amortised cost in accordance with paragraph 40 and to financial assets that are measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41.

63. An entity shall apply the hedge accounting requirements in paragraphs 137–143 (and, if applicable, paragraphs 99–105 of PBE IPSAS 29 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement for the fair value hedge accounting for a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk) to a financial asset that is designated as a hedged item.²

64. After initial recognition, an entity shall measure a financial liability in accordance with paragraphs 45–46.

65. An entity shall apply the hedge accounting requirements in paragraphs 137–143 (and, if applicable, paragraphs 99–105 of PBE IPSAS 29 for the fair value hedge accounting for a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk) to a financial liability that is designated as a hedged item.

66. In determining the fair value of a financial asset or a financial liability for the purpose of applying this Standard, PBE IPSAS 28 or PBE IPSAS 30, an entity shall apply paragraphs AG144–AG155 of Appendix A.

67. The best evidence of fair value is quoted prices in an active market. If the market for a financial instrument is not active, an entity establishes fair value by using a valuation technique. The objective of using a valuation technique is to establish what the transaction price would have been on the measurement date in an arm’s length exchange motivated by normal operating business considerations. Valuation techniques include using recent arm’s length market transactions between knowledgeable, willing parties, if available, reference to the current fair value of another instrument that is substantially the same, discounted cash flow analysis and option pricing models. If there is a valuation technique commonly used by market participants to price the instrument and that technique has been demonstrated to provide reliable estimates of prices obtained in actual market transactions, the entity uses that technique. The chosen valuation technique makes maximum use of market inputs and relies as little as possible on entity-specific inputs. It incorporates all factors that market participants would consider in setting a price and is consistent with accepted economic methodologies for pricing financial instruments. Periodically, an entity calibrates the valuation technique and tests it for validity using prices from any observable current market transactions in the same instrument (i.e., without modification or repackaging) or based on any available observable market data.

68. The fair value of a financial liability with a demand feature (e.g., a demand deposit) is not less than the amount payable on demand, discounted from the first date that the amount could be required to be paid.

69. Interest revenue shall be calculated by using the effective interest method (see paragraphs 9 and AG156–AG162). This shall be calculated by applying the effective interest rate to the gross carrying amount of a financial asset except for:

1. Purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets. For those financial assets, the entity shall apply the credit-adjusted effective interest rate to the amortised cost of the financial asset from initial recognition.

2. Financial assets that are not purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets but subsequently have become credit-impaired financial assets. For those financial assets, the entity shall apply the effective interest rate to the amortised cost of the financial asset in subsequent reporting periods.

70. An entity that, in a reporting period, calculates interest revenue by applying the effective interest method to the amortised cost of a financial asset in accordance with paragraph 69(b), shall, in subsequent reporting periods, calculate the interest revenue by applying the effective interest rate to the gross carrying amount if the credit risk on the financial instrument improves so that the financial asset is no longer credit-impaired and the improvement can be related objectively to an event occurring after the requirements in paragraph 69(b) were applied (such as an improvement in the borrower’s credit rating).

71. When the contractual cash flows of a financial asset are renegotiated or otherwise modified and the renegotiation or modification does not result in the derecognition of that financial asset in accordance with this Standard, an entity shall recalculate the gross carrying amount of the financial asset and shall recognise a modification gain or loss in surplus or deficit. The gross carrying amount of the financial asset shall be recalculated as the present value of the renegotiated or modified contractual cash flows that are discounted at the financial asset’s original effective interest rate (or credit-adjusted effective interest rate for purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets) or, when applicable, the revised effective interest rate calculated in accordance with paragraph 139. Any costs or fees incurred adjust the carrying amount of the modified financial asset and are amortised over the remaining term of the modified financial asset.

72. An entity shall directly reduce the gross carrying amount of a financial asset when the entity has no reasonable expectations of recovering a financial asset in its entirety or a portion thereof. A write-off constitutes a derecognition event (see paragraph AG37(r)).

72.1 An entity shall apply paragraphs 72.2–72.5 to a financial asset or financial liability if, and only if, the basis for determining the contractual cash flows of that financial asset or financial liability changes as a result of interest rate benchmark reform. For this purpose, the term ‘interest rate benchmark reform’ refers to the market-wide reform of an interest rate benchmark as described in paragraph 155.2.

72.2 The basis for determining the contractual cash flows of a financial asset or financial liability can change:

1. By amending the contractual terms specified at the initial recognition of the financial instrument (for example, the contractual terms are amended to replace the referenced interest rate benchmark with an alternative benchmark rate);

2. In a way that was not considered by—or contemplated in—the contractual terms at the initial recognition of the financial instrument, without amending the contractual terms (for example, the method for calculating the interest rate benchmark is altered without amending the contractual terms); and/or

3. Because of the activation of an existing contractual term (for example, an existing fallback clause is triggered).

72.3 As a practical expedient, an entity shall apply paragraph AG160 to account for a change in the basis for determining the contractual cash flows of a financial asset or financial liability that is required by interest rate benchmark reform. This practical expedient applies only to such changes and only to the extent the change is required by interest rate benchmark reform (see also paragraph 72.5). For this purpose, a change and only if, both these conditions are met:

1. The change is necessary as a direct consequence of interest rate benchmark reform; and

2. The new basis for determining the contractual cash flows is economically equivalent to the previous basis (i.e., the basis immediately preceding the change).

72.4 Examples of changes that give rise to a new basis for determining the contractual cash flows that is economically equivalent to the previous basis (i.e., the basis immediately preceding the change) are:

1. The replacement of an existing interest rate benchmark used to determine the contractual cash flows of a financial asset or financial liability with an alternative benchmark rate—or the implementation of such a reform of an interest rate benchmark by altering the method used to calculate the interest rate benchmark—with the addition of a fixed spread necessary to compensate for the basis difference between the existing interest rate benchmark and the alternative benchmark rate;

2. Changes to the reset period, reset dates or the number of days between coupon payment dates in order to implement the reform of an interest rate benchmark; and

3. The addition of a fallback provision to the contractual terms of a financial asset or financial liability to enable any change described in (a) and (b) above to be implemented.

72.5 If changes are made to a financial asset or financial liability in addition to changes to the basis for determining the contractual cash flows required by interest rate benchmark reform, an entity shall first apply the practical expedient in paragraph 72.3 to the changes required by interest rate benchmark reform. The entity shall then apply the applicable requirements in this Standard to any additional changes to which the practical expedient does not apply. If the additional change does not result in the derecognition of the financial asset or financial liability, the entity shall apply paragraph 71 or paragraph AG161, as applicable, to account for that additional change. If the additional change results in the derecognition of the financial asset or financial liability, the entity shall apply the derecognition requirements.

73. An entity shall recognise a loss allowance for expected credit losses on a financial asset that is measured in accordance with paragraphs 40 or 41 , a lease receivable, or a loan commitment and a financial guarantee contract to which the impairment requirements apply in accordance with paragraphs 2(g), 45(c) or 45(d).

74. An entity shall apply the impairment requirements for the recognition and measurement of a loss allowance for financial assets that are measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41. However, the loss allowance shall be recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense and shall not reduce the carrying amount of the financial asset in the statement of financial position.

75. Subject to paragraphs 85–88, at each reporting date, an entity shall measure the loss allowance for a financial instrument at an amount equal to the lifetime expected credit losses if the credit risk on that financial instrument has increased significantly since initial recognition.

76. The objective of the impairment requirements is to recognise lifetime expected credit losses for all financial instruments for which there have been significant increases in credit risk since initial recognition — whether assessed on an individual or collective basis — considering all reasonable and supportable information, including that which is forward-looking.

77. Subject to paragraphs 85–88, if, at the reporting date, the credit risk on a financial instrument has not increased significantly since initial recognition, an entity shall measure the loss allowance for that financial instrument at an amount equal to 12-month expected credit losses.

78. For loan commitments and financial guarantee contracts, the date that the entity becomes a party to the irrevocable commitment shall be considered to be the date of initial recognition for the purposes of applying the impairment requirements.

79. If an entity has measured the loss allowance for a financial instrument at an amount equal to lifetime expected credit losses in the previous reporting period, but determines at the current reporting date that paragraph 75 is no longer met, the entity shall measure the loss allowance at an amount equal to 12-month expected credit losses at the current reporting date.

80. An entity shall recognise in surplus or deficit, as an impairment gain or loss, the amount of expected credit losses (or reversal) that is required to adjust the loss allowance at the reporting date to the amount that is required to be recognised in accordance with this Standard.

81. At each reporting date, an entity shall assess whether the credit risk on a financial instrument has increased significantly since initial recognition. When making the assessment, an entity shall use the change in the risk of a default occurring over the expected life of the financial instrument instead of the change in the amount of expected credit losses. To make that assessment, an entity shall compare the risk of a default occurring on the financial instrument as at the reporting date with the risk of a default occurring on the financial instrument as at the date of initial recognition and consider reasonable and supportable information, that is available without undue cost or effort, that is indicative of significant increases in credit risk since initial recognition.

82. An entity may assume that the credit risk on a financial instrument has not increased significantly since initial recognition if the financial instrument is determined to have low credit risk at the reporting date (see paragraphs AG186–AG188).

83. If reasonable and supportable forward-looking information is available without undue cost or effort, an entity cannot rely solely on past due information when determining whether credit risk has increased significantly since initial recognition. However, when information that is more forward-looking than past due status (either on an individual or a collective basis) is not available without undue cost or effort, an entity may use past due information to determine whether there have been significant increases in credit risk since initial recognition. Regardless of the way in which an entity assesses significant increases in credit risk, there is a rebuttable presumption that the credit risk on a financial asset has increased significantly since initial recognition when contractual payments are more than 30 days past due. An entity can rebut this presumption if the entity has reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort, that demonstrates that the credit risk has not increased significantly since initial recognition even though the contractual payments are more than 30 days past due. When an entity determines that there have been significant increases in credit risk before contractual payments are more than 30 days past due, the rebuttable presumption does not apply.

84. If the contractual cash flows on a financial asset have been renegotiated or modified and the financial asset was not derecognised, an entity shall assess whether there has been a significant increase in the credit risk of the financial instrument in accordance with paragraph 75 by comparing:

1. The risk of a default occurring at the reporting date (based on the modified contractual terms); and

2. The risk of a default occurring at initial recognition (based on the original, unmodified contractual terms).

85. Despite paragraphs 75 and 77, at the reporting date, an entity shall only recognise the cumulative changes in lifetime expected credit losses since initial recognition as a loss allowance for purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets.

86. At each reporting date, an entity shall recognise in surplus or deficit the amount of the change in lifetime expected credit losses as an impairment gain or loss. An entity shall recognise favourable changes in lifetime expected credit losses as an impairment gain, even if the lifetime expected credit losses are less than the amount of expected credit losses that were included in the estimated cash flows on initial recognition.

87. Despite paragraphs 75 and 77, an entity shall always measure the loss allowance at an amount equal to lifetime expected credit losses for:

1. Receivables that result from exchange transactions that are within the scope of PBE IPSAS 9 and non-exchange transactions within the scope of PBE IPSAS 23.

2. Lease receivables that result from transactions that are within the scope of PBE IPSAS 13, if the entity chooses as its accounting policy to measure the loss allowance at an amount equal to lifetime expected credit losses. That accounting policy shall be applied to all lease receivables but may be applied separately to finance and operating lease receivables.

88. An entity may select its accounting policy for trade receivables and lease receivables independently of each other.

89. The requirements for purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets (see paragraphs 9 and 85 to 86) do not apply to short-term receivables.

90. An entity shall measure expected credit losses of a financial instrument in a way that reflects:

1. An unbiased and probability-weighted amount that is determined by evaluating a range of possible outcomes;

2. The time value of money; and

3. Reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort at the reporting date about past events, current conditions and forecasts of future economic conditions.

91. When measuring expected credit losses, an entity need not necessarily identify every possible scenario. However, it shall consider the risk or probability that a credit loss occurs by reflecting the possibility that a credit loss occurs and the possibility that no credit loss occurs, even if the possibility of a credit loss occurring is very low.

92. The maximum period to consider when measuring expected credit losses is the maximum contractual period (including extension options) over which the entity is exposed to credit risk and not a longer period, even if that longer period is consistent with business practice.

93. However, some financial instruments include both a loan and an undrawn commitment component and the entity’s contractual ability to demand repayment and cancel the undrawn commitment does not limit the entity’s exposure to credit losses to the contractual notice period. For such financial instruments, and only those financial instruments, the entity shall measure expected credit losses over the period that the entity is exposed to credit risk and expected credit losses would not be mitigated by credit risk management actions, even if that period extends beyond the maximum contractual period.

94. If an entity reclassifies financial assets in accordance with paragraph 54, it shall apply the reclassification prospectively from the reclassification date. The entity shall not restate any previously recognised gains, losses (including impairment gains or losses) or interest. Paragraphs 95–100 set out the requirements for reclassifications.

95. If an entity reclassifies a financial asset out of the amortised cost measurement category and into the fair value through surplus or deficit measurement category, its fair value is measured at the reclassification date. Any gain or loss arising from a difference between the previous amortised cost of the financial asset and fair value is recognised in surplus or deficit.

96. If an entity reclassifies a financial asset out of the fair value through surplus or deficit measurement category and into the amortised cost measurement category, its fair value at the reclassification date becomes its new gross carrying amount. (See paragraph AG221 for guidance on determining an effective interest rate and a loss allowance at the reclassification date.)

97. If an entity reclassifies a financial asset out of the amortised cost measurement category and into the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category, its fair value is measured at the reclassification date. Any gain or loss arising from a difference between the previous amortised cost of the financial asset and fair value is recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense. The effective interest rate and the measurement of expected credit losses are not adjusted as a result of the reclassification. (See paragraph AG220.)

98. If an entity reclassifies a financial asset out of the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category and into the amortised cost measurement category, the financial asset is reclassified at its fair value at the reclassification date. However, the cumulative gain or loss previously recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense is removed from net assets/equity and adjusted against the fair value of the financial asset at the reclassification date. As a result, the financial asset is measured at the reclassification date as if it had always been measured at amortised cost. This adjustment affects other comprehensive revenue and expense but does not affect surplus or deficit and therefore is not a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1 Presentation of Financial Reports). The effective interest rate and the measurement of expected credit losses are not adjusted as a result of the reclassification. (See paragraph AG220.)

99. If an entity reclassifies a financial asset out of the fair value through surplus or deficit measurement category and into the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category, the financial asset continues to be measured at fair value. (See paragraph AG221 for guidance on determining an effective interest rate and a loss allowance at the reclassification date.)

100. If an entity reclassifies a financial asset out of the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category and into the fair value through surplus or deficit measurement category, the financial asset continues to be measured at fair value. The cumulative gain or loss previously recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense is reclassified from net assets/equity to surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1) at the reclassification date.

101. A gain or loss on a financial asset or financial liability that is measured at fair value shall be recognised in surplus or deficit unless:

1. It is part of a hedging relationship (see paragraphs 137–143 and, if applicable, paragraphs 99- 105 of PBE IPSAS 29 for the fair value hedge accounting for a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk);

2. It is an investment in an equity instrument and the entity has elected to present gains and losses on that investment in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106;

3. It is a financial liability designated as at fair value through surplus or deficit and the entity is required to present the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 108; or

4. It is a financial asset measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41 and the entity is required to recognise some changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 111.

102. Dividends or similar distributions are recognised in surplus or deficit only when:

1. The entity’s right to receive payment of the dividend is established;

2. It is probable that the economic benefits associated with the dividend will flow to the entity; and

3. The amount of the dividend can be measured reliably.

103. A gain or loss on a financial asset that is measured at amortised cost and is not part of a hedging relationship (see paragraphs 137–143 and, if applicable, paragraphs 99–105 of PBE IPSAS 29 for the fair value hedge accounting for a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk) shall be recognised in surplus or deficit when the financial asset is derecognised, reclassified in accordance with paragraph 95, through the amortisation process or in order to recognise impairment gains or losses. An entity shall apply paragraphs 95 and 97 if it reclassifies financial assets out of the amortised cost measurement category. A gain or loss on a financial liability that is measured at amortised cost and is not part of a hedging relationship (see paragraphs 137–143 and, if applicable, paragraphs 99–105 of PBE IPSAS 29 for the fair value hedge accounting for a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk) shall be recognised in surplus or deficit when the financial liability is derecognised and through the amortisation process. (See paragraph AG224 for guidance on foreign exchange gains or losses.)

104. A gain or loss on financial assets or financial liabilities that are hedged items in a hedging relationship shall be recognised in accordance with paragraphs 137–143 and, if applicable, paragraphs 99–105 of PBE IPSAS 29 for the fair value hedge accounting for a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk.

105. If an entity recognises financial assets using settlement date accounting (see paragraphs 11, AG17 and AG20), any change in the fair value of the asset to be received during the period between the trade date and the settlement date is not recognised for assets measured at amortised cost. For assets measured at fair value, however, the change in fair value shall be recognised in surplus or deficit or in other comprehensive revenue and expense, as appropriate in accordance with paragraph 101. The trade date shall be considered the date of initial recognition for the purposes of applying the impairment requirements.

106. At initial recognition, an entity may make an irrevocable election to present in other comprehensive revenue and expense subsequent changes in the fair value of an investment in an equity instrument within the scope of this Standard that is neither held for trading nor contingent consideration recognised by an acquirer in a PBE combination to which PBE IPSAS 40 applies. (See paragraph AG226 for guidance on foreign exchange gains or losses.)

107. If an entity makes the election in paragraph 106, it shall recognise in surplus or deficit dividends or similar distributions from that investment in accordance with paragraph 102.

108. An entity shall present a gain or loss on a financial liability that is designated as at fair value through surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraph 46 or paragraph 51 as follows:

1. The amount of change in the fair value of the financial liability that is attributable to changes in the credit risk of that liability shall be presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense (see paragraphs AG236–AG243), and

2. The remaining amount of change in the fair value of the liability shall be presented in surplus or deficit

unless the treatment of the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk described in (a) would create or enlarge an accounting mismatch in surplus or deficit (in which case paragraph 109 applies). Paragraphs AG228–AG230 and AG233–AG235 provide guidance on determining whether an accounting mismatch would be created or enlarged.

109. If the requirements in paragraph 108 would create or enlarge an accounting mismatch in surplus or deficit, an entity shall present all gains or losses on that liability (including the effects of changes in the credit risk of that liability) in surplus or deficit.

110. Despite the requirements in paragraphs 108 and 109, an entity shall present in surplus or deficit all gains and losses on loan commitments and financial guarantee contracts that are designated as at fair value through surplus or deficit.

111. A gain or loss on a financial asset measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41 shall be recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense, except for impairment gains or losses (see paragraphs 73–93) and foreign exchange gains and losses (see paragraphs AG224–AG225), until the financial asset is derecognised or reclassified. When the financial asset is derecognised the cumulative gain or loss previously recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense is reclassified from net assets/equity to surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1). If the financial asset is reclassified out of the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category, the entity shall account for the cumulative gain or loss that was previously recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraphs 98 and 100. Interest calculated using the effective interest method is recognised in surplus or deficit.

112. As described in paragraph 111, if a financial asset is measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41, the amounts that are recognised in surplus or deficit are the same as the amounts that would have been recognised in surplus or deficit if the financial asset had been measured at amortised cost.

113. The objective of hedge accounting is to represent, in the financial statements, the effect of an entity’s risk management activities that use financial instruments to manage exposures arising from particular risks that could affect surplus or deficit (or other comprehensive revenue and expense, in the case of investments in equity instruments for which an entity has elected to present changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106). This approach aims to convey the context of hedging instruments for which hedge accounting is applied in order to allow insight into their purpose and effect.

114. An entity may choose to designate a hedging relationship between a hedging instrument and a hedged item in accordance with paragraphs 116–128 and AG244–AG274. For hedging relationships that meet the qualifying criteria, an entity shall account for the gain or loss on the hedging instrument and the hedged item in accordance with paragraphs 130–143 and AG294–AG321. When the hedged item is a group of items, an entity shall comply with the additional requirements in paragraphs 146–151 and AG333–AG348.

115. For a fair value hedge of the interest rate exposure of a portfolio of financial assets or financial liabilities (and only for such a hedge), an entity may apply the hedge accounting requirements in PBE IPSAS 29 instead of those in this Standard. In that case, the entity must also apply the specific requirements for the fair value hedge accounting for a portfolio hedge of interest rate risk and designate as the hedged item a portion that is a currency amount (see paragraphs 91, 100 and AG157–AG175 of PBE IPSAS 29).

116. A derivative measured at fair value through surplus or deficit may be designated as a hedging instrument, except for some written options (see paragraph AG247).

117. A non-derivative financial asset or a non-derivative financial liability measured at fair value through surplus or deficit may be designated as a hedging instrument unless it is a financial liability designated as at fair value through surplus or deficit for which the amount of its change in fair value that is attributable to changes in the credit risk of that liability is presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 108. For a hedge of foreign currency risk, the foreign currency risk component of a non-derivative financial asset or a non-derivative financial liability may be designated as a hedging instrument provided that it is not an investment in an equity instrument for which an entity has elected to present changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106.

118. For hedge accounting purposes, only contracts with a party external to the reporting entity (i.e., external to the economic entity or individual entity that is being reported on) can be designated as hedging instruments.

119. A qualifying instrument must be designated in its entirety as a hedging instrument. The only exceptions permitted are:

1. Separating the intrinsic value and time value of an option contract and designating as the hedging instrument only the change in intrinsic value of an option and not the change in its time value (see paragraphs 144 and AG322–AG326);

2. Separating the forward element and the spot element of a forward contract and designating as the hedging instrument only the change in the value of the spot element of a forward contract and not the forward element; similarly, the foreign currency basis spread may be separated and excluded from the designation of a financial instrument as the hedging instrument (see paragraphs 145 and AG327–AG332); and

3. A proportion of the entire hedging instrument, such as 50 per cent of the nominal amount, may be designated as the hedging instrument in a hedging relationship. However, a hedging instrument may not be designated for a part of its change in fair value that results from only a portion of the time period during which the hedging instrument remains outstanding.

120. An entity may view in combination, and jointly designate as the hedging instrument, any combination of the following (including those circumstances in which the risk or risks arising from some hedging instruments offset those arising from others):

1. Derivatives or a proportion of them; and

2. Non-derivatives or a proportion of them.

121. However, a derivative instrument that combines a written option and a purchased option (for example, an interest rate collar) does not qualify as a hedging instrument if it is, in effect, a net written option at the date of designation (unless it qualifies in accordance with paragraph AG247). Similarly, two or more instruments (or proportions of them) may be jointly designated as the hedging instrument only if, in combination, they are not, in effect, a net written option at the date of designation (unless it qualifies in accordance with paragraph AG247).

122. A hedged item can be a recognised asset or liability, an unrecognised firm commitment, a forecast transaction or a net investment in a foreign operation. The hedged item can be:

1. A single item; or

2. A group of items (subject to paragraphs 146–151 and AG333–AG348).

A hedged item can also be a component of such an item or group of items (see paragraphs 128 and AG256–AG274).

123. The hedged item must be reliably measurable.

124. If a hedged item is a forecast transaction (or a component thereof), that transaction must be highly probable.

125. An aggregated exposure that is a combination of an exposure that could qualify as a hedged item in accordance with paragraph 122 and a derivative may be designated as a hedged item (see paragraphs AG252–AG253). This includes a forecast transaction of an aggregated exposure (i.e., uncommitted but anticipated future transactions that would give rise to an exposure and a derivative) if that aggregated exposure is highly probable and, once it has occurred and is therefore no longer forecast, is eligible as a hedged item.

126. For hedge accounting purposes, only assets, liabilities, firm commitments or highly probable forecast transactions with a party external to the reporting entity can be designated as hedged items. Hedge accounting can be applied to transactions between entities in the same economic entity only in the individual or separate financial statements of those entities and not in the consolidated financial statements of the economic entity, except for:

1. The consolidated financial statements of an investment entity, as defined in PBE IPSAS 35, where transactions between an investment entity and its controlled entities measured at fair value through surplus or deficit will not be eliminated in the consolidated financial statements; or

2. The consolidated financial statements of a controlling entity of an investment entity, as defined in PBE IPSAS 35, that is not itself an investment entity, where transactions between a controlled investment entity and the investments of a controlled investment entity measured at fair value through surplus or deficit will not be eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.

127. However, as an exception to paragraph 126, the foreign currency risk of a monetary item within an economic entity (for example, a payable/receivable between two controlled entities) may qualify as a hedged item in the consolidated financial statements if it results in an exposure to foreign exchange rate gains or losses that are not fully eliminated on consolidation in accordance with PBE IPSAS 4 The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates. In accordance with PBE IPSAS 4, foreign exchange rate gains and losses on monetary items within an economic entity are not fully eliminated on consolidation when the monetary item is transacted between two entities within the economic entity that have different functional currencies. In addition, the foreign currency risk of a highly probable forecast transaction within the economic entity may qualify as a hedged item in consolidated financial statements provided that the transaction is denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of the entity entering into that transaction and the foreign currency risk will affect consolidated surplus or deficit.

128. An entity may designate an item in its entirety or a component of an item as the hedged item in a hedging relationship. An entire item comprises all changes in the cash flows or fair value of an item. A component comprises less than the entire fair value change or cash flow variability of an item. In that case, an entity may designate only the following types of components (including combinations) as hedged items:

1. Only changes in the cash flows or fair value of an item attributable to a specific risk or risks (risk component), provided that, based on an assessment within the context of the particular market structure, the risk component is separately identifiable and reliably measurable (see paragraphs AG257–AG264). Risk components include a designation of only changes in the cash flows or the fair value of a hedged item above or below a specified price or other variable (a one- sided risk).

1. One or more selected contractual cash flows.

2. Components of a nominal amount, i.e., a specified part of the amount of an item (see paragraphs AG265–AG269).

129. A hedging relationship qualifies for hedge accounting only if all of the following criteria are met:

1. The hedging relationship consists only of eligible hedging instruments and eligible hedged items.

2. At the inception of the hedging relationship there is formal designation and documentation of the hedging relationship and the entity’s risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedge. That documentation shall include identification of the hedging instrument, the hedged item, the nature of the risk being hedged and how the entity will assess whether the hedging relationship meets the hedge effectiveness requirements (including its analysis of the sources of hedge ineffectiveness and how it determines the hedge ratio).

3. The hedging relationship meets all of the following hedge effectiveness requirements:

   1. There is an economic relationship between the hedged item and the hedging instrument (see paragraphs AG278–AG280);

   2. The effect of credit risk does not dominate the value changes that result from that economic relationship (see paragraphs AG281–AG282); and

   3. The hedge ratio of the hedging relationship is the same as that resulting from the quantity of the hedged item that the entity actually hedges and the quantity of the hedging instrument that the entity actually uses to hedge that quantity of hedged item. However, that designation shall not reflect an imbalance between the weightings of the hedged item and the hedging instrument that would create hedge ineffectiveness (irrespective of whether recognised or not) that could result in an accounting outcome that would be inconsistent with the purpose of hedge accounting (see paragraphs AG283–AG285).

130. An entity applies hedge accounting to hedging relationships that meet the qualifying criteria in paragraph 129 (which include the entity’s decision to designate the hedging relationship).

131. There are three types of hedging relationships:

1. Fair value hedge: a hedge of the exposure to changes in fair value of a recognised asset or liability or an unrecognised firm commitment, or a component of any such item, that is attributable to a particular risk and could affect surplus or deficit.

2. Cash flow hedge: a hedge of the exposure to variability in cash flows that is attributable to a particular risk associated with all, or a component of, a recognised asset or liability (such as all or some future interest payments on variable-rate debt) or a highly probable forecast transaction, and could affect surplus or deficit.

3. Hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation as defined in PBE IPSAS 4.

132. If the hedged item is an equity instrument for which an entity has elected to present changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106, the hedged exposure referred to in paragraph 131(a) must be one that could affect other comprehensive revenue and expense. In that case, and only in that case, the recognised hedge ineffectiveness is presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense.

133. A hedge of the foreign currency risk of a firm commitment may be accounted for as a fair value hedge or a cash flow hedge.

134. If a hedging relationship ceases to meet the hedge effectiveness requirement relating to the hedge ratio (see paragraph 129(c)(iii)) but the risk management objective for that designated hedging relationship remains the same, an entity shall adjust the hedge ratio of the hedging relationship so that it meets the qualifying criteria again (this is referred to in this Standard as ‘rebalancing’—see paragraphs AG300–AG314).

135. An entity shall discontinue hedge accounting prospectively only when the hedging relationship (or a part of a hedging relationship) ceases to meet the qualifying criteria (after taking into account any rebalancing of the hedging relationship, if applicable). This includes instances when the hedging instrument expires or is sold, terminated or exercised. For this purpose, the replacement or rollover of a hedging instrument into another hedging instrument is not an expiration or termination if such a replacement or rollover is part of, and consistent with, the entity’s documented risk management objective. Additionally, for this purpose there is not an expiration or termination of the hedging instrument if:

1. As a consequence of laws or regulations or the introduction of laws or regulations, the parties to the hedging instrument agree that one or more clearing counterparties replace their original counterparty to become the new counterparty to each of the parties. For this purpose, a clearing counterparty is a central counterparty (sometimes called a ‘clearing organisation’ or ‘clearing agency’) or an entity or entities, for example, a clearing member of a clearing organisation or a client of a clearing member of a clearing organisation, that are acting as a counterparty in order to effect clearing by a central counterparty. However, when the parties to the hedging instrument replace their original counterparties with different counterparties the requirement in this subparagraph is met only if each of those parties effects clearing with the same central counterparty.

2. Other changes, if any, to the hedging instrument are limited to those that are necessary to effect such a replacement of the counterparty. Such changes are limited to those that are consistent with the terms that would be expected if the hedging instrument were originally cleared with the clearing counterparty. These changes include changes in the collateral requirements, rights to offset receivables and payables balances, and charges levied.

Discontinuing hedge accounting can either affect a hedging relationship in its entirety or only a part of it (in which case hedge accounting continues for the remainder of the hedging relationship).

136. An entity shall apply:

1. Paragraph 139 when it discontinues hedge accounting for a fair value hedge for which the hedged item is (or is a component of) a financial instrument measured at amortised cost; and

2. Paragraph 141 when it discontinues hedge accounting for cash flow hedges.

137. As long as a fair value hedge meets the qualifying criteria in paragraph 129, the hedging relationship shall be accounted for as follows:

1. The gain or loss on the hedging instrument shall be recognised in surplus or deficit (or other comprehensive revenue and expense, if the hedging instrument hedges an equity instrument for which an entity has elected to present changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106).

2. The hedging gain or loss on the hedged item shall adjust the carrying amount of the hedged item (if applicable) and be recognised in surplus or deficit. If the hedged item is a financial asset (or a component thereof) that is measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41, the hedging gain or loss on the hedged item shall be recognised in surplus or deficit. However, if the hedged item is an equity instrument for which an entity has elected to present changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106, those amounts shall remain in other comprehensive revenue and expense. When a hedged item is an unrecognised firm commitment (or a component thereof), the cumulative change in the fair value of the hedged item subsequent to its designation is recognised as an asset or a liability with a corresponding gain or loss recognised in surplus or deficit.

138. When a hedged item in a fair value hedge is a firm commitment (or a component thereof) to acquire an asset or assume a liability, the initial carrying amount of the asset or the liability that results from the entity meeting the firm commitment is adjusted to include the cumulative change in the fair value of the hedged item that was recognised in the statement of financial position.

139. Any adjustment arising from paragraph 137(b) shall be amortised to surplus or deficit if the hedged item is a financial instrument (or a component thereof) measured at amortised cost. Amortisation may begin as soon as an adjustment exists and shall begin no later than when the hedged item ceases to be adjusted for hedging gains and losses. The amortisation is based on a recalculated effective interest rate at the date that amortisation begins. In the case of a financial asset (or a component thereof) that is a hedged item and that is measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41, amortisation applies in the same manner but to the amount that represents the cumulative gain or loss previously recognised in accordance with paragraph 137(b) instead of by adjusting the carrying amount.

140. As long as a cash flow hedge meets the qualifying criteria in paragraph 129, the hedging relationship shall be accounted for as follows:

1. The separate component of net assets/equity associated with the hedged item (cash flow hedge reserve) is adjusted to the lower of the following (in absolute amounts):

   1. The cumulative gain or loss on the hedging instrument from inception of the hedge; and

   2. The cumulative change in fair value (present value) of the hedged item (i.e., the present value of the cumulative change in the hedged expected future cash flows) from inception of the hedge.

2. The portion of the gain or loss on the hedging instrument that is determined to be an effective hedge (i.e., the portion that is offset by the change in the cash flow hedge reserve calculated in accordance with (a)) shall be recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense.

3. Any remaining gain or loss on the hedging instrument (or any gain or loss required to balance the change in the cash flow hedge reserve calculated in accordance with (a)) is hedge ineffectiveness that shall be recognised in surplus or deficit.

4. The amount that has been accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve in accordance with (a) shall be accounted for as follows:

   1. If a hedged forecast transaction subsequently results in the recognition of a non- financial asset or non-financial liability, or a hedged forecast transaction for a non- financial asset or a non-financial liability becomes a firm commitment for which fair value hedge accounting is applied, the entity shall remove that amount from the cash flow hedge reserve and include it directly in the initial cost or other carrying amount of the asset or the liability. This is not a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1) and hence it does not affect other comprehensive revenue and expense.

   2. For cash flow hedges other than those covered by (i), that amount shall be reclassified from the cash flow hedge reserve to surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1) in the same period or periods during which the hedged expected future cash flows affect surplus or deficit (for example, in the periods that interest revenue or interest expense is recognised or when a forecast sale occurs).

   3. However, if that amount is a loss and an entity expects that all or a portion of that loss will not be recovered in one or more future periods, it shall immediately reclassify the amount that is not expected to be recovered into surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1).

141. When an entity discontinues hedge accounting for a cash flow hedge (see paragraphs 135 and 136(b)) it shall account for the amount that has been accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve in accordance with paragraph 140(a) as follows:

1. If the hedged future cash flows are still expected to occur, that amount shall remain in the cash flow hedge reserve until the future cash flows occur or until paragraph 140(d)(iii) applies. When the future cash flows occur, paragraph 140(d) applies.

2. If the hedged future cash flows are no longer expected to occur, that amount shall be immediately reclassified from the cash flow hedge reserve to surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1). A hedged future cash flow that is no longer highly probable to occur may still be expected to occur.

142. Hedges of a net investment in a foreign operation, including a hedge of a monetary item that is accounted for as part of the net investment (see PBE IPSAS 4), shall be accounted for similarly to cash flow hedges:

1. The portion of the gain or loss on the hedging instrument that is determined to be an effective hedge shall be recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense (see paragraph 140); and

2. The ineffective portion shall be recognised in surplus or deficit.

143. The cumulative gain or loss on the hedging instrument relating to the effective portion of the hedge that has been accumulated in the foreign currency translation reserve shall be reclassified from net assets/equity to surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1) in accordance with paragraphs 57–58 of PBE IPSAS 4 on the disposal or partial disposal of the foreign operation.

144. When an entity separates the intrinsic value and time value of an option contract and designates as the hedging instrument only the change in intrinsic value of the option (see paragraph 119(a)), it shall account for the time value of the option as follows (see paragraphs AG322–AG326):

1. An entity shall distinguish the time value of options by the type of hedged item that the option hedges (see paragraph AG322):

   1. A transaction related hedged item; or

   2. A time-period related hedged item.

2. The change in fair value of the time value of an option that hedges a transaction related hedged item shall be recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense to the extent that it relates to the hedged item and shall be accumulated in a separate component of net assets/equity. The cumulative change in fair value arising from the time value of the option that has been accumulated in a separate component of net assets/equity (the ‘amount’) shall be accounted for as follows:

   1. If the hedged item subsequently results in the recognition of a non-financial asset or a non- financial liability, or a firm commitment for a non-financial asset or a non-financial liability for which fair value hedge accounting is applied, the entity shall remove the amount from the separate component of net assets/equity and include it directly in the initial cost or other carrying amount of the asset or the liability. This is not a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1) and hence does not affect other comprehensive revenue and expense.

   2. For hedging relationships other than those covered by (i), the amount shall be reclassified from the separate component of net assets/equity to surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1) in the same period or periods during which the hedged expected future cash flows affect surplus or deficit (for example, when a forecast sale occurs).

   3. However, if all or a portion of that amount is not expected to be recovered in one or more future periods, the amount that is not expected to be recovered shall be immediately reclassified into surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1).

3. The change in fair value of the time value of an option that hedges a time-period related hedged item shall be recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense to the extent that it relates to the hedged item and shall be accumulated in a separate component of net assets/equity. The time value at the date of designation of the option as a hedging instrument, to the extent that it relates to the hedged item, shall be amortised on a systematic and rational basis over the period during which the hedge adjustment for the option’s intrinsic value could affect surplus or deficit (or other comprehensive revenue and expense, if the hedged item is an equity instrument for which an entity has elected to present changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106). Hence, in each reporting period, the amortisation amount shall be reclassified from the separate component of net assets/equity to surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1). However, if hedge accounting is discontinued for the hedging relationship that includes the change in intrinsic value of the option as the hedging instrument, the net amount (i.e., including cumulative amortisation) that has been accumulated in the separate component of net assets/equity shall be immediately reclassified into surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1).

145. When an entity separates the forward element and the spot element of a forward contract and designates as the hedging instrument only the change in the value of the spot element of the forward contract, or when an entity separates the foreign currency basis spread from a financial instrument and excludes it from the designation of that financial instrument as the hedging instrument (see paragraph 119(b)), the entity may apply paragraph 144 to the forward element of the forward contract or to the foreign currency basis spread in the same manner as it is applied to the time value of an option. In that case, the entity shall apply the application guidance in paragraphs AG327–AG332.

146. A group of items (including a group of items that constitute a net position; see paragraphs AG333– AG340) is an eligible hedged item only if:

1. It consists of items (including components of items) that are, individually, eligible hedged items;

2. The items in the group are managed together on a group basis for risk management purposes; and

3. In the case of a cash flow hedge of a group of items whose variabilities in cash flows are not expected to be approximately proportional to the overall variability in cash flows of the group so that offsetting risk positions arise:

   1. It is a hedge of foreign currency risk; and

   2. The designation of that net position specifies the reporting period in which the forecast transactions are expected to affect surplus or deficit, as well as their nature and volume (see paragraphs AG339–AG340).

147. A component that is a proportion of an eligible group of items is an eligible hedged item provided that designation is consistent with the entity’s risk management objective.

148. A layer component of an overall group of items (for example, a bottom layer) is eligible for hedge accounting only if:

1. It is separately identifiable and reliably measurable;

2. The risk management objective is to hedge a layer component;

3. The items in the overall group from which the layer is identified are exposed to the same hedged risk (so that the measurement of the hedged layer is not significantly affected by which particular items from the overall group form part of the hedged layer);

4. For a hedge of existing items (for example, an unrecognised firm commitment or a recognised asset) an entity can identify and track the overall group of items from which the hedged layer is defined (so that the entity is able to comply with the requirements for the accounting for qualifying hedging relationships); and

5. Any items in the group that contain prepayment options meet the requirements for components of a nominal amount (see paragraph AG269).

149. For a hedge of a group of items with offsetting risk positions (i.e., in a hedge of a net position) whose hedged risk affects different line items in the statement of comprehensive revenue and expense, any hedging gains or losses in that statement shall be presented in a separate line from those affected by the hedged items. Hence, in that statement the amount in the line item that relates to the hedged item itself (for example, revenue or expenses) remains unaffected.

150. For assets and liabilities that are hedged together as a group in a fair value hedge, the gain or loss in the statement of financial position on the individual assets and liabilities shall be recognised as an adjustment of the carrying amount of the respective individual items comprising the group in accordance with paragraph 137(b).

151. When the hedged item is a group that is a nil net position (i.e., the hedged items among themselves fully offset the risk that is managed on a group basis), an entity is permitted to designate it in a hedging relationship that does not include a hedging instrument, provided that:

1. The hedge is part of a rolling net risk hedging strategy, whereby the entity routinely hedges new positions of the same type as time moves on (for example, when transactions move into the time horizon for which the entity hedges);

2. The hedged net position changes in size over the life of the rolling net risk hedging strategy and the entity uses eligible hedging instruments to hedge the net risk (i.e., when the net position is not nil);

3. Hedge accounting is normally applied to such net positions when the net position is not nil and it is hedged with eligible hedging instruments; and

4. Not applying hedge accounting to the nil net position would give rise to inconsistent accounting outcomes, because the accounting would not recognise the offsetting risk positions that would otherwise be recognised in a hedge of a net position.

152. If an entity uses a credit derivative that is measured at fair value through surplus or deficit to manage the credit risk of all, or a part of, a financial instrument (credit exposure) it may designate that financial instrument to the extent that it is so managed (i.e., all or a proportion of it) as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if:

1. The name of the credit exposure (for example, the borrower, or the holder of a loan commitment) matches the reference entity of the credit derivative (‘name matching’); and

2. The seniority of the financial instrument matches that of the instruments that can be delivered in accordance with the credit derivative.

An entity may make this designation irrespective of whether the financial instrument that is managed for credit risk is within the scope of this Standard (for example, an entity may designate loan commitments that are outside the scope of this Standard). The entity may designate that financial instrument at, or subsequent to, initial recognition, or while it is unrecognised. The entity shall document the designation concurrently.

153. If a financial instrument is designated in accordance with paragraph 152 as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit after its initial recognition, or was previously not recognised, the difference at the time of designation between the carrying amount, if any, and the fair value shall immediately be recognised in surplus or deficit. For financial assets measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41, the cumulative gain or loss previously recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense shall immediately be reclassified from net assets/equity to surplus or deficit as a reclassification adjustment (see PBE IPSAS 1).

154. An entity shall discontinue measuring the financial instrument that gave rise to the credit risk, or a proportion of that financial instrument, at fair value through surplus or deficit if:

1. The qualifying criteria in paragraph 152 are no longer met, for example:

   1. The credit derivative or the related financial instrument that gives rise to the credit risk expires or is sold, terminated or settled; or

   2. The credit risk of the financial instrument is no longer managed using credit derivatives. For example, this could occur because of improvements in the credit quality of the borrower or the loan commitment holder or changes to capital requirements imposed on an entity; and

2. The financial instrument that gives rise to the credit risk is not otherwise required to be measured at fair value through surplus or deficit (i.e., the entity’s management model has not changed in the meantime so that a reclassification in accordance with paragraph 54 was required).

155. When an entity discontinues measuring the financial instrument that gives rise to the credit risk, or a proportion of that financial instrument, at fair value through surplus or deficit, that financial instrument’s fair value at the date of discontinuation becomes its new carrying amount. Subsequently, the same measurement that was used before designating the financial instrument at fair value through surplus or deficit shall be applied (including amortisation that results from the new carrying amount). For example, a financial asset that had originally been classified as measured at amortised cost would revert to that measurement and its effective interest rate would be recalculated based on its new gross carrying amount on the date of discontinuing measurement at fair value through surplus or deficit.

155.1 An entity shall apply paragraphs 155.4–155.12 and paragraphs 156.3 and 184(d) to all hedging relationships directly affected by interest rate benchmark reform. These paragraphs apply only to such hedging relationships. A hedging relationship is directly affected by interest rate benchmark reform only if the reform gives rise to uncertainties about:

1. The interest rate benchmark (contractually or non-contractually specified) designated as a hedged risk; and/or

2. The timing or the amount of interest rate benchmark-based cash flows of the hedged item or of the hedging instrument.

155.2 For the purpose of applying paragraphs 155.4–155.12, the term ‘interest rate benchmark reform’ refers to the market-wide reform of an interest rate benchmark, including the replacement of an interest rate benchmark with an alternative benchmark rate such as that resulting from the recommendations set out in the Financial Stability Board’s July 2014 report ‘Reforming Major Interest Rate Benchmarks’.³

155.3 Paragraphs 155.4–155.12 provide exceptions only to the requirements specified in these paragraphs. An entity shall continue to apply all other hedge accounting requirements to hedging relationships directly affected by interest rate benchmark reform.

155.4 For the purpose of determining whether a forecast transaction (or a component thereof) is highly probable as required by paragraph 124, an entity shall assume that the interest rate benchmark on which the hedged cash flows (contractually or non-contractually specified) are based is not altered as a result of interest rate benchmark reform.

155.5 For the purpose of applying the requirement in paragraph 141 in order to determine whether the hedged future cash flows are expected to occur, an entity shall assume that the interest rate benchmark on which the hedged cash flows (contractually or non-contractually specified) are based is not altered as a result of interest rate benchmark reform.

155.6 For the purpose of applying the requirements in paragraphs 129(c)(i) and AG278–AG280, an entity shall assume that the interest rate benchmark on which the hedged cash flows and/or the hedged risk (contractually or non-contractually specified) are based, or the interest rate benchmark on which the cash flows of the hedging instrument are based, is not altered as a result of interest rate benchmark reform.

155.7 Unless paragraph 155.8 applies, for a hedge of a non-contractually specified benchmark component of interest rate risk, an entity shall apply the requirement in paragraphs 128(a) and AG257—that the risk component shall be separately identifiable—only at the inception of the hedging relationship.

155.8 When an entity, consistent with its hedge documentation, frequently resets (ie discontinues and restarts) a hedging relationship because both the hedging instrument and the hedged item frequently change (ie the entity uses a dynamic process in which both the hedged items and the hedging instruments used to manage that exposure do not remain the same for long), the entity shall apply the requirement in paragraphs 128(a) and AG257—that the risk component is separately identifiable—only when it initially designates a hedged item in that hedging relationship. A hedged item that has been assessed at the time of its initial designation in the hedging relationship, whether it was at the time of the hedge inception or subsequently, is not reassessed at any subsequent redesignation in the same hedging relationship.

155.9 An entity shall prospectively cease applying paragraph 155.4 to a hedged item at the earlier of:

1. When the uncertainty arising from interest rate benchmark reform is no longer present with respect to the timing and the amount of the interest rate benchmark-based cash flows of the hedged item; and

2. When the hedging relationship that the hedged item is part of is discontinued.

155.10 An entity shall prospectively cease applying paragraph 155.5 at the earlier of:

1. When the uncertainty arising from interest rate benchmark reform is no longer present with respect to the timing and the amount of the interest rate benchmark-based future cash flows of the hedged item; and

2. When the entire amount accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve with respect to that discontinued hedging relationship has been reclassified to surplus or deficit.

155.11 An entity shall prospectively cease applying paragraph 155.6:

1. To a hedged item, when the uncertainty arising from interest rate benchmark reform is no longer present with respect to the hedged risk or the timing and the amount of the interest rate benchmark- based cash flows of the hedged item; and

2. To a hedging instrument, when the uncertainty arising from interest rate benchmark reform is no longer present with respect to the timing and the amount of the interest rate benchmark-based cash flows of the hedging instrument.

If the hedging relationship that the hedged item and the hedging instrument are part of is discontinued earlier than the date specified in paragraph 155.11(a) or the date specified in paragraph 155.11(b), the entity shall prospectively cease applying paragraph 155.6 to that hedging relationship at the date of discontinuation.

155.12 When designating a group of items as the hedged item, or a combination of financial instruments as the hedging instrument, an entity shall prospectively cease applying paragraphs 155.4–155.6 to an individual item or financial instrument in accordance with paragraphs 155.9, 155.10, or 155.11, as relevant, when the uncertainty arising from interest rate benchmark reform is no longer present with respect to the hedged risk and/or the timing and the amount of the interest rate benchmark-based cash flows of that item or financial instrument.

155.13 An entity shall prospectively cease applying paragraphs 155.6 and 155.8 at the earlier of:

1. When changes required by interest rate benchmark reform are made to the non-contractually specified risk component applying paragraph 155.14; or

2. When the hedging relationship in which the non-contractually specified risk component is designated is discontinued.

155.14 As and when the requirements in paragraphs 155.4–155.8 cease to apply to a hedging relationship (see paragraphs 155.9–155.13), an entity shall amend the formal designation of that hedging relationship as previously documented to reflect the changes required by interest rate benchmark reform, i.e., the changes are consistent with the requirements in paragraphs 72.2–72.4. In this context, the hedge designation shall be amended only to make one or more of these changes:

1. Designating an alternative benchmark rate (contractually or non-contractually specified) as a hedged risk;

2. Amending the description of the hedged item, including the description of the designated portion of the cash flows or fair value being hedged; or

3. Amending the description of the hedging instrument.

155.15 An entity also shall apply the requirement in paragraph 155.14(c) if these three conditions are met:

1. The entity makes a change required by interest rate benchmark reform using an approach other than changing the basis for determining the contractual cash flows of the hedging instrument (as described in paragraph 72.2);

2. The original hedging instrument is not derecognised; and

3. The chosen approach is economically equivalent to changing the basis for determining the contractual cash flows of the original hedging instrument (as described in paragraphs 72.3 and 72.4).

155.16 The requirements in paragraphs 155.4–155.8 may cease to apply at different times. Therefore, in applying paragraph 155.14, an entity may be required to amend the formal designation of its hedging relationships at different times, or may be required to amend the formal designation of a hedging relationship more than once. When, and only when, such a change is made to the hedge designation, an entity shall apply paragraphs 155.20–155.25 as applicable. An entity also shall apply paragraph 137 (for a fair value hedge) or paragraph 140 (for a cash flow hedge) to account for any changes in the fair value of the hedged item or the hedging instrument.

155.17 An entity shall amend a hedging relationship as required in paragraph 155.14 by the end of the reporting period during which a change required by interest rate benchmark reform is made to the hedged risk, hedged item or hedging instrument. For the avoidance of doubt, such an amendment to the formal designation of a hedging relationship constitutes neither the discontinuation of the hedging relationship nor the designation of a new hedging relationship.

155.18 If changes are made in addition to those changes required by interest rate benchmark reform to the financial asset or financial liability designated in a hedging relationship (as described in paragraphs 72.2– 72.4) or to the designation of the hedging relationship (as required by paragraph 155.14), an entity shall first apply the applicable requirements in this Standard to determine if those additional changes result in the discontinuation of hedge accounting. If the additional changes do not result in the discontinuation of hedge accounting, an entity shall amend the formal designation of the hedging relationship as specified in paragraph 155.14.

155.19 Paragraphs 155.20–155.26 provide exceptions to the requirements specified in those paragraphs only. An entity shall apply all other hedge accounting requirements in this Standard, including the qualifying criteria in paragraph 129, to hedging relationships that were directly affected by interest rate benchmark reform.

155.20 For the purpose of applying paragraph 140, at the point when an entity amends the description of a hedged item as required in paragraph 155.14(b), the amount accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve shall be deemed to be based on the alternative benchmark rate on which the hedged future cash flows are determined.

155.21 For a discontinued hedging relationship, when the interest rate benchmark on which the hedged future cash flows had been based is changed as required by interest rate benchmark reform, for the purpose of applying paragraph 141 in order to determine whether the hedged future cash flows are expected to occur, the amount accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve for that hedging relationship shall be deemed to be based on the alternative benchmark rate on which the hedged future cash flows will be based.

155.22 When an entity applies paragraph 155.14 to groups of items designated as hedged items in a fair value or cash flow hedge, the entity shall allocate the hedged items to subgroups based on the benchmark rate being hedged and designate the benchmark rate as the hedged risk for each subgroup. For example, in a hedging relationship in which a group of items is hedged for changes in an interest rate benchmark subject to interest rate benchmark reform, the hedged cash flows or fair value of some items in the group could be changed to reference an alternative benchmark rate before other items in the group are changed. In this example, in applying paragraph 155.14, the entity would designate the alternative benchmark rate as the hedged risk for that relevant subgroup of hedged items. The entity would continue to designate the existing interest rate benchmark as the hedged risk for the other subgroup of hedged items until the hedged cash flows or fair value of those items are changed to reference the alternative benchmark rate or the items expire and are replaced with hedged items that reference the alternative benchmark rate.

155.23 An entity shall assess separately whether each subgroup meets the requirements in paragraph 146 to be an eligible hedged item. If any subgroup fails to meet the requirements in paragraph 146, the entity shall discontinue hedge accounting prospectively for the hedging relationship in its entirety. An entity also shall apply the requirements in paragraphs 137 and 140 to account for ineffectiveness related to the hedging relationship in its entirety.

155.24 An alternative benchmark rate designated as a non-contractually specified risk component that is not separately identifiable (see paragraphs 128(a) and AG257) at the date it is designated shall be deemed to have met that requirement at that date, if, and only if, the entity reasonably expects the alternative benchmark rate will be separately identifiable within 24 months. The 24-month period applies to each alternative benchmark rate separately and starts from the date the entity designates the alternative benchmark rate as a non-contractually specified risk component for the first time (i.e., the 24month period applies on a rate-by-rate basis).

155.25 If subsequently an entity reasonably expects that the alternative benchmark rate will not be separately identifiable within 24 months from the date the entity designated it as a non-contractually specified risk component for the first time, the entity shall cease applying the requirement in paragraph 155.24 to that alternative benchmark rate and discontinue hedge accounting prospectively from the date of that reassessment for all hedging relationships in which the alternative benchmark rate was designated as a noncontractually specified risk component.

155.26 In addition to those hedging relationships specified in paragraph 155.14, an entity shall apply the requirements in paragraphs 155.24 and 155.25 to new hedging relationships in which an alternative benchmark rate is designated as a non-contractually specified risk component (see paragraphs 128(a) and AG257) when, because of interest rate benchmark reform, that risk component is not separately identifiable at the date it is designated.

156. An entity shall apply this Standard for annual financial statements covering periods beginning on or after 1 January 2022. Earlier application is permitted. If an entity elects to apply this Standard early, it must disclose that fact and apply all of the requirements in this Standard at the same time (but see also paragraphs 173 and 179). It shall also, at the same time, apply the amendments in Appendix D.

156.1 PBE IPSAS 40 PBE Combinations, issued in July 2019, amended paragraphs 2, 45, 106, AG110 and AG250. An entity shall apply those amendments when it applies PBE IPSAS 40.

156.2 [See PBE IFRS 17 Insurance Contracts and Amendments to PBE IFRS 17]

156.3 PBE Interest Rate Benchmark Reform, which amended PBE IPSAS 41, PBE IPSAS 29 and PBE IPSAS 30, issued in February 2020, added paragraphs 155.1–155.12 and amended paragraphs 157.7, 157.8, 179 and 184. If an entity has applied PBE IPSAS 41 for annual periods beginning on or before 1 January 2020 it shall apply these amendments for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2020. Earlier application is permitted. If an entity applies these amendments for an earlier period, it shall disclose that fact. If an entity has not applied PBE IPSAS 41 for annual periods beginning on or before 1 January 2020, it shall apply these amendments when it first applies PBE IPSAS 41.

156.4 PBE Interest Rate Benchmark Reform—Phase 2, which amended PBE IPSAS 41, PBE IPSAS 29 and PBE IPSAS 30, issued in November 2020, added paragraphs 72.1–72.5, 155.13, 155.14–155.26, 157.12–157.15 and 184H, and amended paragraphs 157.7, 157.8 and 179. If an entity has early adopted PBE IPSAS 41 it shall apply these amendments for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2021. Earlier application is permitted. If an entity applies these amendments for an earlier period, it shall disclose that fact. If an entity has not early adopted PBE IPSAS 41, it shall apply these amendments when it first applies PBE IPSAS 41.

156.5. 2022 Omnibus Amendments to PBE Standards, issued in June 2022, added paragraphs 184I and AG46A and amended paragraph AG46. An entity shall apply these amendments for annual financial statements covering periods beginning on or after 1 January 2023. Earlier application is permitted. If an entity applies these amendments for an earlier period, it shall disclose that fact.

157. [Not used.]

157.1. An entity that has previously applied PBE IFRS 9 Financial Instruments shall apply the transition provisions in paragraphs 157.3–157.11. An entity that has not previously applied PBE IFRS 9 shall apply the transition provisions in paragraphs 158–184.

157.2 For the purposes of the transition provisions, the date of initial application is the date when an entity first applies the requirements of this Standard and must be the beginning of a reporting period after the issue of this Standard.

157.3 When an entity that has previously applied PBE IFRS 9 first applies this Standard, it shall not change the classification or measurement of its existing financial assets and financial liabilities on the date of initial application, except as expressly permitted or required by this Standard or other PBE Standards. In such cases an entity shall also apply any other transition requirements in this Standard that are necessary.

157.4 When an entity that has previously applied PBE IFRS 9 first applies this Standard, on the date of initial application, with regard to designating a financial asset or financial liability as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit, an entity applies the requirements in paragraphs AG73–AG74.1 of this Standard (referred to as the revised requirements). An entity:

1. Shall revoke its previous designation of a financial asset as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if that designation was previously made in accordance with the condition in paragraph 44 but that condition is no longer satisfied as a result of the application of the revised requirements;

2. May designate a financial asset as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if that designation would not have previously satisfied the condition in paragraph 44 but that condition is now satisfied as a result of the application of the revised requirements;

3. Shall revoke its previous designation of a financial liability as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if that designation was previously made in accordance with the condition in paragraph 46(a) but that condition is no longer satisfied as a result of the application of the revised requirements; and

4. May designate a financial liability as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if that designation would not have previously satisfied the condition in paragraph 46(a) but that condition is now satisfied as a result of the application of the revised requirements.

Such a designation and revocation shall be made on the basis of the facts and circumstances that exist at the date of initial application of this Standard. That classification shall be applied retrospectively.

157.5 An entity is not required to restate prior periods to reflect the application of the revised requirements. The entity may restate prior periods if, and only if, it is possible without the use of hindsight and the restated financial statements reflect all the requirements in this Standard. If an entity does not restate prior periods, the entity shall recognise any difference between the previous carrying amount and the carrying amount at the beginning of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application of the revised requirements in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense (or other component of net assets/equity, as appropriate) of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application of the revised requirements in this Standard.

157.6 In the reporting period that includes the date of initial application of the revised requirements, the entity shall disclose the following information as at that date of initial application for each class of financial assets and financial liabilities that were affected by the revised requirements:

1. The previous measurement category and carrying amount determined immediately before applying the revised requirements;

2. The new measurement category and carrying amount determined after applying the revised requirements;

3. The carrying amount of any financial assets and financial liabilities in the statement of financial position that were previously designated as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit but are no longer so designated; and

4. The reasons for any designation or de-designation of financial assets or financial liabilities as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit.

157.7 When an entity that has previously applied the hedge accounting requirements of PBE IFRS 9 first applies this Standard it shall apply the requirements in paragraphs 113–155.26 of this Standard. On first time application of this Standard it shall apply hedge accounting to the existing hedging relationships to which it applied hedge accounting under PBE IFRS 9.

157.8 When an entity that has previously applied PBE IFRS 9 continued to apply the hedge accounting requirements of PBE IPSAS 29 it may continue to apply those requirements. Alternatively, an entity may elect, on adoption of this Standard, to apply the requirements in paragraphs 113–155.26 of this Standard in accordance with paragraphs 179–184 and paragraph 184H of this Standard.

157.9 When an entity that has previously applied PBE IFRS 9 first applies this Standard, on the date of initial application, with respect to the simplified approach for receivables, an entity applies the requirements in paragraph 87 retrospectively from the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented. However, the entity is not required to restate prior periods to reflect the application of paragraph 87. If an entity does not restate prior periods, the entity shall recognise any difference between the previous carrying amount and the carrying amount at the beginning of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application of paragraph 87 in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense (or other component of net assets/equity, as appropriate) of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application of paragraph 87.

157.10 When an entity that has previously applied PBE IFRS 9 first applies this Standard it shall apply the requirements in paragraphs AG63A–AG63F of PBE IPSAS 28 (which include requirements related to offsetting financial assets and financial liabilities) retrospectively from the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented. Restatement is required. In addition, the entity shall provide the disclosures required by paragraphs 17A–17F and paragraphs AG42–AG55 of PBE IPSAS 30 in accordance with the transitional provisions in paragraph 53.7 of PBE IPSAS 30.

157.11 When an entity that has previously applied PBE IFRS 9 first applies this Standard, on the date of initial application, an entity applies the requirements in Appendix C of this Standard with regard to extinguishing financial liabilities with equity instruments. An entity applies the requirements of Appendix C retrospectively from the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented. However, the entity is not required to restate prior periods to reflect the application of Appendix C. If an entity does not restate prior periods, the entity shall recognise any difference between the previous carrying amount and the carrying amount at the beginning of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application of Appendix C in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense (or other component of net assets/equity, as appropriate) of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application of Appendix C.

157.12 An entity shall apply PBE Interest Rate Benchmark Reform—Phase 2 retrospectively in accordance with PBE IPSAS 3, except as specified in paragraphs 157.13–157.15.

157.13 An entity shall designate a new hedging relationship (for example, as described in paragraph 155.26) only prospectively (i.e., an entity is prohibited from designating a new hedge accounting relationship in prior periods). However, an entity shall reinstate a discontinued hedging relationship if, and only if, these conditions are met:

1. The entity had discontinued that hedging relationship solely due to changes required by interest rate benchmark reform and the entity would not have been required to discontinue that hedging relationship if these amendments had been applied at that time; and

2. At the beginning of the reporting period in which an entity first applies these amendments (date of initial application of these amendments), that discontinued hedging relationship meets the qualifying criteria for hedge accounting (after taking into account these amendments).

157.14 If, in applying paragraph 157.13, an entity reinstates a discontinued hedging relationship, the entity shall read references in paragraphs 155.24 and 155.25 to the date the alternative benchmark rate is designated as a non-contractually specified risk component for the first time as referring to the date of initial application of these amendments (i.e., the 24-month period for that alternative benchmark rate designated as a non-contractually specified risk component begins from the date of initial application of these amendments).

157.15 An entity is not required to restate prior periods to reflect the application of these amendments. The entity may restate prior periods if, and only if, it is possible without the use of hindsight. If an entity does not restate prior periods, the entity shall recognise any difference between the previous carrying amount and the carrying amount at the beginning of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application of these amendments in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense (or other component of net assets/equity, as appropriate) of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application of these amendments.

158. An entity shall apply this Standard retrospectively, in accordance with PBE IPSAS 3 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors, except as specified in paragraphs 161–184. This Standard shall not be applied to items that have already been derecognised at the date of initial application.

159. [Not used]

160. At the date of initial application, an entity shall assess whether a financial asset meets the condition in paragraphs 40(a) or 41(a) on the basis of the facts and circumstances that exist at that date. The resulting classification shall be applied retrospectively irrespective of the entity’s management model in prior reporting periods.

161. If, at the date of initial application, it is impracticable (as defined in PBE IPSAS 3) for an entity to assess a modified time value of money element in accordance with paragraphs AG68–AG70 on the basis of the facts and circumstances that existed at the initial recognition of the financial asset, an entity shall assess the contractual cash flow characteristics of that financial asset on the basis of the facts and circumstances that existed at the initial recognition of the financial asset without taking into account the requirements related to the modification of the time value of money element in paragraphs AG68–AG70. (See also paragraph 49R of PBE IPSAS 30.)

162. If, at the date of initial application, it is impracticable (as defined in PBE IPSAS 3) for an entity to assess whether the fair value of a prepayment feature was insignificant in accordance with paragraph AG74(c) on the basis of the facts and circumstances that existed at the initial recognition of the financial asset, an entity shall assess the contractual cash flow characteristics of that financial asset on the basis of the facts and circumstances that existed at the initial recognition of the financial asset without taking into account the exception for prepayment features in paragraph AG74. (See also paragraph 49S of PBE IPSAS 30.)

163. If an entity measures a hybrid contract at fair value in accordance with paragraphs 41, 43 or 44 but the fair value of the hybrid contract had not been measured in comparative reporting periods, the fair value of the hybrid contract in the comparative reporting periods shall be the sum of the fair values of the components (i.e., the non-derivative host and the embedded derivative) at the end of each comparative reporting period if the entity restates prior periods (see paragraph 173).

164. If an entity has applied paragraph 163 then at the date of initial application the entity shall recognise any difference between the fair value of the entire hybrid contract at the date of initial application and the sum of the fair values of the components of the hybrid contract at the date of initial application in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense (or other component of net assets/equity, as appropriate) of the reporting period that includes the date of initial application.

165. At the date of initial application an entity may designate:

1. A financial asset as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraph 44; or

2. An investment in an equity instrument as at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106.

Such a designation shall be made on the basis of the facts and circumstances that exist at the date of initial application. That classification shall be applied retrospectively.

166. At the date of initial application an entity:

1. Shall revoke its previous designation of a financial asset as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if that financial asset does not meet the condition in paragraph 44.

2. May revoke its previous designation of a financial asset as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if that financial asset meets the condition in paragraph 44.

Such a revocation shall be made on the basis of the facts and circumstances that exist at the date of initial application. That classification shall be applied retrospectively.

167. At the date of initial application, an entity:

1. May designate a financial liability as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraph 46(a).

2. Shall revoke its previous designation of a financial liability as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if such designation was made at initial recognition in accordance with the condition now in paragraph 46(a) and such designation does not satisfy that condition at the date of initial application.

3. May revoke its previous designation of a financial liability as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if such designation was made at initial recognition in accordance with the condition now in paragraph 46(a) and such designation satisfies that condition at the date of initial application.

Such a designation and revocation shall be made on the basis of the facts and circumstances that exist at the date of initial application. That classification shall be applied retrospectively.

168. If it is impracticable (as defined in PBE IPSAS 3) for an entity to apply retrospectively the effective interest method, the entity shall treat:

1. The fair value of the financial asset or the financial liability at the end of each comparative period presented as the gross carrying amount of that financial asset or the amortised cost of that financial liability if the entity restates prior periods; and

2. The fair value of the financial asset or the financial liability at the date of initial application as the new gross carrying amount of that financial asset or the new amortised cost of that financial liability at the date of initial application of this Standard.

169. If an entity previously accounted at cost (in accordance with PBE IPSAS 29), for an investment in an equity instrument that does not have a quoted price in an active market for an identical instrument (i.e., a Level 1 input) (or for a derivative asset that is linked to and must be settled by delivery of such an equity instrument) it shall measure that instrument at fair value at the date of initial application. Any difference between the previous carrying amount and the fair value shall be recognised in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense (or other component of net assets/equity, as appropriate) of the reporting period that includes the date of initial application.

169.1 Despite the requirements in paragraphs 45(c) and AG136, an entity that was previously unable to determine a reliable measure of the fair value of a financial guarantee contract issued through a non-exchange transaction shall, at the date of initial application, measure the contract at the higher of:

1. The loss allowance determined in accordance with paragraphs 73–93; and

2. The previous carrying amount determined in accordance with PBE IPSAS 29.

Any difference between the amount determined at the date of initial application and the previous carrying amount shall be recognised in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense of the reporting period that includes the date of initial application. The amount recognised at the date of initial application becomes the amount initially recognised in accordance with this Standard.

170. If an entity previously accounted for a derivative liability that is linked to, and must be settled by, delivery of an equity instrument that does not have a quoted price in an active market for an identical instrument (i.e., a Level 1 input) at cost in accordance with PBE IPSAS 29, it shall measure that derivative liability at fair value at the date of initial application. Any difference between the previous carrying amount and the fair value shall be recognised in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense of the reporting period that includes the date of initial application.

171. At the date of initial application, an entity shall determine whether the treatment in paragraph 108 would create or enlarge an accounting mismatch in surplus or deficit on the basis of the facts and circumstances that exist at the date of initial application. This Standard shall be applied retrospectively on the basis of that determination.

172. At the date of initial application, an entity is permitted to make the designation in paragraph 6 for contracts that already exist on the date but only if it designates all similar contracts. The change in the net assets resulting from such designations shall be recognised in net assets/equity at the date of initial application.

173. Despite the requirement in paragraph 158, an entity that adopts the classification and measurement requirements of this Standard (which include the requirements related to amortised cost measurement for financial assets and impairment in paragraphs 69–72 and paragraphs 73–93) shall provide the disclosures set out in paragraphs 49L–49O of PBE IPSAS 30 but need not restate prior periods. The entity may restate prior periods if, and only if, it is possible without the use of hindsight. If an entity does not restate prior periods, the entity shall recognise any difference between the previous carrying amount and the carrying amount at the beginning of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application in the opening accumulated comprehensive revenue and expense (or other component of net assets/equity, as appropriate) of the annual reporting period that includes the date of initial application. However, if an entity restates prior periods, the restated financial statements must reflect all of the requirements in this Standard.

174. If an entity prepares interim financial reports in accordance with PBE IAS 34 Interim Financial Reporting the entity need not apply the requirements in this Standard to interim periods prior to the date of initial application if it is impracticable (as defined in PBE IPSAS 3).

175. An entity shall apply the impairment requirements in paragraphs 73–93 retrospectively in accordance with PBE IPSAS 3 subject to paragraphs 173 and 176–178.

176. At the date of initial application, an entity shall use reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort to determine the credit risk at the date that a financial instrument was initially recognised (or for loan commitments and financial guarantee contracts at the date that the entity became a party to the irrevocable commitment in accordance with paragraph 78) and compare that to the credit risk at the date of initial application of this Standard.

177. When determining whether there has been a significant increase in credit risk since initial recognition, an entity may apply:

1. The requirements in paragraphs 82 and AG186–AG188; and

2. The rebuttable presumption in paragraph 83 for contractual payments that are more than 30 days past due if an entity will apply the impairment requirements by identifying significant increases in credit risk since initial recognition for those financial instruments on the basis of past due information.

178. If, at the date of initial application, determining whether there has been a significant increase in credit risk since initial recognition would require undue cost or effort, an entity shall recognise a loss allowance at an amount equal to lifetime expected credit losses at each reporting date until that financial instrument is derecognised (unless that financial instrument is low credit risk at a reporting date, in which case paragraph 177(a) applies).

179. When an entity first applies this Standard, it may choose as its accounting policy to continue to apply the hedge accounting requirements of PBE IPSAS 29 instead of the requirements in paragraphs 113–155.26 of this Standard. An entity shall apply that policy to all of its hedging relationships. An entity that chooses that policy shall also apply Appendix C of PBE IPSAS 29.

180. Except as provided in paragraph 184, an entity shall apply the hedge accounting requirements of this Standard prospectively.

181. To apply hedge accounting from the date of initial application of the hedge accounting requirements of this Standard, all qualifying criteria must be met as at that date.

182. Hedging relationships that qualified for hedge accounting in accordance with PBE IPSAS 29 that also qualify for hedge accounting in accordance with the criteria of this Standard (see paragraph 129), after taking into account any rebalancing of the hedging relationship on transition (see paragraph 183(b)), shall be regarded as continuing hedging relationships.

183. On initial application of the hedge accounting requirements of this Standard, an entity:

1. May start to apply those requirements from the same point in time as it ceases to apply the hedge accounting requirements of PBE IPSAS 29; and

2. Shall consider the hedge ratio in accordance with PBE IPSAS 29 as the starting point for rebalancing the hedge ratio of a continuing hedging relationship, if applicable. Any gain or loss from such a rebalancing shall be recognised in surplus or deficit.

184. As an exception to prospective application of the hedge accounting requirements of this Standard, an entity:

1. Shall apply the accounting for the time value of options in accordance with paragraph 144 retrospectively if, in accordance with PBE IPSAS 29, only the change in an option’s intrinsic value was designated as a hedging instrument in a hedging relationship. This retrospective application applies only to those hedging relationships that existed at the beginning of the earliest comparative period or were designated thereafter.

2. May apply the accounting for the forward element of forward contracts in accordance with paragraph 145 retrospectively if, in accordance with PBE IPSAS 29, only the change in the spot element of a forward contract was designated as a hedging instrument in a hedging relationship. This retrospective application applies only to those hedging relationships that existed at the beginning of the earliest comparative period or were designated thereafter. In addition, if an entity elects retrospective application of this accounting, it shall be applied to all hedging relationships that qualify for this election (i.e., on transition this election is not available on a hedging- relationship-by-hedging-relationship basis). The accounting for foreign currency basis spreads (see paragraph 145) may be applied retrospectively for those hedging relationships that existed at the beginning of the earliest comparative period or were designated thereafter.

3. Shall apply retrospectively the requirement of paragraph 135 that there is not an expiration or termination of the hedging instrument if:

   1. As a consequence of laws or regulations, or the introduction of laws or regulations, the parties to the hedging instrument agree that one or more clearing counterparties replace their original counterparty to become the new counterparty to each of the parties; and

   2. Other changes, if any, to the hedging instrument are limited to those that are necessary to effect such a replacement of the counterparty.

4. Shall apply the requirements in paragraphs 155.1–155.12 retrospectively. This retrospective application applies only to those hedging relationships that existed at the beginning of the reporting period in which an entity first applies those requirements or were designated thereafter, and to the amount accumulated in the cash flow hedge reserve that existed at the beginning of the reporting period in which an entity first applies those requirements.

184A–G[See Amendments to PBE IFRS 17]

184H An entity shall apply PBE Interest Rate Benchmark Reform—Phase 2 retrospectively in accordance with PBE IPSAS 3, except as specified in paragraphs 157.13–157.15.

184I An entity shall apply the amendments in 2022 Omnibus Amendments to PBE Standards to financial liabilities that are modified or exchanged on or after the beginning of the annual reporting period in which the entity first applies the amendment.

184.1 This Standard supersedes PBE IFRS 9. Effective Date of PBE IFRS 9, issued in March 2019, limited the early adoption of PBE IFRS 9 to annual periods beginning before 1 January 2020.

AG1. Some contracts require a payment based on climatic, geological or other physical variables. (Those based on climatic variables are sometimes referred to as ‘weather derivatives’.) If those contracts are not insurance contracts, they are within the scope of this Standard.

AG2. This Standard does not change the requirements relating to employee benefit plans that comply with the relevant international or national accounting standard on accounting and reporting by retirement benefit plans and royalty agreements based on the volume of sales or service revenues that are accounted for under PBE IPSAS 9 Revenue from Exchange Transactions.

AG3. Sometimes, an entity makes what it views as a ‘strategic investment’ in equity instruments issued by another entity, with the management model of establishing or maintaining a long-term operating relationship with the entity in which the investment is made. The investor or joint venturer entity uses PBE IPSAS 36 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures to determine whether the equity method of accounting shall be applied to such an investment.

AG4. This Standard applies to the financial assets and financial liabilities of insurers, other than rights and obligations that paragraph 2(e) excludes because they arise under insurance contracts. An entity does however apply this Standard to:

1. Financial guarantee contracts, except those where the issuer elects to treat such contracts as insurance contracts in accordance with PBE IPSAS 28 Financial Instruments: Presentation; and

2. Embedded derivatives included in insurance contracts.

An entity may, but is not required to, apply this Standard to other insurance contracts that involve the transfer of financial risk.

AG5. Financial guarantee contracts may have various legal forms, such as a guarantee, some types of letter of credit, a credit default contract or an insurance contract. Their accounting treatment does not depend on their legal form. The following are examples of the appropriate treatment (see paragraph 2(e)):

1. Although a financial guarantee contract meets the definition of an insurance contract if the risk transferred is significant, the issuer applies this Standard. Nevertheless, an entity may elect, under certain circumstances, to treat financial guarantee contracts as insurance contracts using PBE IPSAS 28 if the issuer has previously adopted an accounting policy that treated financial guarantee contracts as insurance contracts and has used accounting that is applicable to insurance contracts; the issuer may elect to apply either this Standard or PBE IFRS 4 Insurance Contracts to such financial guarantee contracts. If this Standard applies, paragraph 57 requires the issuer to recognise a financial guarantee contract initially at fair value. If the financial guarantee contract was issued to an unrelated party in a stand-alone arm’s length transaction, its fair value at inception is likely to equal the premium received, unless there is evidence to the contrary. Subsequently, unless the financial guarantee contract was designated at inception as at fair value through surplus or deficit or unless paragraphs 26–34 and AG32–AG38 apply (when a transfer of a financial asset does not qualify for derecognition or the continuing involvement approach applies), the issuer measures it at the higher of:

   1. The amount determined in accordance with paragraphs 73–93; and

   2. The amount initially recognised less, when appropriate, the cumulative amortisation recognised in accordance with the principles of PBE IPSAS 9 (see paragraph 45(c)).

2. Some credit-related guarantees do not, as a precondition for payment, require that the holder is exposed to, and has incurred a loss on, the failure of the debtor to make payments on the guaranteed asset when due. An example of such a guarantee is one that requires payments in response to changes in a specified credit rating or credit index. Such guarantees are not financial guarantee contracts as defined in this Standard, and are not insurance contracts. Such guarantees are derivatives and the issuer applies this Standard to them.

3. If a financial guarantee contract was issued in connection with the sale of goods, the issuer applies PBE IPSAS 9 in determining when it recognises the revenue from the guarantee and from the sale of goods.

AG6. Rights and obligations (assets and liabilities) may arise from non-exchange revenue transactions, for example, an entity may receive cash from a multi-lateral agency to perform certain activities. Where the performance of those activities is subject to conditions, an asset and a liability is recognised simultaneously. Where the asset is a financial asset, it is recognised in accordance with PBE IPSAS 23 Revenue from Non-Exchange Transactions, and initially measured in accordance with PBE IPSAS 23 and this Standard. A liability that is initially recognised as a result of conditions imposed on the use of an asset is outside the scope of this Standard and is dealt with in PBE IPSAS 23. After initial recognition, if circumstances indicate that recognition of a liability in accordance with PBE IPSAS 23 is no longer appropriate, an entity considers whether a financial liability should be recognised in accordance with this Standard. Other liabilities that may arise from non-exchange revenue transactions are recognised and measured in accordance with this Standard if they meet the definition of a financial liability in PBE IPSAS 28.

AG7. Typical examples of derivatives are futures and forward, swap and option contracts. A derivative usually has a notional amount, which is an amount of currency, a number of shares, a number of units of weight or volume or other units specified in the contract. However, a derivative instrument does not require the holder or writer to invest or receive the notional amount at the inception of the contract. Alternatively, a derivative could require a fixed payment or payment of an amount that can change (but not proportionally with a change in the underlying) as a result of some future event that is unrelated to a notional amount. For example, a contract may require a fixed payment of CU1,000 if the six-month interbank offered rate increases by 100 basis points. Such a contract is a derivative even though a notional amount is not specified.

AG8. The definition of a derivative in this Standard includes contracts that are settled gross by delivery of the underlying item (e.g., a forward contract to purchase a fixed rate debt instrument). An entity may have a contract to buy or sell a non-financial item that can be settled net in cash or another financial instrument or by exchanging financial instruments (e.g., a contract to buy or sell a commodity at a fixed price at a future date). Such a contract is within the scope of this Standard unless it was entered into and continues to be held for the purpose of delivery of a non-financial item in accordance with the entity’s expected purchase, sale or usage requirements. However, this Standard applies to such contracts for an entity’s expected purchase, sale or usage requirements if the entity makes a designation in accordance with paragraph 6 (see paragraphs 5–8).

AG9. One of the defining characteristics of a derivative is that it has an initial net investment that is smaller than would be required for other types of contracts that would be expected to have a similar response to changes in market factors. An option contract meets that definition because the premium is less than the investment that would be required to obtain the underlying financial instrument to which the option is linked. A currency swap that requires an initial exchange of different currencies of equal fair values meets the definition because it has a zero initial net investment.

AG10. A regular way purchase or sale gives rise to a fixed price commitment between trade date and settlement date that meets the definition of a derivative. However, because of the short duration of the commitment it is not recognised as a derivative financial instrument. Instead, this Standard provides for special accounting for such regular way contracts (see paragraphs 11 and AG17–20).

AG11. The definition of a derivative refers to non-financial variables that are not specific to a party to the contract. These include an index of earthquake losses in a particular region and an index of temperatures in a particular city. Non-financial variables specific to a party to the contract include the occurrence or non-occurrence of a fire that damages or destroys an asset of a party to the contract. A change in the fair value of a non-financial asset is specific to the owner if the fair value reflects not only changes in market prices for such assets (a financial variable) but also the condition of the specific non-financial asset held (a non-financial variable). For example, if a guarantee of the residual value of a specific car exposes the guarantor to the risk of changes in the car’s physical condition, the change in that residual value is specific to the owner of the car.

AG12. Trading generally reflects active and frequent buying and selling, and financial instruments held for trading generally are used with the objective of generating a profit from short-term fluctuations in price or dealer’s margin.

AG13. Financial liabilities held for trading include:

1. Derivative liabilities that are not accounted for as hedging instruments;

2. Obligations to deliver financial assets borrowed by a short seller (i.e., an entity that sells financial assets it has borrowed and does not yet own);

3. Financial liabilities that are incurred with a management model to repurchase them in the near term (e.g., a quoted debt instrument that the issuer may buy back in the near term depending on changes in its fair value); and

4. Financial liabilities that are part of a portfolio of identified financial instruments that are managed together and for which there is evidence of a recent pattern of short-term profit-taking.

AG14. The fact that a liability is used to fund trading activities does not in itself make that liability one that is held for trading.

AG15. As a consequence of the principle in paragraph 10, an entity recognises all of its contractual rights and obligations under derivatives in its statement of financial position as assets and liabilities, respectively, except for derivatives that prevent a transfer of financial assets from being accounted for as a sale (see paragraph AG35). If a transfer of a financial asset does not qualify for derecognition, the transferee does not recognise the transferred asset as its asset (see paragraph AG36).

AG16. The following are examples of applying the principle in paragraph 10:

1. Unconditional receivables and payables are recognised as assets or liabilities when the entity becomes a party to the contract and, as a consequence, has a legal right to receive or a legal obligation to pay cash.

2. Assets to be acquired and liabilities to be incurred as a result of a firm commitment to purchase or sell goods or services are generally not recognised until at least one of the parties has performed under the agreement. For example, an entity that receives a firm order does not generally recognise an asset (and the entity that places the order does not recognise a liability) at the time of the commitment but, instead, delays recognition until the ordered goods or services have been shipped, delivered or rendered. If a firm commitment to buy or sell non-financial items is within the scope of this Standard in accordance with paragraphs 5–8, its net fair value is recognised as an asset or a liability on the commitment date (see paragraph AG92(c)). In addition, if a previously unrecognised firm commitment is designated as a hedged item in a fair value hedge, any change in the net fair value attributable to the hedged risk is recognised as an asset or a liability after the inception of the hedge (see paragraphs 137(b) and 138).

3. A forward contract that is within the scope of this Standard (see paragraph 2) is recognised as an asset or a liability on the commitment date, instead of on the date on which settlement takes place. When an entity becomes a party to a forward contract, the fair values of the right and obligation are often equal, so that the net fair value of the forward is zero. If the net fair value of the right and obligation is not zero, the contract is recognised as an asset or liability.

4. Option contracts that are within the scope of this Standard (see paragraph 2) are recognised as assets or liabilities when the holder or writer becomes a party to the contract.

5. Planned future transactions, no matter how likely, are not assets and liabilities because the entity has not become a party to a contract.

AG17. A regular way purchase or sale of financial assets is recognised using either trade date accounting or settlement date accounting as described in paragraphs AG19 and AG20. An entity shall apply the same method consistently for all purchases and sales of financial assets that are classified in the same way in accordance with this Standard. For this purpose assets that are mandatorily measured at fair value through surplus or deficit form a separate classification from assets designated as measured at fair value through surplus or deficit. In addition, investments in equity instruments accounted for using the option provided in paragraph 106 form a separate classification.

AG18. A contract that requires or permits net settlement of the change in the value of the contract is not a regular way contract. Instead, such a contract is accounted for as a derivative in the period between the trade date and the settlement date.

AG19. The trade date is the date that an entity commits itself to purchase or sell an asset. Trade date accounting refers to (a) the recognition of an asset to be received and the liability to pay for it on the trade date, and (b) derecognition of an asset that is sold, recognition of any gain or loss on disposal and the recognition of a receivable from the buyer for payment on the trade date. Generally, interest does not start to accrue on the asset and corresponding liability until the settlement date when title passes.

AG20. The settlement date is the date that an asset is delivered to or by an entity. Settlement date accounting refers to (a) the recognition of an asset on the day it is received by the entity, and (b) the derecognition of an asset and recognition of any gain or loss on disposal on the day that it is delivered by the entity. When settlement date accounting is applied an entity accounts for any change in the fair value of the asset to be received during the period between the trade date and the settlement date in the same way as it accounts for the acquired asset. In other words, the change in value is not recognised for assets measured at amortised cost; it is recognised in surplus or deficit for assets classified as financial assets measured at fair value through surplus or deficit; and it is recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense for financial assets measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41 and for investments in equity instruments accounted for in accordance with paragraph 106.

AG21. The following flow chart illustrates the evaluation of whether and to what extent a financial asset is derecognised.

AG22. The situation described in paragraph 15(b) (when an entity retains the contractual rights to receive the cash flows of the financial asset, but assumes a contractual obligation to pay the cash flows to one or more recipients) occurs, for example, if the entity is a trust, and issues to investors beneficial interests in the underlying financial assets that it owns and provides servicing of those financial assets. In that case, the financial assets qualify for derecognition if the conditions in paragraphs 16 and 17 are met.

AG23. In applying paragraph 16, the entity could be, for example, the originator of the financial asset, or it could be an economic entity that includes a controlled entity that has acquired the financial asset and passes on cash flows to unrelated third party investors.

AG24. Examples of when an entity has transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership are:

1. An unconditional sale of a financial asset;

2. A sale of a financial asset together with an option to repurchase the financial asset at its fair value at the time of repurchase; and

3. A sale of a financial asset together with a put or call option that is deeply out of the money (i.e., an option that is so far out of the money it is highly unlikely to go into the money before expiry).

AG25. Examples of when an entity has retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership are:

1. A sale and repurchase transaction where the repurchase price is a fixed price or the sale price plus a lender’s return;

2. A securities lending agreement;

3. A sale of a financial asset together with a total return swap that transfers the market risk exposure back to the entity;

4. A sale of a financial asset together with a deep in-the-money put or call option (i.e., an option that is so far in the money that it is highly unlikely to go out of the money before expiry); and

5. A sale of short-term receivables in which the entity guarantees to compensate the transferee for credit losses that are likely to occur.

AG26. If an entity determines that as a result of the transfer, it has transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the transferred asset, it does not recognise the transferred asset again in a future period, unless it reacquires the transferred asset in a new transaction.

AG27. An entity has not retained control of a transferred asset if the transferee has the practical ability to sell the transferred asset. An entity has retained control of a transferred asset if the transferee does not have the practical ability to sell the transferred asset. A transferee has the practical ability to sell the transferred asset if it is traded in an active market because the transferee could repurchase the transferred asset in the market if it needs to return the asset to the entity. For example, a transferee may have the practical ability to sell a transferred asset if the transferred asset is subject to an option that allows the entity to repurchase it, but the transferee can readily obtain the transferred asset in the market if the option is exercised. A transferee does not have the practical ability to sell the transferred asset if the entity retains such an option and the transferee cannot readily obtain the transferred asset in the market if the entity exercises its option.

AG28. The transferee has the practical ability to sell the transferred asset only if the transferee can sell the transferred asset in its entirety to an unrelated third party and is able to exercise that ability unilaterally and without imposing additional restrictions on the transfer. The critical question is what the transferee is able to do in practice, not what contractual rights the transferee has concerning what it can do with the transferred asset or what contractual prohibitions exist. In particular:

1. A contractual right to dispose of the transferred asset has little practical effect if there is no market for the transferred asset, and

2. An ability to dispose of the transferred asset has little practical effect if it cannot be exercised freely. For that reason:

   1. The transferee’s ability to dispose of the transferred asset must be independent of the actions of others (i.e., it must be a unilateral ability), and

   2. The transferee must be able to dispose of the transferred asset without needing to attach restrictive conditions or ‘strings’ to the transfer (e.g., conditions about how a loan asset is serviced or an option giving the transferee the right to repurchase the asset).

AG29. That the transferee is unlikely to sell the transferred asset does not, of itself, mean that the transferor has retained control of the transferred asset. However, if a put option or guarantee constrains the transferee from selling the transferred asset, then the transferor has retained control of the transferred asset. For example, if a put option or guarantee is sufficiently valuable it constrains the transferee from selling the transferred asset because the transferee would, in practice, not sell the transferred asset to a third party without attaching a similar option or other restrictive conditions. Instead, the transferee would hold the transferred asset so as to obtain payments under the guarantee or put option. Under these circumstances the transferor has retained control of the transferred asset.

AG30. An entity may retain the right to a part of the interest payments on transferred assets as compensation for servicing those assets. The part of the interest payments that the entity would give up upon termination or transfer of the servicing contract is allocated to the servicing asset or servicing liability. The part of the interest payments that the entity would not give up is an interest-only strip receivable. For example, if the entity would not give up any interest upon termination or transfer of the servicing contract, the entire interest spread is an interest-only strip receivable. For the purposes of applying paragraph 24, the fair values of the servicing asset and interest-only strip receivable are used to allocate the carrying amount of the receivable between the part of the asset that is derecognised and the part that continues to be recognised. If there is no servicing fee specified or the fee to be received is not expected to compensate the entity adequately for performing the servicing, a liability for the servicing obligation is recognised at fair value.

AG31. When measuring the fair values of the part that continues to be recognised and the part that is derecognised for the purposes of applying paragraph 24, an entity applies the fair value measurement requirements in paragraphs 66–68 and AG144–AG155.

AG32. The following is an application of the principle outlined in paragraph 26. If a guarantee provided by the entity for default losses on the transferred asset prevents a transferred asset from being derecognised because the entity has retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the transferred asset, the transferred asset continues to be recognised in its entirety and the consideration received is recognised as a liability.

AG33. In the public sector, securitisation schemes may involve a sale of future flows arising from a sovereign right, such as a right to taxation, that have not previously been recognised as assets. An entity recognises the revenue arising from such transactions in accordance with the relevant revenue standard (see PBE IPSAS 9 and PBE IPSAS 23). Such transactions may give rise to financial liabilities as defined in PBE IPSAS 28. Examples of such financial liabilities may include but are not limited to borrowings, financial guarantees, liabilities arising from a servicing or administrative contract, or payables relating to cash collected on behalf of the purchasing entity. Financial liabilities shall be recognised when the entity becomes party to the contractual provisions of the instrument in accordance with paragraph 10 and classified in accordance with paragraphs 45 and 46. The financial liabilities shall be initially recognised in accordance with paragraph 57, and subsequently measured in accordance with paragraphs 62 and 63.

AG34. The following are examples of how an entity measures a transferred asset and the associated liability under paragraph 27.

All Assets

1. If a guarantee provided by an entity to pay for default losses on a transferred asset prevents the transferred asset from being derecognised to the extent of the continuing involvement, the transferred asset at the date of the transfer is measured at the lower of (i) the carrying amount of the asset and (ii) the maximum amount of the consideration received in the transfer that the entity could be required to repay (‘the guarantee amount’). The associated liability is initially measured at the guarantee amount plus the fair value of the guarantee (which is normally the consideration received for the guarantee). Subsequently, the initial fair value of the guarantee is recognised in surplus or deficit on a time proportion basis (see PBE IPSAS 9) and the carrying value of the asset is reduced by any loss allowance. Assets Measured at Amortised Cost

2. If a put option obligation written by an entity or call option right held by an entity prevents a transferred asset from being derecognised and the entity measures the transferred asset at amortised cost, the associated liability is measured at its cost (i.e., the consideration received) adjusted for the amortisation of any difference between that cost and the gross carrying amount of the transferred asset at the expiration date of the option. For example, assume that the gross carrying amount of the asset on the date of the transfer is CU98 and that the consideration received is CU95. The gross carrying amount of the asset on the option exercise date will be CU100. The initial carrying amount of the associated liability is CU95 and the difference between CU95 and CU100 is recognised in surplus or deficit using the effective interest method. If the option is exercised, any difference between the carrying amount of the associated liability and the exercise price is recognised in surplus or deficit.Assets Measured at Fair Value

3. If a call option right retained by an entity prevents a transferred asset from being derecognised and the entity measures the transferred asset at fair value, the asset continues to be measured at its fair value. The associated liability is measured at (i) the option exercise price less the time value of the option if the option is in or at the money, or (ii) the fair value of the transferred asset less the time value of the option if the option is out of the money. The adjustment to the measurement of the associated liability ensures that the net carrying amount of the asset and the associated liability is the fair value of the call option right. For example, if the fair value of the underlying asset is CU80, the option exercise price is CU95 and the time value of the option is CU5, the carrying amount of the associated liability is CU75 (CU80 – CU5) and the carrying amount of the transferred asset is CU80 (i.e., its fair value).

4. If a put option written by an entity prevents a transferred asset from being derecognised and the entity measures the transferred asset at fair value, the associated liability is measured at the option exercise price plus the time value of the option. The measurement of the asset at fair value is limited to the lower of the fair value and the option exercise price because the entity has no right to increases in the fair value of the transferred asset above the exercise price of the option. This ensures that the net carrying amount of the asset and the associated liability is the fair value of the put option obligation. For example, if the fair value of the underlying asset is CU120, the option exercise price is CU100 and the time value of the option is CU5, the carrying amount of the associated liability is CU105 (CU100 + CU5) and the carrying amount of the asset is CU100 (in this case the option exercise price).

5. If a collar, in the form of a purchased call and written put, prevents a transferred asset from being derecognised and the entity measures the asset at fair value, it continues to measure the asset at fair value. The associated liability is measured at (i) the sum of the call exercise price and fair value of the put option less the time value of the call option, if the call option is in or at the money, or (ii) the sum of the fair value of the asset and the fair value of the put option less the time value of the call option if the call option is out of the money. The adjustment to the associated liability ensures that the net carrying amount of the asset and the associated liability is the fair value of the options held and written by the entity. For example, assume an entity transfers a financial asset that is measured at fair value while simultaneously purchasing a call with an exercise price of CU120 and writing a put with an exercise price of CU80. Assume also that the fair value of the asset is CU100 at the date of the transfer. The time value of the put and call are CU1 and CU5 respectively. In this case, the entity recognises an asset of CU100 (the fair value of the asset) and a liability of CU96 [(CU100 + CU1) – CU5]. This gives a net asset value of CU4, which is the fair value of the options held and written by the entity.

AG35. To the extent that a transfer of a financial asset does not qualify for derecognition, the transferor’s contractual rights or obligations related to the transfer are not accounted for separately as derivatives if recognising both the derivative and either the transferred asset or the liability arising from the transfer would result in recognising the same rights or obligations twice. For example, a call option retained by the transferor may prevent a transfer of financial assets from being accounted for as a sale. In that case, the call option is not separately recognised as a derivative asset.

AG36. To the extent that a transfer of a financial asset does not qualify for derecognition, the transferee does not recognise the transferred asset as its asset. The transferee derecognises the cash or other consideration paid and recognises a receivable from the transferor. If the transferor has both a right and an obligation to reacquire control of the entire transferred asset for a fixed amount (such as under a repurchase agreement), the transferee may measure its receivable at amortised cost if it meets the criteria in paragraph 40.

AG37. The following examples illustrate the application of the derecognition principles of this Standard.

1. Repurchase agreements and securities lending. If a financial asset is sold under an agreement to repurchase it at a fixed price or at the sale price plus a lender’s return or if it is loaned under an agreement to return it to the transferor, it is not derecognised because the transferor retains substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership. If the transferee obtains the right to sell or pledge the asset, the transferor reclassifies the asset in its statement of financial position, for example, as a loaned asset or repurchase receivable.

2. Repurchase agreements and securities lending—assets that are substantially the same. If a financial asset is sold under an agreement to repurchase the same or substantially the same asset at a fixed price or at the sale price plus a lender’s return or if a financial asset is borrowed or loaned under an agreement to return the same or substantially the same asset to the transferor, it is not derecognised because the transferor retains substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership.

3. Repurchase agreements and securities lending—right of substitution. If a repurchase agreement at a fixed repurchase price or a price equal to the sale price plus a lender’s return, or a similar securities lending transaction, provides the transferee with a right to substitute assets that are similar and of equal fair value to the transferred asset at the repurchase date, the asset sold or lent under a repurchase or securities lending transaction is not derecognised because the transferor retains substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership.

4. Repurchase right of first refusal at fair value. If an entity sells a financial asset and retains only a right of first refusal to repurchase the transferred asset at fair value if the transferee subsequently sells it, the entity derecognises the asset because it has transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership.

5. Wash sale transaction. The repurchase of a financial asset shortly after it has been sold is sometimes referred to as a wash sale. Such a repurchase does not preclude derecognition provided that the original transaction met the derecognition requirements. However, if an agreement to sell a financial asset is entered into concurrently with an agreement to repurchase the same asset at a fixed price or the sale price plus a lender’s return, then the asset is not derecognised.

6. Put options and call options that are deeply in the money. If a transferred financial asset can be called back by the transferor and the call option is deeply in the money, the transfer does not qualify for derecognition because the transferor has retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership. Similarly, if the financial asset can be put back by the transferee and the put option is deeply in the money, the transfer does not qualify for derecognition because the transferor has retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership.

7. Put options and call options that are deeply out of the money. A financial asset that is transferred subject only to a deep out-of-the-money put option held by the transferee or a deep out-of-the- money call option held by the transferor is derecognised. This is because the transferor has transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership.

8. Readily obtainable assets subject to a call option that is neither deeply in the money nor deeply out of the money. If an entity holds a call option on an asset that is readily obtainable in the market and the option is neither deeply in the money nor deeply out of the money, the asset is derecognised. This is because the entity (i) has neither retained nor transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership, and (ii) has not retained control. However, if the asset is not readily obtainable in the market, derecognition is precluded to the extent of the amount of the asset that is subject to the call option because the entity has retained control of the asset.

9. A not readily obtainable asset subject to a put option written by an entity that is neither deeply in the money nor deeply out of the money. If an entity transfers a financial asset that is not readily obtainable in the market, and writes a put option that is not deeply out of the money, the entity neither retains nor transfers substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership because of the written put option. The entity retains control of the asset if the put option is sufficiently valuable to prevent the transferee from selling the asset, in which case the asset continues to be recognised to the extent of the transferor’s continuing involvement (see paragraph AG29). The entity transfers control of the asset if the put option is not sufficiently valuable to prevent the transferee from selling the asset, in which case the asset is derecognised.

10. Assets subject to a fair value put or call option or a forward repurchase agreement. A transfer of a financial asset that is subject only to a put or call option or a forward repurchase agreement that has an exercise or repurchase price equal to the fair value of the financial asset at the time of repurchase results in derecognition because of the transfer of substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership.

11. Cash-settled call or put options. An entity evaluates the transfer of a financial asset that is subject to a put or call option or a forward repurchase agreement that will be settled net in cash to determine whether it has retained or transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership. If the entity has not retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the transferred asset, it determines whether it has retained control of the transferred asset. That the put or the call or the forward repurchase agreement is settled net in cash does not automatically mean that the entity has transferred control (see paragraphs AG29 and (g), (h) and (i) above).

12. Removal of accounts provision. A removal of accounts provision is an unconditional repurchase (call) option that gives an entity the right to reclaim assets transferred subject to some restrictions. Provided that such an option results in the entity neither retaining nor transferring substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership, it precludes derecognition only to the extent of the amount subject to repurchase (assuming that the transferee cannot sell the assets). For example, if the carrying amount and proceeds from the transfer of loan assets are CU100,000 and any individual loan could be called back but the aggregate amount of loans that could be repurchased could not exceed CU10,000, CU90,000 of the loans would qualify for derecognition.

13. Clean-up calls. An entity, which may be a transferor, that services transferred assets may hold a clean-up call to purchase remaining transferred assets when the amount of outstanding assets falls to a specified level at which the cost of servicing those assets becomes burdensome in relation to the benefits of servicing. Provided that such a clean-up call results in the entity neither retaining nor transferring substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership and the transferee cannot sell the assets, it precludes derecognition only to the extent of the amount of the assets that is subject to the call option.

14. Subordinated retained interests and credit guarantees. An entity may provide the transferee with credit enhancement by subordinating some or all of its interest retained in the transferred asset. Alternatively, an entity may provide the transferee with credit enhancement in the form of a credit guarantee that could be unlimited or limited to a specified amount. If the entity retains substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the transferred asset, the asset continues to be recognised in its entirety. If the entity retains some, but not substantially all, of the risks and rewards of ownership and has retained control, derecognition is precluded to the extent of the amount of cash or other assets that the entity could be required to pay.

15. Total return swaps. An entity may sell a financial asset to a transferee and enter into a total return swap with the transferee, whereby all of the interest payment cash flows from the underlying asset are remitted to the entity in exchange for a fixed payment or variable rate payment and any increases or declines in the fair value of the underlying asset are absorbed by the entity. In such a case, derecognition of all of the asset is prohibited.

16. Interest rate swaps. An entity may transfer to a transferee a fixed rate financial asset and enter into an interest rate swap with the transferee to receive a fixed interest rate and pay a variable interest rate based on a notional amount that is equal to the principal amount of the transferred financial asset. The interest rate swap does not preclude derecognition of the transferred asset provided the payments on the swap are not conditional on payments being made on the transferred asset.

17. Amortising interest rate swaps. An entity may transfer to a transferee a fixed rate financial asset that is paid off over time, and enter into an amortising interest rate swap with the transferee to receive a fixed interest rate and pay a variable interest rate based on a notional amount. If the notional amount of the swap amortises so that it equals the principal amount of the transferred financial asset outstanding at any point in time, the swap would generally result in the entity retaining substantial prepayment risk, in which case the entity either continues to recognise all of the transferred asset or continues to recognise the transferred asset to the extent of its continuing involvement. Conversely, if the amortisation of the notional amount of the swap is not linked to the principal amount outstanding of the transferred asset, such a swap would not result in the entity retaining prepayment risk on the asset. Hence, it would not preclude derecognition of the transferred asset provided the payments on the swap are not conditional on interest payments being made on the transferred asset and the swap does not result in the entity retaining any other significant risks and rewards of ownership on the transferred asset.

18. Write-off. An entity has no reasonable expectations of recovering the contractual cash flows on a financial asset in its entirety or a portion thereof.

AG38. This paragraph illustrates the application of the continuing involvement approach when the entity’s continuing involvement is in a part of a financial asset.

AG39. A financial liability (or part of it) is extinguished when the debtor either:

1. Discharges the liability (or part of it) by paying the creditor, normally with cash, other financial assets, goods or services; or

2. Is legally released from primary responsibility for the liability (or part of it) either by process of law or by the creditor. (If the debtor has given a guarantee this condition may still be met.)

AG40. If an issuer of a debt instrument repurchases that instrument, the debt is extinguished even if the issuer is a market maker in that instrument or intends to resell it in the near term.

AG41. Payment to a third party, including a trust (sometimes called ‘in-substance defeasance’), does not, by itself, relieve the debtor of its primary obligation to the creditor, in the absence of legal release.

AG42. If a debtor pays a third party to assume an obligation and notifies its creditor that the third party has assumed its debt obligation, the debtor does not derecognise the debt obligation unless the condition in paragraph AG39(b) is met. If the debtor pays a third party to assume an obligation and obtains a legal release from its creditor, the debtor has extinguished the debt. However, if the debtor agrees to make payments on the debt to the third party or direct to its original creditor, the debtor recognises a new debt obligation to the third party.

AG43. If a third party assumes an obligation of an entity, and the entity provides either no or only nominal consideration to that third party in return, an entity applies the derecognition requirements of this Standard as well as paragraphs 84 to 87 of PBE IPSAS 23.

AG44. Lenders will sometimes waive their right to collect debt owed by a public sector entity, for example, a central government may cancel a loan owed by a local government. This waiver of debt would constitute a legal release of the debt owing by the borrower to the lender. Where an entity’s obligations have been waived as part of a non-exchange transaction it applies the derecognition requirements of this Standard as well as paragraphs 84 to 87 of PBE IPSAS 23.

AG45. Although legal release, whether judicially or by the creditor, results in derecognition of a liability, the entity may recognise a new liability if the derecognition criteria in paragraphs 12–34 are not met for the financial assets transferred. If those criteria are not met, the transferred assets are not derecognised, and the entity recognises a new liability relating to the transferred assets.

AG46. For the purpose of paragraph 36, the terms are substantially different if the discounted present value of the cash flows under the new terms, including any fees paid net of any fees received and discounted using the original effective interest rate, is at least 10 per cent different from the discounted present value of the remaining cash flows of the original financial liability. If an exchange of debt instruments or modification of terms is accounted for as an extinguishment, any costs or fees incurred are recognised as part of the gain or loss on the extinguishment. In determining those fees paid net of fees received, a borrower includes only fees paid or received between the borrower and the lender, including fees paid or received by either the borrower or lender on the other’s behalf.

AG46A. If an exchange of debt instruments or modification of terms is accounted for as an extinguishment, any costs or fees incurred are recognised as part of the gain or loss on the extinguishment. If the exchange or modification is not accounted for as an extinguishment, any costs or fees incurred adjust the carrying amount of the liability and are amortised over the remaining term of the modified liability.

AG47. In some cases, a creditor releases a debtor from its present obligation to make payments, but the debtor assumes a guarantee obligation to pay if the party assuming primary responsibility defaults. In these circumstances the debtor:

1. Recognises a new financial liability based on the fair value of its obligation for the guarantee; and

2. Recognises a gain or loss based on the difference between (i) any proceeds paid and (ii) the carrying amount of the original financial liability less the fair value of the new financial liability.

AG48. Paragraph 39(a) requires an entity to classify financial assets on the basis of the entity’s management model for the financial assets, unless paragraph 44 applies. An entity assesses whether its financial assets meet the condition in paragraph 40(a) or the condition in paragraph 41(a) on the basis of the management model as determined by the entity’s key management personnel (as defined in PBE IPSAS 20 Related Party Disclosures).

AG49. An entity’s management model is determined at a level that reflects how groups of financial assets are managed together to achieve a particular objective. The entity’s management model does not depend on management’s intentions for an individual instrument. Accordingly, this condition is not an instrument-by-instrument approach to classification and should be determined on a higher level of aggregation. However, a single entity may have more than one management model for its financial instruments. Consequently, classification need not be determined at the reporting entity level. For example, an entity may hold a portfolio of investments that it manages in order to collect contractual cash flows and another portfolio of investments that it manages in order to trade to realise fair value changes. Similarly, in some circumstances, it may be appropriate to separate a portfolio of financial assets into subportfolios in order to reflect the level at which an entity manages those financial assets. For example, that may be the case if an entity originates or purchases a portfolio of mortgage loans and manages some of the loans with an objective of collecting contractual cash flows and manages the other loans with an objective of selling them.

AG50. An entity’s management model refers to how an entity manages its financial assets in order to generate cash flows. That is, the entity’s management model determines whether cash flows will result from collecting contractual cash flows, selling financial assets or both. Consequently, this assessment is not performed on the basis of scenarios that the entity does not reasonably expect to occur, such as so- called ‘worst case’ or ‘stress case’ scenarios. For example, if an entity expects that it will sell a particular portfolio of financial assets only in a stress case scenario, that scenario would not affect the entity’s assessment of the management model for those assets if the entity reasonably expects that such a scenario will not occur. If cash flows are realised in a way that is different from the entity’s expectations at the date that the entity assessed the management model (for example, if the entity sells more or fewer financial assets than it expected when it classified the assets), that does not give rise to a prior period error in the entity’s financial statements (see PBE IPSAS 3 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors) nor does it change the classification of the remaining financial assets held in that management model (i.e., those assets that the entity recognised in prior periods and still holds) as long as the entity considered all relevant information that was available at the time that it made the management model assessment. However, when an entity assesses the management model for newly originated or newly purchased financial assets, it must consider information about how cash flows were realised in the past, along with all other relevant information.

AG51. An entity’s management model for financial assets is a matter of fact and not merely an assertion. It is typically observable through the activities that the entity undertakes to achieve the objective of the management model. An entity will need to use judgement when it assesses its management model for financial assets and that assessment is not determined by a single factor or activity. Instead, the entity must consider all relevant evidence that is available at the date of the assessment. Such relevant evidence includes, but is not limited to:

1. How the performance of the management model and the financial assets held within that management model are evaluated and reported to the entity’s key management personnel;

2. The risks that affect the performance of the management model (and the financial assets held within that management model) and, in particular, the way in which those risks are managed; and

3. How management is compensated (for example, whether the compensation is based on the fair value of the assets managed or on the contractual cash flows collected).

AG52. Financial assets that are held within a management model whose objective is to hold assets in order to collect contractual cash flows are managed to realise cash flows by collecting contractual payments over the life of the instrument. That is, the entity manages the assets held within the portfolio to collect those particular contractual cash flows (instead of managing the overall return on the portfolio by both holding and selling assets). In determining whether cash flows are going to be realised by collecting the financial assets’ contractual cash flows, it is necessary to consider the frequency, value and timing of sales in prior periods, the reasons for those sales and expectations about future sales activity. However sales in themselves do not determine the management model and therefore cannot be considered in isolation. Instead, information about past sales and expectations about future sales provide evidence related to how the entity’s stated objective for managing the financial assets is achieved and, specifically, how cash flows are realised. An entity must consider information about past sales within the context of the reasons for those sales and the conditions that existed at that time as compared to current conditions.

AG53. Although the objective of an entity’s management model may be to hold financial assets in order to collect contractual cash flows, the entity need not hold all of those instruments until maturity. Thus an entity’s management model can be to hold financial assets to collect contractual cash flows even when sales of financial assets occur or are expected to occur in the future.

AG54. The management model may be to hold assets to collect contractual cash flows even if the entity sells financial assets when there is an increase in the assets’ credit risk. To determine whether there has been an increase in the assets’ credit risk, the entity considers reasonable and supportable information, including forward looking information. Irrespective of their frequency and value, sales due to an increase in the assets’ credit risk are not inconsistent with a management model whose objective is to hold financial assets to collect contractual cash flows because the credit quality of financial assets is relevant to the entity’s ability to collect contractual cash flows. Credit risk management activities that are aimed at minimising potential credit losses due to credit deterioration are integral to such a management model. Selling a financial asset because it no longer meets the credit criteria specified in the entity’s documented investment policy is an example of a sale that has occurred due to an increase in credit risk. However, in the absence of such a policy, the entity may demonstrate in other ways that the sale occurred due to an increase in credit risk.

AG55. Sales that occur for other reasons, such as sales made to manage credit concentration risk (without an increase in the assets’ credit risk), may also be consistent with a management model whose objective is to hold financial assets in order to collect contractual cash flows. In particular, such sales may be consistent with a management model whose objective is to hold financial assets in order to collect contractual cash flows if those sales are infrequent (even if significant in value) or insignificant in value both individually and in aggregate (even if frequent). If more than an infrequent number of such sales are made out of a portfolio and those sales are more than insignificant in value (either individually or in aggregate), the entity needs to assess whether and how such sales are consistent with an objective of collecting contractual cash flows. Whether a third party imposes the requirement to sell the financial assets, or that activity is at the entity’s discretion, is not relevant to this assessment. An increase in the frequency or value of sales in a particular period is not necessarily inconsistent with an objective to hold financial assets in order to collect contractual cash flows, if an entity can explain the reasons for those sales and demonstrate why those sales do not reflect a change in the entity’s management model. In addition, sales may be consistent with the objective of holding financial assets in order to collect contractual cash flows if the sales are made close to the maturity of the financial assets and the proceeds from the sales approximate the collection of the remaining contractual cash flows.

AG56. The following are examples of when the objective of an entity’s management model may be to hold financial assets to collect the contractual cash flows. This list of examples is not exhaustive. Furthermore, the examples are not intended to discuss all factors that may be relevant to the assessment of the entity’s management model nor specify the relative importance of the factors.

AG57. An entity may hold financial assets in a management model whose objective is achieved by both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets. In this type of management model, the entity’s key management personnel have made a decision that both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets are integral to achieving the objective of the management model. There are various objectives that may be consistent with this type of management model. For example, the objective of the management model may be to manage everyday liquidity needs, to maintain a particular interest yield profile or to match the duration of the financial assets to the duration of the liabilities that those assets are funding. To achieve such an objective, the entity will both collect contractual cash flows and sell financial assets.

AG58. Compared to a management model whose objective is to hold financial assets to collect contractual cash flows, this management model will typically involve greater frequency and value of sales. This is because selling financial assets is integral to achieving the management model's objective instead of being only incidental to it. However, there is no threshold for the frequency or value of sales that must occur in this management model because both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets are integral to achieving its objective.

AG59. The following are examples of when the objective of the entity’s management model may be achieved by both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets. This list of examples is not exhaustive. Furthermore, the examples are not intended to describe all the factors that may be relevant to the assessment of the entity’s management model nor specify the relative importance of the factors.

AG60. Financial assets are measured at fair value through surplus or deficit if they are not held within a management model whose objective is to hold assets to collect contractual cash flows or within a management model whose objective is achieved by both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets (but see also paragraph 106). One management model that results in measurement at fair value through surplus or deficit is one in which an entity manages the financial assets with the objective of realising cash flows through the sale of the assets. The entity makes decisions based on the assets’ fair values and manages the assets to realise those fair values. In this case, the entity’s objective will typically result in active buying and selling. Even though the entity will collect contractual cash flows while it holds the financial assets, the objective of such a management model is not achieved by both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets. This is because the collection of contractual cash flows is not integral to achieving the management model’s objective; instead, it is incidental to it.

AG61. A portfolio of financial assets that is managed and whose performance is evaluated on a fair value basis (as described in paragraph 46(b)) is neither held to collect contractual cash flows nor held both to collect contractual cash flows and to sell financial assets. The entity is primarily focused on fair value information and uses that information to assess the assets’ performance and to make decisions. In addition, a portfolio of financial assets that meets the definition of held for trading is not held to collect contractual cash flows or held both to collect contractual cash flows and to sell financial assets. For such portfolios, the collection of contractual cash flows is only incidental to achieving the management model’s objective. Consequently, such portfolios of financial assets must be measured at fair value through surplus or deficit.

AG62. Paragraph 39(b) requires an entity to classify a financial asset on the basis of its contractual cash flow characteristics if the financial asset is held within a management model whose objective is to hold assets to collect contractual cash flows or within a management model whose objective is achieved by both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets, unless paragraph 44 applies. To do so, the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b) requires an entity to determine whether the asset’s contractual cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding.

AG63. Contractual cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding are consistent with a basic lending arrangement. In a basic lending arrangement, consideration for the time value of money (see paragraphs AG67–AG71) and credit risk are typically the most significant elements of interest. However, in such an arrangement, interest can also include consideration for other basic lending risks (for example, liquidity risk) and costs (for example, administrative costs) associated with holding the financial asset for a particular period of time. In addition, interest can include a profit margin that is consistent with a basic lending arrangement. In extreme economic circumstances, interest can be negative if, for example, the holder of a financial asset either explicitly or implicitly pays for the deposit of its money for a particular period of time (and that fee exceeds the consideration that the holder receives for the time value of money, credit risk and other basic lending risks and costs). However, contractual terms that introduce exposure to risks or volatility in the contractual cash flows that is unrelated to a basic lending arrangement, such as exposure to changes in equity prices, commodity prices, a specific profitability or income threshold being reached by the borrower or lender, or the achievement (or otherwise) of specific financial or other ratios, do not give rise to contractual cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. An originated or a purchased financial asset can be a basic lending arrangement irrespective of whether it is a loan in its legal form.

AG64. In accordance with paragraph 42(a), principal is the fair value of the financial asset at initial recognition. However that principal amount may change over the life of the financial asset (for example, if there are repayments of principal).

AG65. An entity shall assess whether contractual cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding for the currency in which the financial asset is denominated.

AG66. Leverage is a contractual cash flow characteristic of some financial assets. Leverage increases the variability of the contractual cash flows with the result that they do not have the economic characteristics of interest. Stand-alone option, forward and swap contracts are examples of financial assets that include such leverage. Thus, such contracts do not meet the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b) and cannot be subsequently measured at amortised cost or fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense.

AG67. Time value of money is the element of interest that provides consideration for only the passage of time. That is, the time value of money element does not provide consideration for other risks or costs associated with holding the financial asset. In order to assess whether the element provides consideration for only the passage of time, an entity applies judgement and considers relevant factors such as the currency in which the financial asset is denominated and the period for which the interest rate is set.

AG68. However, in some cases, the time value of money element may be modified (i.e., imperfect). That would be the case, for example, if a financial asset’s interest rate is periodically reset but the frequency of that reset does not match the tenor of the interest rate (for example, the interest rate resets every month to a one-year rate) or if a financial asset’s interest rate is periodically reset to an average of particular short- and long-term interest rates. In such cases, an entity must assess the modification to determine whether the contractual cash flows represent solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. In some circumstances, the entity may be able to make that determination by performing a qualitative assessment of the time value of money element whereas, in other circumstances, it may be necessary to perform a quantitative assessment.

AG69. When assessing a modified time value of money element, the objective is to determine how different the contractual (undiscounted) cash flows could be from the (undiscounted) cash flows that would arise if the time value of money element was not modified (the benchmark cash flows). For example, if the financial asset under assessment contains a variable interest rate that is reset every month to a one-year interest rate, the entity would compare that financial asset to a financial instrument with identical contractual terms and the identical credit risk except the variable interest rate is reset monthly to a one- month interest rate. If the modified time value of money element could result in contractual (undiscounted) cash flows that are significantly different from the (undiscounted) benchmark cash flows, the financial asset does not meet the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b). To make this determination, the entity must consider the effect of the modified time value of money element in each reporting period and cumulatively over the life of the financial instrument. The reason for the interest rate being set in this way is not relevant to the analysis. If it is clear, with little or no analysis, whether the contractual (undiscounted) cash flows on the financial asset under the assessment could (or could not) be significantly different from the (undiscounted) benchmark cash flows, an entity need not perform a detailed assessment.

AG70. When assessing a modified time value of money element, an entity must consider factors that could affect future contractual cash flows. For example, if an entity is assessing a bond with a five-year term and the variable interest rate is reset every six months to a five-year rate, the entity cannot conclude that the contractual cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding simply because the interest rate curve at the time of the assessment is such that the difference between a five-year interest rate and a six-month interest rate is not significant. Instead, the entity must also consider whether the relationship between the five-year interest rate and the six-month interest rate could change over the life of the instrument such that the contractual (undiscounted) cash flows over the life of the instrument could be significantly different from the (undiscounted) benchmark cash flows. However, an entity must consider only reasonably possible scenarios instead of every possible scenario. If an entity concludes that the contractual (undiscounted) cash flows could be significantly different from the (undiscounted) benchmark cash flows, the financial asset does not meet the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b) and therefore cannot be measured at amortised cost or fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense.

AG71. In some jurisdictions, the government or a regulatory authority sets interest rates. For example, such government regulation of interest rates may be part of a broad macroeconomic policy or it may be introduced to encourage entities to invest in a particular sector of the economy. In some of these cases, the objective of the time value of money element is not to provide consideration for only the passage of time. However, despite paragraphs AG67–AG70, a regulated interest rate shall be considered a proxy for the time value of money element for the purpose of applying the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b) if that regulated interest rate provides consideration that is broadly consistent with the passage of time and does not provide exposure to risks or volatility in the contractual cash flows that are inconsistent with a basic lending arrangement.

AG72. If a financial asset contains a contractual term that could change the timing or amount of contractual cash flows (for example, if the asset can be prepaid before maturity or its term can be extended), the entity must determine whether the contractual cash flows that could arise over the life of the instrument due to that contractual term are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. To make this determination, the entity must assess the contractual cash flows that could arise both before, and after, the change in contractual cash flows. The entity may also need to assess the nature of any contingent event (i.e., the trigger) that would change the timing or amount of the contractual cash flows. While the nature of the contingent event in itself is not a determinative factor in assessing whether the contractual cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest, it may be an indicator. For example, compare a financial instrument with an interest rate that is reset to a higher rate if the debtor misses a particular number of payments to a financial instrument with an interest rate that is reset to a higher rate if a specified equity index reaches a particular level. It is more likely in the former case that the contractual cash flows over the life of the instrument will be solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding because of the relationship between missed payments and an increase in credit risk. (See also paragraph AG80.)

AG73. The following are examples of contractual terms that result in contractual cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding:

1. A variable interest rate that consists of consideration for the time value of money, the credit risk associated with the principal amount outstanding during a particular period of time (the consideration for credit risk may be determined at initial recognition only, and so may be fixed) and other basic lending risks and costs, as well as a profit margin;

2. A contractual term that permits the issuer (i.e., the debtor) to prepay a debt instrument or permits the holder (i.e., the creditor) to put a debt instrument back to the issuer before maturity and the prepayment amount substantially represents unpaid amounts of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding, which may include reasonable compensation for the early termination of the contract; and

3. A contractual term that permits the issuer or the holder to extend the contractual term of a debt instrument (i.e., an extension option) and the terms of the extension option result in contractual cash flows during the extension period that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding, which may include reasonable additional compensation for the extension of the contract.

AG74. Despite paragraph AG72, a financial asset that would otherwise meet the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b) but does not do so only as a result of a contractual term that permits (or requires) the issuer to prepay a debt instrument or permits (or requires) the holder to put a debt instrument back to the issuer before maturity is eligible to be measured at amortised cost or fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense (subject to meeting the condition in paragraph 40(a) or the condition in paragraph 41(a)) if:

1. The entity acquires or originates the financial asset at a premium or discount to the contractual par amount;

2. The prepayment amount substantially represents the contractual par amount and accrued (but unpaid) contractual interest, which may include reasonable compensation for the early termination of the contract; and

3. When the entity initially recognises the financial asset, the fair value of the prepayment feature is insignificant.

AG74.1 For the purpose of applying paragraphs AG73(b) and AG74(b), irrespective of the event or circumstance that causes the early termination of the contract, a party may pay or receive reasonable compensation for that early termination. For example, a party may pay or receive reasonable compensation when it chooses to terminate the contract early (or otherwise causes the early termination to occur).

AG75. The following examples illustrate contractual cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. This list of examples is not exhaustive.

AG76. The following examples illustrate contractual cash flows that are not solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. This list of examples is not exhaustive.

AG77. In some cases a financial asset may have contractual cash flows that are described as principal and interest but those cash flows do not represent the payment of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding as described in paragraphs 40(b), 41(b) and 42 of this Standard.

AG78. This may be the case if the financial asset represents an investment in particular assets or cash flows and hence the contractual cash flows are not solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. For example, if the contractual terms stipulate that the financial asset’s cash flows increase as more automobiles use a particular toll road, those contractual cash flows are inconsistent with a basic lending arrangement. As a result, the instrument would not satisfy the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b). This could be the case when a creditor’s claim is limited to specified assets of the debtor or the cash flows from specified assets (for example, a ‘non-recourse’ financial asset).

AG79. However, the fact that a financial asset is non-recourse does not in itself necessarily preclude the financial asset from meeting the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b). In such situations, the creditor is required to assess (‘look through to’) the particular underlying assets or cash flows to determine whether the contractual cash flows of the financial asset being classified are payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. If the terms of the financial asset give rise to any other cash flows or limit the cash flows in a manner inconsistent with payments representing principal and interest, the financial asset does not meet the condition in paragraphs 40(b) and 41(b). Whether the underlying assets are financial assets or non-financial assets does not in itself affect this assessment.

AG80. A contractual cash flow characteristic does not affect the classification of the financial asset if it could have only a de minimis effect on the contractual cash flows of the financial asset. To make this determination, an entity must consider the possible effect of the contractual cash flow characteristic in each reporting period and cumulatively over the life of the financial instrument. In addition, if a contractual cash flow characteristic could have an effect on the contractual cash flows that is more than de minimis (either in a single reporting period or cumulatively) but that cash flow characteristic is not genuine, it does not affect the classification of a financial asset. A cash flow characteristic is not genuine if it affects the instrument’s contractual cash flows only on the occurrence of an event that is extremely rare, highly abnormal and very unlikely to occur.

AG81. In almost every lending transaction the creditor’s instrument is ranked relative to the instruments of the debtor’s other creditors. An instrument that is subordinated to other instruments may have contractual cash flows that are payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding if the debtor’s non-payment is a breach of contract and the holder has a contractual right to unpaid amounts of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding even in the event of the debtor’s bankruptcy. For example, a trade receivable that ranks its creditor as a general creditor would qualify as having payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. This is the case even if the debtor issued loans that are collateralised, which in the event of bankruptcy would give that loan holder priority over the claims of the general creditor in respect of the collateral but does not affect the contractual right of the general creditor to unpaid principal and other amounts due.

AG82. In some types of transactions, an issuer may prioritise payments to the holders of financial assets using multiple contractually linked instruments that create concentrations of credit risk (tranches). Each tranche has a subordination ranking that specifies the order in which any cash flows generated by the issuer are allocated to the tranche. In such situations, the holders of a tranche have the right to payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding only if the issuer generates sufficient cash flows to satisfy higher-ranking tranches.

AG83. In such transactions, a tranche has cash flow characteristics that are payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding only if:

1. The contractual terms of the tranche being assessed for classification (without looking through to the underlying pool of financial instruments) give rise to cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding (e.g., the interest rate on the tranche is not linked to a commodity index);

2. The underlying pool of financial instruments has the cash flow characteristics set out in paragraphs AG85 and AG86; and

3. The exposure to credit risk in the underlying pool of financial instruments inherent in the tranche is equal to or lower than the exposure to credit risk of the underlying pool of financial instruments (for example, the credit rating of the tranche being assessed for classification is equal to or higher than the credit rating that would apply to a single tranche that funded the underlying pool of financial instruments).

AG84. An entity must look through until it can identify the underlying pool of instruments that are creating (instead of passing through) the cash flows. This is the underlying pool of financial instruments.

AG85. The underlying pool must contain one or more instruments that have contractual cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding.

AG86. The underlying pool of instruments may also include instruments that:

1. Reduce the cash flow variability of the instruments in paragraph AG85 and, when combined with the instruments in paragraph AG85, result in cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding (e.g., an interest rate cap or floor or a contract that reduces the credit risk on some or all of the instruments in paragraph AG85); or

2. Align the cash flows of the tranches with the cash flows of the pool of underlying instruments in paragraph AG85 to address differences in and only in:

   1. Whether the interest rate is fixed or floating;

   2. The currency in which the cash flows are denominated, including inflation in that currency; or

   3. The timing of the cash flows.

AG87. If any instrument in the pool does not meet the conditions in either paragraph AG85 or paragraph AG86, the condition in paragraph 83(b) is not met. In performing this assessment, a detailed instrument-by-instrument analysis of the pool may not be necessary. However, an entity must use judgement and perform sufficient analysis to determine whether the instruments in the pool meet the conditions in paragraphs AG85–AG86. (See also paragraph AG80 for guidance on contractual cash flow characteristics that have only a de minimis effect.)

AG88. If the holder cannot assess the conditions in paragraph AG83 at initial recognition, the tranche must be measured at fair value through surplus or deficit. If the underlying pool of instruments can change after initial recognition in such a way that the pool may not meet the conditions in paragraphs A85–AG86, the tranche does not meet the conditions in paragraph AG83 and must be measured at fair value through surplus or deficit. However, if the underlying pool includes instruments that are collateralised by assets that do not meet the conditions in paragraphs AG85–AG86, the ability to take possession of such assets shall be disregarded for the purposes of applying this paragraph unless the entity acquired the tranche with the management model of controlling the collateral.

AG89. Subject to the conditions in paragraphs 44 and 46, this Standard allows an entity to designate a financial asset, a financial liability, or a group of financial instruments (financial assets, financial liabilities or both) as at fair value through surplus or deficit provided that doing so results in more relevant information.

AG90. The decision of an entity to designate a financial asset or financial liability as at fair value through surplus or deficit is similar to an accounting policy choice (although, unlike an accounting policy choice, it is not required to be applied consistently to all similar transactions). When an entity has such a choice, paragraph 12 of PBE IPSAS 3 requires the chosen policy to result in the financial statements providing faithfully representative and more relevant information about the effects of transactions, other events and conditions on the entity’s financial position, financial performance or cash flows. For example, in the case of designation of a financial liability as at fair value through surplus or deficit, paragraph 46 sets out the two circumstances when the requirement for more relevant information will be met. Accordingly, to choose such designation in accordance with paragraph 46, the entity needs to demonstrate that it falls within one (or both) of these two circumstances.

AG91. Measurement of a financial asset or financial liability and classification of recognised changes in its value are determined by the item’s classification and whether the item is part of a designated hedging relationship. Those requirements can create a measurement or recognition inconsistency (sometimes referred to as an ‘accounting mismatch’) when, for example, in the absence of designation as at fair value through surplus or deficit, a financial asset would be classified as subsequently measured at fair value through surplus or deficit and a liability the entity considers related would be subsequently measured at amortised cost (with changes in fair value not recognised). In such circumstances, an entity may conclude that its financial statements would provide more relevant information if both the asset and the liability were measured as at fair value through surplus or deficit.

AG92. The following examples show when this condition could be met. In all cases, an entity may use this condition to designate financial assets or financial liabilities as at fair value through surplus or deficit only if it meets the principle in paragraph 44 or 46(a):

1. An entity has liabilities under insurance contracts, whose measurement incorporates current information (as permitted by paragraph 24 of PBE IFRS 4) and financial assets that it considers to be related and that would otherwise be measured at either fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense or amortised cost.

2. An entity has financial assets, financial liabilities or both that share a risk, such as interest rate risk, and that gives rise to opposite changes in fair value that tend to offset each other. However, only some of the instruments would be measured at fair value through surplus or deficit (for example, those that are derivatives, or are classified as held for trading). It may also be the case that the requirements for hedge accounting are not met because, for example, the requirements for hedge effectiveness in paragraph 129 are not met.

3. An entity has financial assets, financial liabilities or both that share a risk, such as interest rate risk, that gives rise to opposite changes in fair value that tend to offset each other and none of the financial assets or financial liabilities qualifies for designation as a hedging instrument because they are not measured at fair value through surplus or deficit. Furthermore, in the absence of hedge accounting there is a significant inconsistency in the recognition of gains and losses. For example, the entity has financed a specified group of loans by issuing traded bonds whose changes in fair value tend to offset each other. If, in addition, the entity regularly buys and sells the bonds but rarely, if ever, buys and sells the loans, reporting both the loans and the bonds at fair value through surplus or deficit eliminates the inconsistency in the timing of the recognition of the gains and losses that would otherwise result from measuring them both at amortised cost and recognising a gain or loss each time a bond is repurchased.

AG93. In cases such as those described in the preceding paragraph, to designate, at initial recognition, the financial assets and financial liabilities not otherwise so measured as at fair value through surplus or deficit may eliminate or significantly reduce the measurement or recognition inconsistency and produce more relevant information. For practical purposes, the entity need not enter into all of the assets and liabilities giving rise to the measurement or recognition inconsistency at exactly the same time. A reasonable delay is permitted provided that each transaction is designated as at fair value through surplus or deficit at its initial recognition and, at that time, any remaining transactions are expected to occur.

AG94. It would not be acceptable to designate only some of the financial assets and financial liabilities giving rise to the inconsistency as at fair value through surplus or deficit if to do so would not eliminate or significantly reduce the inconsistency and would therefore not result in more relevant information. However, it would be acceptable to designate only some of a number of similar financial assets or similar financial liabilities if doing so achieves a significant reduction (and possibly a greater reduction than other allowable designations) in the inconsistency. For example, assume an entity has a number of similar financial liabilities that sum to CU100 and a number of similar financial assets that sum to CU50 but are measured on a different basis. The entity may significantly reduce the measurement inconsistency by designating at initial recognition all of the assets but only some of the liabilities (for example, individual liabilities with a combined total of CU45) as at fair value through surplus or deficit. However, because designation as at fair value through surplus or deficit can be applied only to the whole of a financial instrument, the entity in this example must designate one or more liabilities in their entirety. It could not designate either a component of a liability (e.g., changes in value attributable to only one risk, such as changes in a benchmark interest rate) or a proportion (i.e., percentage) of a liability.

AG95. An entity may manage and evaluate the performance of a group of financial liabilities or financial assets and financial liabilities in such a way that measuring that group at fair value through surplus or deficit results in more relevant information. The focus in this instance is on the way the entity manages and evaluates performance, instead of on the nature of its financial instruments.

AG96. For example, an entity may use this condition to designate financial liabilities as at fair value through surplus or deficit if it meets the principle in paragraph 46(b) and the entity has financial assets and financial liabilities that share one or more risks and those risks are managed and evaluated on a fair value basis in accordance with a documented policy of asset and liability management. An example could be an entity that has issued ‘structured products’ containing multiple embedded derivatives and manages the resulting risks on a fair value basis using a mix of derivative and non-derivative financial instruments.

AG97. As noted above, this condition relies on the way the entity manages and evaluates performance of the group of financial instruments under consideration. Accordingly, (subject to the requirement of designation at initial recognition) an entity that designates financial liabilities as at fair value through surplus or deficit on the basis of this condition shall so designate all eligible financial liabilities that are managed and evaluated together.

AG98. Documentation of the entity’s strategy need not be extensive but should be sufficient to demonstrate compliance with paragraph 46(b). Such documentation is not required for each individual item, but may be on a portfolio basis. For example, if the performance management system for a department— as approved by the entity’s key management personnel—clearly demonstrates that its performance is evaluated on this basis, no further documentation is required to demonstrate compliance with paragraph 46(b).

AG99. When an entity becomes a party to a hybrid contract with a host that is not an asset within the scope of this Standard, paragraph 49 requires the entity to identify any embedded derivative, assess whether it is required to be separated from the host contract and, for those that are required to be separated, measure the derivatives at fair value at initial recognition and subsequently at fair value through surplus or deficit.

AG100. If a host contract has no stated or predetermined maturity and represents a residual interest in the net assets of an entity, then its economic characteristics and risks are those of an equity instrument, and an embedded derivative would need to possess equity characteristics related to the same entity to be regarded as closely related. If the host contract is not an equity instrument and meets the definition of a financial instrument, then its economic characteristics and risks are those of a debt instrument.

AG101. An embedded non-option derivative (such as an embedded forward or swap) is separated from its host contract on the basis of its stated or implied substantive terms, so as to result in it having a fair value of zero at initial recognition. An embedded option-based derivative (such as an embedded put, call, cap, floor or swaption) is separated from its host contract on the basis of the stated terms of the option feature. The initial carrying amount of the host instrument is the residual amount after separating the embedded derivative.

AG102. Generally, multiple embedded derivatives in a single hybrid contract are treated as a single compound embedded derivative. However, embedded derivatives that are classified as equity (see PBE IPSAS 28) are accounted for separately from those classified as assets or liabilities. In addition, if a hybrid contract has more than one embedded derivative and those derivatives relate to different risk exposures and are readily separable and independent of each other, they are accounted for separately from each other.

AG103. The economic characteristics and risks of an embedded derivative are not closely related to the host contract (paragraph 49(a)) in the following examples. In these examples, assuming the conditions in paragraph 49(b) and 49(c) are met, an entity accounts for the embedded derivative separately from the host contract.

1. A put option embedded in an instrument that enables the holder to require the issuer to reacquire the instrument for an amount of cash or other assets that varies on the basis of the change in an equity or commodity price or index is not closely related to a host debt instrument.

2. An option or automatic provision to extend the remaining term to maturity of a debt instrument is not closely related to the host debt instrument unless there is a concurrent adjustment to the approximate current market rate of interest at the time of the extension. If an entity issues a debt instrument and the holder of that debt instrument writes a call option on the debt instrument to a third party, the issuer regards the call option as extending the term to maturity of the debt instrument provided the issuer can be required to participate in or facilitate the remarketing of the debt instrument as a result of the call option being exercised.

3. Equity-indexed interest or principal payments embedded in a host debt instrument or insurance contract—by which the amount of interest or principal is indexed to the value of equity instruments—are not closely related to the host instrument because the risks inherent in the host and the embedded derivative are dissimilar.

4. Commodity-indexed interest or principal payments embedded in a host debt instrument or insurance contract—by which the amount of interest or principal is indexed to the price of a commodity (such as gold)—are not closely related to the host instrument because the risks inherent in the host and the embedded derivative are dissimilar.

5. A call, put, or prepayment option embedded in a host debt contract or host insurance contract is not closely related to the host contract unless:

   1. The option’s exercise price is approximately equal on each exercise date to the amortised cost of the host debt instrument or the carrying amount of the host insurance contract; or

   2. The exercise price of a prepayment option reimburses the lender for an amount up to the approximate present value of lost interest for the remaining term of the host contract. Lost interest is the product of the principal amount prepaid multiplied by the interest rate differential. The interest rate differential is the excess of the effective interest rate of the host contract over the effective interest rate the entity would receive at the prepayment date if it reinvested the principal amount prepaid in a similar contract for the remaining term of the host contract.The assessment of whether the call or put option is closely related to the host debt contract is made before separating the equity element of a convertible debt instrument in accordance with PBE IPSAS 28.

6. Credit derivatives that are embedded in a host debt instrument and allow one party (the ‘beneficiary’) to transfer the credit risk of a particular reference asset, which it may not own, to another party (the ‘guarantor’) are not closely related to the host debt instrument. Such credit derivatives allow the guarantor to assume the credit risk associated with the reference asset without directly owning it.

AG104. An example of a hybrid contract is a financial instrument that gives the holder a right to put the financial instrument back to the issuer in exchange for an amount of cash or other financial assets that varies on the basis of the change in an equity or commodity index that may increase or decrease (a ‘puttable instrument’). Unless the issuer on initial recognition designates the puttable instrument as a financial liability at fair value through surplus or deficit, it is required to separate an embedded derivative (i.e., the indexed principal payment) under paragraph 49 because the host contract is a debt instrument under paragraph AG100 and the indexed principal payment is not closely related to a host debt instrument under paragraph AG103(a). Because the principal payment can increase and decrease, the embedded derivative is a non-option derivative whose value is indexed to the underlying variable.

AG105. In the case of a puttable instrument that can be put back at any time for cash equal to a proportionate share of the net asset value of an entity (such as units of an open-ended mutual fund or some unit-linked investment products), the effect of separating an embedded derivative and accounting for each component is to measure the hybrid contract at the redemption amount that is payable at the end of the reporting period if the holder exercised its right to put the instrument back to the issuer.

AG106. The economic characteristics and risks of an embedded derivative are closely related to the economic characteristics and risks of the host contract in the following examples. In these examples, an entity does not account for the embedded derivative separately from the host contract.

1. An embedded derivative in which the underlying is an interest rate or interest rate index that can change the amount of interest that would otherwise be paid or received on an interest-bearing host debt contract or insurance contract is closely related to the host contract unless the hybrid contract can be settled in such a way that the holder would not recover substantially all of its recognised investment or the embedded derivative could at least double the holder’s initial rate of return on the host contract and could result in a rate of return that is at least twice what the market return would be for a contract with the same terms as the host contract.

2. An embedded floor or cap on the interest rate on a debt contract or insurance contract is closely related to the host contract, provided the cap is at or above the market rate of interest and the floor is at or below the market rate of interest when the contract is issued, and the cap or floor is not leveraged in relation to the host contract. Similarly, provisions included in a contract to purchase or sell an asset (e.g., a commodity) that establish a cap and a floor on the price to be paid or received for the asset are closely related to the host contract if both the cap and floor were out of the money at inception and are not leveraged.

3. An embedded foreign currency derivative that provides a stream of principal or interest payments that are denominated in a foreign currency and is embedded in a host debt instrument (for example, a dual currency bond) is closely related to the host debt instrument. Such a derivative is not separated from the host instrument because PBE IPSAS 4 The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates requires foreign currency gains and losses on monetary items to be recognised in surplus or deficit.

4. An embedded foreign currency derivative in a host contract that is an insurance contract or not a financial instrument (such as a contract for the purchase or sale of a non-financial item where the price is denominated in a foreign currency) is closely related to the host contract provided it is not leveraged, does not contain an option feature, and requires payments denominated in one of the following currencies:

   1. The functional currency of any substantial party to that contract;

   2. The currency in which the price of the related good or service that is acquired or delivered is routinely denominated in commercial transactions around the world (such as the US dollar for crude oil transactions); or

   3. A currency that is commonly used in contracts to purchase or sell non-financial items in the economic environment in which the transaction takes place (e.g., a relatively stable and liquid currency that is commonly used in local business transactions or external trade).

5. An embedded prepayment option in an interest-only or principal-only strip is closely related to the host contract provided the host contract (i) initially resulted from separating the right to receive contractual cash flows of a financial instrument that, in and of itself, did not contain an embedded derivative, and (ii) does not contain any terms not present in the original host debt contract.

6. An embedded derivative in a host lease contract is closely related to the host contract if the embedded derivative is (i) an inflation-related index such as an index of lease payments to a consumer price index (provided that the lease is not leveraged and the index relates to inflation in the entity’s own economic environment), (ii) variable lease payments based on related sales or (iii) variable lease payments based on variable interest rates.

7. A unit-linking feature embedded in a host financial instrument or host insurance contract is closely related to the host instrument or host contract if the unit-denominated payments are measured at current unit values that reflect the fair values of the assets of the fund. A unit-linking feature is a contractual term that requires payments denominated in units of an internal or external investment fund.

8. A derivative embedded in an insurance contract is closely related to the host insurance contract if the embedded derivative and host insurance contract are so interdependent that an entity cannot measure the embedded derivative separately (i.e., without considering the host contract).

AG107. As noted in paragraph AG99, when an entity becomes a party to a hybrid contract with a host that is not an asset within the scope of this Standard and with one or more embedded derivatives, paragraph 49 requires the entity to identify any such embedded derivative, assess whether it is required to be separated from the host contract and, for those that are required to be separated, measure the derivatives at fair value at initial recognition and subsequently. These requirements can be more complex, or result in less reliable measures, than measuring the entire instrument at fair value through surplus or deficit. For that reason this Standard permits the entire hybrid contract to be designated as at fair value through surplus or deficit.

AG108. Such designation may be used whether paragraph 49 requires the embedded derivatives to be separated from the host contract or prohibits such separation. However, paragraph 51 would not justify designating the hybrid contract as at fair value through surplus or deficit in the cases set out in paragraph 51(a) and 51(b) because doing so would not reduce complexity or increase reliability.

AG109. In accordance with paragraph 49, an entity shall assess whether an embedded derivative is required to be separated from the host contract and accounted for as a derivative when the entity first becomes a party to the contract. Subsequent reassessment is prohibited unless there is a change in the terms of the contract that significantly modifies the cash flows that otherwise would be required under the contract, in which case reassessment is required. An entity determines whether a modification to cash flows is significant by considering the extent to which the expected future cash flows associated with the embedded derivative, the host contract or both have changed and whether the change is significant relative to the previously expected cash flows on the contract.

AG110. Paragraph AG109 does not apply to embedded derivatives in contracts acquired in:

1. A PBE combination (as defined in PBE IPSAS 40 PBE Combinations); or

2. [Deleted by NZASB]

3. The formation of a joint venture as defined in PBE IPSAS 37 Joint Arrangements

or their possible reassessment at the date of acquisition.

AG111. Paragraph 54 requires an entity to reclassify financial assets if the entity changes its management model for managing those financial assets. Such changes are expected to be very infrequent. Such changes are determined by the entity’s senior management as a result of external or internal changes and must be significant to the entity’s operations and demonstrable to external parties. Accordingly, a change in an entity’s management model will occur only when an entity either begins or ceases to perform an activity that is significant to its operations; for example, when the entity has acquired, disposed of or terminated a business line. Examples of a change in management model include the following:

1. A government agency extends loans to small business owners and has a management model to sell the loan portfolios to private entities at a discount due to the long collection cycle of these loans. The entity enters into a long-term contract with a third-party collection service provider. The loan portfolios are no longer for sale, as they are held to collect the contractual cash flows with the aid of the collections service provider.

2. A department of government decides to end its support for its national auto manufacturing industry by no longer providing favourable loans. That department no longer issues new loans and the department is actively marketing its loan portfolio for sale.

AG112. A change in the objective of the entity’s management model must be effected before the reclassification date. For example, if a mortgage and housing corporation decides on February 15 to shut down its retail mortgage business and hence must reclassify all affected financial assets on April 1 (i.e., the first day of the entity’s next reporting period), the entity must not accept new retail mortgage business or otherwise engage in activities consistent with its former management model after February 15.

AG113. The following are not changes in management model:

1. A change in intention related to particular financial assets (even in circumstances of significant changes in market conditions).

2. The temporary disappearance of a particular market for financial assets.

3. A transfer of financial assets between parts of the entity with different management models.

AG114. The initial recognition and measurement of assets and liabilities resulting from non-exchange revenue transactions is dealt with in PBE IPSAS 23. Assets resulting from non-exchange revenue transactions can arise out of both contractual and non-contractual arrangements (see PBE IPSAS 28 paragraphs AG20 and AG21). Where these assets arise out of contractual arrangements and otherwise meet the definition of a financial instrument, they are:

1. Initially recognised in accordance with PBE IPSAS 23;

2. Initially measured:

   1. At fair value using the principles in PBE IPSAS 23; and

   2. Taking account of transaction costs that are directly attributable to the acquisition of the financial asset in accordance with paragraph 57 of this Standard, where the asset is subsequently measured other than at fair value through surplus or deficit.

AG115. The fair value of a financial instrument at initial recognition is normally the transaction price (i.e., the fair value of the consideration given or received, see also paragraph AG117). However, if part of the consideration given or received is for something other than the financial instrument, the fair value of the financial instrument is estimated, using a valuation technique (see paragraphs AG149–AG154). For example, the fair value of a long-term loan or receivable that carries no interest can be measured as the present value of all future cash receipts discounted using the prevailing market rate(s) of interest for a similar instrument (similar as to currency, term, type of interest rate and other factors) with a similar credit rating. Any additional amount lent is an expense or a reduction of revenue unless it qualifies for recognition as some other type of asset.

AG116. If an entity originates a loan that bears an off-market interest rate (e.g., 5 per cent when the market rate for similar loans is 8 per cent), and receives an upfront fee as compensation, the entity recognises the loan at its fair value, i.e., net of the fee it receives.

AG117. The best evidence of the fair value of a financial instrument at initial recognition is normally the transaction price. If an entity determines that the fair value at initial recognition differs from the transaction price as mentioned in paragraph 58, the entity shall account for that instrument at that date as follows:

1. At the measurement required by paragraph 57 if that fair value is evidenced by a quoted price in an active market for an identical asset or liability (i.e., a Level 1 input) or based on a valuation technique that uses only data from observable markets. An entity shall recognise the difference between the fair value at initial recognition and the transaction price as a gain or loss.

2. In all other cases, at the measurement required by paragraph 57, adjusted to defer the difference between the fair value at initial recognition and the transaction price. After initial recognition, the entity shall recognise that deferred difference as a gain or loss only to the extent that it arises from a change in a factor (including time) that market participants would take into account when pricing the asset or liability.

The requirements of this paragraph do not apply to concessionary loans or equity instruments arising from non-exchange transactions as outlined in paragraphs AG118 to AG130.

AG118. Concessionary loans are granted to or received by an entity at below market terms. Below market terms can result from interest and/or principal concessions. Examples of concessionary loans that commonly have below market terms include loans to developing countries, small farms, student loans granted to qualifying students for university or college education and housing loans granted to low income families. Entities may receive concessionary loans, for example, from development agencies and other government entities.

AG119. The granting or receiving of a concessionary loan is distinguished from the waiver of debt owing to or by an entity. This distinction is important because it affects whether the below market conditions are considered in the initial recognition or measurement of the loan rather than as part of the subsequent measurement or derecognition.

AG120. The intention of a concessionary loan at the outset is to provide or receive resources at below market terms. A waiver of debt results from loans initially granted or received at market related terms where the intention of either party to the loan has changed subsequent to its initial issue or receipt. For example, a government may lend money to a not-for-profit entity with the intention that the loan be repaid in full on market terms. However, the government may subsequently write-off part of the loan. This is not a concessionary loan as the intention of the loan at the outset was to provide credit to an entity at market related rates. An entity would treat the subsequent write-off of the loan as a waiver of debt and apply the derecognition requirements of PBE IPSAS 41 (see paragraphs 12–34).

AG121. Concessionary loans also share many characteristics with originated credit-impaired loans. Whether a loan is classified as concessionary or originated credit-impaired determines whether the difference between the transaction price and the fair value of the loan is recognised as a concession or as a credit loss in the statement of comprehensive revenue and expense.

AG122. Whether a loan is concessionary or originated credit-impaired depends on its substance. An intention to incorporate a non-exchange component into the transaction, such as a transfer of resources, indicates the loan is concessionary. The non-exchange component is incorporated into the transaction by granting the loan at below market terms. By contrast, originated credit-impaired loans are loans where one or more events, that have a detrimental impact on the estimated future cash flows of the financial asset, have occurred.

AG123. As concessionary loans are granted or received at below market terms, the transaction price on initial recognition of the loan may not be its fair value. At initial recognition, an entity therefore analyses the substance of the loan granted or received into its component parts, and accounts for those components using the principles in paragraphs AG124 and AG126 below.

AG124. An entity firstly assesses whether the substance of the concessionary loan is in fact a loan, a non- exchange transaction, a contribution from owners or a combination thereof, by applying the principles in PBE IPSAS 28 and paragraphs 42–58 of PBE IPSAS 23. If an entity has determined that the transaction, or part of the transaction, is a loan, it assesses whether the transaction price represents the fair value of the loan on initial recognition. An entity determines the fair value of the loan by using the principles in AG144–AG155. Where an entity cannot determine fair value by reference to an active market, it uses a valuation technique. Fair value using a valuation technique could be determined by discounting all future cash receipts using a market related rate of interest for a similar loan (see paragraph AG115).

AG125. Any difference between the fair value of the loan and the transaction price (the loan proceeds) is treated as follows:

1. Where the loan is received by an entity, the difference is accounted for in accordance with PBE IPSAS 23.

2. Where the loan is granted by an entity, the difference is treated as an expense in surplus or deficit at initial recognition, except where the loan is a transaction with owners, in their capacity as owners. Where the loan is a transaction with owners in their capacity as owners, for example, where a controlling entity provides a concessionary loan to a controlled entity, the difference may represent a capital contribution, i.e., an investment in an entity, rather than an expense.

Illustrative Examples are provided in paragraph IG54 of PBE IPSAS 23 as well as paragraphs IE153 to IE161 accompanying this Standard.

AG126. After evaluating the substance of the concessionary loan and measuring the loan component at fair value, an entity subsequently assesses the classification of concessionary loans in accordance with paragraphs 39–44 and measures concessionary loans in accordance with paragraphs 61–65.

AG127. In some circumstances a concessionary loan may be granted that is also originated credit-impaired. For example, a government may provide loans with concessionary terms on a recurring basis to a borrower that historically has not been able to repay in full. If the concessionary loan is credit-impaired, an entity measures the instrument at the fair value including the expected credit losses over the life of the instrument. An entity applies paragraph AG125(b) to account for the component parts and recognises the credit losses and concessionary element in its entirety as a concession.

AG128. In the public sector, equity investment can be used as a way for an entity to provide financing or subsidised funding to another public sector entity. In such a transaction, there is generally a lack of an active market for such investments (i.e., the equity instrument is unquoted), and there are no or minimal future cash flow expectations from the investment besides a potential redemption by the issuing entity. Cash is provided by the investing entity to the investee generally to further the investee’s economic or social objectives. Examples of such investments could include membership shares in a development bank, or equity investment in another public sector entity that provides certain social programs or services (e.g., shelters, subsidised housing, small business assistance...etc.)

AG129. At initial recognition of such transactions, an entity shall analyse the substance of the arrangement and assess whether the intention at the outset is the provision or receipt of resources by way of a non- exchange transaction. To the extent that the transaction, or component of the transaction, is a non- exchange transaction, any assets or revenues arising from the transaction are accounted for in accordance with PBE IPSAS 23. The entity providing the resources shall recognise the amount as an expense in surplus or deficit at initial recognition.

AG130. To the extent an equity instrument arises from the transaction, or component of the transaction, that is within the scope of this Standard, it is to be recognised initially at fair value in accordance with paragraph 57. The equity instrument is to be measured subsequently in accordance with paragraphs 61– 63. If the instrument does not have an active market, the entity shall consider valuation techniques and inputs in paragraphs AG149–AG155) in determining its fair value.

AG131. Only contractual financial guarantees (or guarantees that are in substance, contractual) are within the scope of this Standard (See paragraphs AG3 and AG4 of PBE IPSAS 28). Non-contractual guarantees are not within the scope of this Standard as they do not meet the definition of a financial instrument. This Standard prescribes recognition and measurement requirements only for the issuer of financial guarantee contracts.

AG132. In paragraph 9, ‘financial guarantee contract’ is defined as “a contract that requires the issuer to make specified payments to reimburse the holder for a loss it incurs because a specified debtor fails to make payment when due in accordance with the original or modified terms of a debt instrument.” Under the requirements of this Standard, financial guarantee contracts, like other financial assets and financial liabilities, are required to be initially recognised at fair value. Paragraphs 66–68 of this Standard provide commentary and guidance on determining fair value and this is complemented by Application Guidance in paragraphs AG144–AG155. Subsequent measurement for financial guarantee contracts is at the higher of the amount of the loss allowance determined in accordance with paragraphs 73–93 and the amount initially recognised less, when appropriate, cumulative amortisation in accordance with PBE IPSAS 9.

AG133. In the public sector, guarantees are frequently provided by way of non-exchange transactions, i.e., at no or nominal consideration. This type of guarantee is provided generally to further the entity’s economic and social objectives. Such purposes include supporting infrastructure projects, supporting corporate entities at times of economic distress, guaranteeing the bond issues of entities in other tiers of governments and the loans of employees to finance motor vehicles that are to be used for performance of their duties as employees. Where there is consideration for a financial guarantee, an entity should determine whether that consideration arises from an exchange transaction and whether the consideration represents a fair value. If the consideration does represent a fair value, entities should recognise the financial guarantee at the amount of the consideration. Subsequent measurement should be at the higher of the amount of the loss allowance determined in accordance with paragraphs 73–93 and the amount initially recognised, less, when appropriate, cumulative amortisation recognised in accordance with PBE IPSAS 9. Where the entity concludes that the consideration is not a fair value, an entity determines the carrying value at initial recognition in the same way as if no consideration had been paid.

AG134. At initial recognition, where no fee is charged or where the consideration is not fair value, an entity firstly considers whether there are quoted prices available in an active market for financial guarantee contracts directly equivalent to that entered into. Evidence of an active market includes recent arm’s length market transactions between knowledgeable willing parties, and reference to the current fair value of another financial guarantee contract that is substantially the same as that provided at nil or nominal consideration by the issuer. The fact that a financial guarantee contract has been entered into at no consideration by the debtor to the issuer is not, of itself, conclusive evidence of the absence of an active market. Guarantees may be available from commercial issuers, but a public sector entity may agree to enter into a financial guarantee contract for a number of non-commercial reasons. For example, if a debtor is unable to afford a commercial fee, and initiation of a project in fulfilment of one of the entity’s social or policy objectives would be put at risk unless a financial guarantee contract is issued, it may approach a public sector entity or government to issue a financial guarantee contract.

AG135. Where there is no active market for a directly equivalent guarantee contract; the entity considers whether a valuation technique other than observation of an active market is available and provides a reliable measure of fair value. Such a valuation technique may rely on mathematical models which consider financial risk. For example, Central Government W guarantees a bond issue of Municipality X. As Municipality X has a government guarantee backing its bond issue, its bonds have a lower coupon than if they were not secured by a government guarantee. This is because the guarantee lowers the risk profile of the bonds for investors. The guarantee fee could be determined by using the credit spread between what the coupon rate would have been had the issue not been backed by a government guarantee and the rate with the guarantee in place. Where a fair value is obtainable either by observation of an active market or through another valuation technique, the entity recognises the financial guarantee at that fair value in the statement of financial position and recognises an expense of an equivalent amount in the statement of comprehensive revenue and expense. When using a valuation technique that is not based on observation of an active market an entity needs to satisfy itself that the output of any model is reliable and understandable.

AG136. If no reliable measure of fair value can be determined, either by direct observation of an active market or through another valuation technique, an entity is required to measure the financial guarantee contract at the amount of the loss allowance determined in accordance with paragraphs 73 to 93.

AG137. If a financial instrument that was previously recognised as a financial asset is measured at fair value through surplus or deficit and its fair value decreases below zero, it is a financial liability measured in accordance with paragraph 45. However, hybrid contracts with hosts that are assets within the scope of this Standard are always measured in accordance with paragraph 48.

AG138. The following example illustrates the accounting for transaction costs on the initial and subsequent measurement of a financial asset measured at fair value with changes through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with either paragraph 106 or 41. An entity acquires a financial asset for CU100 plus a purchase commission of CU2. Initially, the entity recognises the asset at CU102. The reporting period ends one day later, when the quoted market price of the asset is CU100. If the asset were sold, a commission of CU3 would be paid. On that date, the entity measures the asset at CU100 (without regard to the possible commission on sale) and recognises a loss of CU2 in other comprehensive revenue and expense. If the financial asset is measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41, the transaction costs are amortised to surplus or deficit using the effective interest method.

AG139. The subsequent measurement of a financial asset or financial liability and the subsequent recognition of gains and losses described in paragraph AG117 shall be consistent with the requirements of this Standard.

AG140. All investments in equity instruments and contracts on those instruments must be measured at fair value. However, in limited circumstances, cost may be an appropriate estimate of fair value. That may be the case if insufficient more recent information is available to measure fair value, or if there is a wide range of possible fair value measurements and cost represents the best estimate of fair value within that range.

AG141. Indicators that cost might not be representative of fair value include:

1. A significant change in the performance of the investee compared with budgets, plans or milestones.

2. Changes in expectation that the investee’s technical product milestones will be achieved.

3. A significant change in the market for the investee’s equity or its products or potential products.

4. A significant change in the global economy or the economic environment in which the investee operates.

5. A significant change in the performance of comparable entities, or in the valuations implied by the overall market.

6. Internal matters of the investee such as fraud, commercial disputes, litigation, changes in management or strategy.

7. Evidence from external transactions in the investee’s equity, either by the investee (such as a fresh issue of equity), or by transfers of equity instruments between third parties.

AG142. The list in paragraph AG141 is not exhaustive. An entity shall use all information about the performance and operations of the investee that becomes available after the date of initial recognition. To the extent that any such relevant factors exist, they may indicate that cost might not be representative of fair value. In such cases, the entity must measure fair value.

AG143. Cost is never the best estimate of fair value for investments in quoted equity instruments (or contracts on quoted equity instruments).

AG144. Underlying the definition of fair value is a presumption that an entity is a going concern without any intention or need to liquidate, to curtail materially the scale of its operations or to undertake a transaction on adverse terms. Fair value is not, therefore, the amount that an entity would receive or pay in a forced transaction, involuntary liquidation or distress sale. However, fair value reflects the credit quality of the instrument.

AG145. This Standard uses the terms ‘bid price’ and ‘asking price’ (sometimes referred to as ‘current offer price’) in the context of quoted market prices, and the term ‘the bid-ask spread’ to include only transaction costs. Other adjustments to arrive at fair value (e.g., for counterparty credit risk) are not included in the term ‘bid-ask spread.’

AG146. A financial instrument is regarded as quoted in an active market if quoted prices are readily and regularly available from an exchange, dealer, broker, industry group, pricing service or regulatory agency, and those prices represent actual and regularly occurring market transactions on an arm’s length basis. Fair value is defined in terms of a price agreed by a willing buyer and a willing seller in an arm’s length transaction. The objective of determining fair value for a financial instrument that is traded in an active market is to arrive at the price at which a transaction would occur at the end of the reporting period in that instrument (i.e., without modifying or repackaging the instrument) in the most advantageous active market to which the entity has immediate access. However, the entity adjusts the price in the more advantageous market to reflect any differences in counterparty credit risk between instruments traded in that market and the one being valued. The existence of published price quotations in an active market is the best evidence of fair value and when they exist they are used to measure the financial asset or financial liability.

AG147. The appropriate quoted market price for an asset held or liability to be issued is usually the current bid price and, for an asset to be acquired or liability held, the asking price. When an entity has assets and liabilities with offsetting market risks, it may use mid-market prices as a basis for establishing fair values for the offsetting risk positions and apply the bid or asking price to the net open position as appropriate. When current bid and asking prices are unavailable, the price of the most recent transaction provides evidence of the current fair value as long as there has not been a significant change in economic circumstances since the time of the transaction. If conditions have changed since the time of the transaction (e.g., a change in the risk-free interest rate following the most recent price quote for a government bond), the fair value reflects the change in conditions by reference to current prices or rates for similar financial instruments, as appropriate. Similarly, if the entity can demonstrate that the last transaction price is not fair value (e.g., because it reflected the amount that an entity would receive or pay in a forced transaction, involuntary liquidation or distress sale), that price is adjusted. The fair value of a portfolio of financial instruments is the product of the number of units of the instrument and its quoted market price. If a published price quotation in an active market does not exist for a financial instrument in its entirety, but active markets exist for its component parts, fair value is determined on the basis of the relevant market prices for the component parts.

AG148. If a rate (rather than a price) is quoted in an active market, the entity uses that market-quoted rate as an input into a valuation technique to determine fair value. If the market-quoted rate does not include credit risk or other factors that market participants would include in valuing the instrument, the entity adjusts for those factors.

AG149. If the market for a financial instrument is not active, an entity establishes fair value by using a valuation technique. Valuation techniques include using recent arm’s length market transactions between knowledgeable, willing parties, if available, reference to the current fair value of another instrument that is substantially the same, discounted cash flow analysis and option pricing models. If there is a valuation technique commonly used by market participants to price the instrument and that technique has been demonstrated to provide reliable estimates of prices obtained in actual market transactions, the entity uses that technique.

AG150. The objective of using a valuation technique is to establish what the transaction price would have been on the measurement date in an arm’s length exchange motivated by normal operating considerations. Fair value is estimated on the basis of the results of a valuation technique that makes maximum use of market inputs, and relies as little as possible on entity-specific inputs. A valuation technique would be expected to arrive at a realistic estimate of the fair value if (a) it reasonably reflects how the market could be expected to price the instrument and (b) the inputs to the valuation technique reasonably represent market expectations and measures of the risk-return factors inherent in the financial instrument.

AG151. Therefore, a valuation technique (a) incorporates all factors that market participants would consider in setting a price and (b) is consistent with accepted economic methodologies for pricing financial instruments. Periodically, an entity calibrates the valuation technique and tests it for validity using prices from any observable current market transactions in the same instrument (i.e., without modification or repackaging) or based on any available observable market data. An entity obtains market data consistently in the same market where the instrument was originated or purchased.

AG152. The initial acquisition or origination of a financial asset or incurrence of a financial liability is a market transaction that provides a foundation for estimating the fair value of the financial instrument. In particular, if the financial instrument is a debt instrument (such as a loan), its fair value can be determined by reference to the market conditions that existed at its acquisition or origination date and current market conditions or interest rates currently charged by the entity or by others for similar debt instruments (i.e., similar remaining maturity, cash flow pattern, currency, credit risk, collateral and interest basis). Alternatively, provided there is no change in the credit risk of the debtor and applicable credit spreads after the origination of the debt instrument, an estimate of the current market interest rate may be derived by using a benchmark interest rate reflecting a better credit quality than the underlying debt instrument, holding the credit spread constant, and adjusting for the change in the benchmark interest rate from the origination date. If conditions have changed since the most recent market transaction, the corresponding change in the fair value of the financial instrument being valued is determined by reference to current prices or rates for similar financial instruments, adjusted as appropriate, for any differences from the instrument being valued.

AG153. The same information may not be available at each measurement date. For example, at the date that an entity makes a loan or acquires a debt instrument that is not actively traded, the entity has a transaction price that is also a market price. However, no new transaction information may be available at the next measurement date and, although the entity can determine the general level of market interest rates, it may not know what level of credit or other risk market participants would consider in pricing the instrument on that date. An entity may not have information from recent transactions to determine the appropriate credit spread over the basic interest rate to use in determining a discount rate for a present value computation. It would be reasonable to assume, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that no changes have taken place in the spread that existed at the date the loan was made. However, the entity would be expected to make reasonable efforts to determine whether there is evidence that there has been a change in such factors. When evidence of a change exists, the entity would consider the effects of the change in determining the fair value of the financial instrument.

AG154. In applying discounted cash flow analysis, an entity uses one or more discount rates equal to the prevailing rates of return for financial instruments having substantially the same terms and characteristics, including the credit quality of the instrument, the remaining term over which the contractual interest rate is fixed, the remaining term to repayment of the principal and the currency in which payments are to be made.

AG155. An appropriate technique for estimating the fair value of a particular financial instrument would incorporate observable market data about the market conditions and other factors that are likely to affect the instrument’s fair value. The fair value of a financial instrument will be based on one or more of the following factors (and perhaps others).

1. The time value of money (i.e., interest at the basic or risk-free rate). Basic interest rates can usually be derived from observable government bond prices and are often quoted in financial publications. These rates typically vary with the expected dates of the projected cash flows along a yield curve of interest rates for different time horizons. For practical reasons, an entity may use a well-accepted and readily observable general market rate, such as a swap rate, as the benchmark rate. (If the rate used is not the risk-free interest rate, the credit risk adjustment appropriate to the particular financial instrument is determined on the basis of its credit risk in relation to the credit risk in this benchmark rate). In some countries, the central government’s bonds may carry a significant credit risk and may not provide a stable benchmark basic interest rate for instruments denominated in that currency. Some entities in these countries may have a better credit standing and a lower borrowing rate than the central government. In such a case, basic interest rates may be more appropriately determined by reference to interest rates for the highest rated corporate bonds issued in the currency of that jurisdiction.

2. Credit risk. The effect on fair value of credit risk (i.e., the premium over the basic interest rate for credit risk) may be derived from observable market prices for traded instruments of different credit quality or from observable interest rates charged by lenders for loans of various credit ratings.

3. Foreign currency exchange prices. Active currency exchange markets exist for most major currencies, and prices are quoted daily in financial publications.

4. Commodity prices. There are observable market prices for many commodities.

5. Equity prices. Prices (and indexes of prices) of traded equity instruments are readily observable in some markets. Present value based techniques may be used to estimate the current market price of equity instruments for which there are no observable prices.

6. Volatility (i.e., magnitude of future changes in price of the financial instrument or other item). Measures of the volatility of actively traded items can normally be reasonably estimated on the basis of historical market data or by using volatilities implied in current market prices.

7. Prepayment risk and surrender risk. Expected prepayment patterns for financial assets and expected surrender patterns for financial liabilities can be estimated on the basis of historical data. (The fair value of a financial liability that can be surrendered by the counterparty cannot be less than the present value of the surrender amount – see paragraph 68).

8. Servicing costs for a financial asset or a financial liability. Costs of servicing can be estimated using comparisons with current fees charged by other market participants. If the costs of servicing a financial asset or financial liability are significant and other market participants would face comparable costs, the issuer would consider them in determining the fair value of that financial asset or financial liability. It is likely that the fair value at inception of a contractual right to future fees equals the origination costs paid for them, unless future fees and related costs are out of line with market comparables.

AG156. In applying the effective interest method, an entity identifies fees that are an integral part of the effective interest rate of a financial instrument. The description of fees for financial services may not be indicative of the nature and substance of the services provided. Fees that are an integral part of the effective interest rate of a financial instrument are treated as an adjustment to the effective interest rate, unless the financial instrument is measured at fair value, with the change in fair value being recognised in surplus or deficit. In those cases, the fees are recognised as revenue or expense when the instrument is initially recognised.

AG157. Fees that are an integral part of the effective interest rate of a financial instrument include:

1. Origination fees received by the entity relating to the creation or acquisition of a financial asset. Such fees may include compensation for activities such as evaluating the borrower’s financial condition, evaluating and recording guarantees, collateral and other security arrangements, negotiating the terms of the instrument, preparing and processing documents and closing the transaction. These fees are an integral part of generating an involvement with the resulting financial instrument.

2. Commitment fees received by the entity to originate a loan when the loan commitment is not measured in accordance with paragraph 45(a) and it is probable that the entity will enter into a specific lending arrangement. These fees are regarded as compensation for an ongoing involvement with the acquisition of a financial instrument. If the commitment expires without the entity making the loan, the fee is recognised as revenue on expiry.

3. Origination fees paid on issuing financial liabilities measured at amortised cost. These fees are an integral part of generating an involvement with a financial liability. An entity distinguishes fees and costs that are an integral part of the effective interest rate for the financial liability from origination fees and transaction costs relating to the right to provide services, such as investment management services.

AG158. Fees that are not an integral part of the effective interest rate of a financial instrument and are accounted for in accordance with PBE IPSAS 9 include:

1. Fees charged for servicing a loan;

2. Commitment fees to originate a loan when the loan commitment is not measured in accordance with paragraph 45(a) and it is unlikely that a specific lending arrangement will be entered into; and

3. Loan syndication fees received by an entity that arranges a loan and retains no part of the loan package for itself (or retains a part at the same effective interest rate for comparable risk as other participants).

AG159. When applying the effective interest method, an entity generally amortises any fees, points paid or received, transaction costs and other premiums or discounts that are included in the calculation of the effective interest rate over the expected life of the financial instrument. However, a shorter period is used if this is the period to which the fees, points paid or received, transaction costs, premiums or discounts relate. This will be the case when the variable to which the fees, points paid or received, transaction costs, premiums or discounts relate is repriced to market rates before the expected maturity of the financial instrument. In such a case, the appropriate amortisation period is the period to the next such repricing date. For example, if a premium or discount on a floating-rate financial instrument reflects the interest that has accrued on that financial instrument since the interest was last paid, or changes in the market rates since the floating interest rate was reset to the market rates, it will be amortised to the next date when the floating interest is reset to market rates. This is because the premium or discount relates to the period to the next interest reset date because, at that date, the variable to which the premium or discount relates (i.e., interest rates) is reset to the market rates. If, however, the premium or discount results from a change in the credit spread over the floating rate specified in the financial instrument, or other variables that are not reset to the market rates, it is amortised over the expected life of the financial instrument.

AG160. For floating-rate financial assets and floating-rate financial liabilities, periodic re-estimation of cash flows to reflect the movements in the market rates of interest alters the effective interest rate. If a floating-rate financial asset or a floating-rate financial liability is recognised initially at an amount equal to the principal receivable or payable on maturity, re-estimating the future interest payments normally has no significant effect on the carrying amount of the asset or the liability.

AG161. If an entity revises its estimates of payments or receipts (excluding modifications in accordance with paragraph 71 and changes in estimates of expected credit losses), it shall adjust the gross carrying amount of the financial asset or amortised cost of a financial liability (or group of financial instruments) to reflect actual and revised estimated contractual cash flows. The entity recalculates the gross carrying amount of the financial asset or amortised cost of the financial liability as the present value of the estimated future contractual cash flows that are discounted at the financial instrument’s original effective interest rate (or credit-adjusted effective interest rate for purchased or originated credit- impaired financial assets) or, when applicable, the revised effective interest rate calculated in accordance with paragraph 139. The adjustment is recognised in surplus or deficit as revenue or expense.

AG162. In some cases a financial asset is considered credit-impaired at initial recognition because the credit risk is very high, and in the case of a purchase it is acquired at a deep discount. An entity is required to include the initial expected credit losses in the estimated cash flows when calculating the credit- adjusted effective interest rate for financial assets that are considered to be purchased or originated credit-impaired at initial recognition. However, this does not mean that a credit-adjusted effective interest rate should be applied solely because the financial asset has high credit risk at initial recognition.

AG163. Transaction costs include fees and commission paid to agents (including employees acting as selling agents), advisers, brokers and dealers, levies by regulatory agencies and security exchanges, and transfer taxes and duties. Transaction costs do not include debt premiums or discounts, financing costs or internal administrative or holding costs.

AG164. Write-offs can relate to a financial asset in its entirety or to a portion of it. For example, an entity plans to enforce the collateral on a financial asset and expects to recover no more than 30 per cent of the financial asset from the collateral. If the entity has no reasonable prospects of recovering any further cash flows from the financial asset, it should write off the remaining 70 per cent of the financial asset.

AG165 In order to meet the objective of recognising lifetime expected credit losses for significant increases in credit risk since initial recognition, it may be necessary to perform the assessment of significant increases in credit risk on a collective basis by considering information that is indicative of significant increases in credit risk on, for example, a group or sub-group of financial instruments. This is to ensure that an entity meets the objective of recognising lifetime expected credit losses when there are significant increases in credit risk, even if evidence of such significant increases in credit risk at the individual instrument level is not yet available.

AG166. Lifetime expected credit losses are generally expected to be recognised before a financial instrument becomes past due. Typically, credit risk increases significantly before a financial instrument becomes past due or other lagging borrower-specific factors (for example, a modification or restructuring) are observed. Consequently when reasonable and supportable information that is more forward-looking than past due information is available without undue cost or effort, it must be used to assess changes in credit risk.

AG167. However, depending on the nature of the financial instruments and the credit risk information available for particular groups of financial instruments, an entity may not be able to identify significant changes in credit risk for individual financial instruments before the financial instrument becomes past due. This may be the case for financial instruments such as student loans for which there is little or no updated credit risk information that is routinely obtained and monitored on an individual instrument until a borrower breaches the contractual terms. If changes in the credit risk for individual financial instruments are not captured before they become past due, a loss allowance based only on credit information at an individual financial instrument level would not faithfully represent the changes in credit risk since initial recognition.

AG168. In some circumstances an entity does not have reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort to measure lifetime expected credit losses on an individual instrument basis. In that case, lifetime expected credit losses shall be recognised on a collective basis that considers comprehensive credit risk information. This comprehensive credit risk information must incorporate not only past due information but also all relevant credit information, including forward-looking macroeconomic information, in order to approximate the result of recognising lifetime expected credit losses when there has been a significant increase in credit risk since initial recognition on an individual instrument level.

AG169. For the purpose of determining significant increases in credit risk and recognising a loss allowance on a collective basis, an entity can group financial instruments on the basis of shared credit risk characteristics with the objective of facilitating an analysis that is designed to enable significant increases in credit risk to be identified on a timely basis. The entity should not obscure this information by grouping financial instruments with different risk characteristics. Examples of shared credit risk characteristics may include, but are not limited to, the:

1. Instrument type;

2. Credit risk ratings;

3. Collateral type;

4. Date of initial recognition;

5. Remaining term to maturity;

6. Industry;

7. Geographical location of the borrower; and

8. The value of collateral relative to the financial asset if it has an impact on the probability of a default occurring (for example, non-recourse loans in some jurisdictions or loan-to-value ratios).

AG170. Paragraph 76 requires that lifetime expected credit losses are recognised on all financial instruments for which there has been significant increases in credit risk since initial recognition. In order to meet this objective, if an entity is not able to group financial instruments for which the credit risk is considered to have increased significantly since initial recognition based on shared credit risk characteristics, the entity should recognise lifetime expected credit losses on a portion of the financial assets for which credit risk is deemed to have increased significantly. The aggregation of financial instruments to assess whether there are changes in credit risk on a collective basis may change over time as new information becomes available on groups of, or individual, financial instruments.

AG171. The assessment of whether lifetime expected credit losses should be recognised is based on significant increases in the likelihood or risk of a default occurring since initial recognition (irrespective of whether a financial instrument has been repriced to reflect an increase in credit risk) instead of on evidence of a financial asset being credit-impaired at the reporting date or an actual default occurring. Generally, there will be a significant increase in credit risk before a financial asset becomes credit-impaired or an actual default occurs.

AG172. For loan commitments, an entity considers changes in the risk of a default occurring on the loan to which a loan commitment relates. For financial guarantee contracts, an entity considers the changes in the risk that the specified debtor will default on the contract.

AG173. The significance of a change in the credit risk since initial recognition depends on the risk of a default occurring as at initial recognition. Thus, a given change, in absolute terms, in the risk of a default occurring will be more significant for a financial instrument with a lower initial risk of a default occurring compared to a financial instrument with a higher initial risk of a default occurring.

AG174. The risk of a default occurring on financial instruments that have comparable credit risk is higher the longer the expected life of the instrument; for example, the risk of a default occurring on an AAA-rated bond with an expected life of 10 years is higher than that on an AAA-rated bond with an expected life of five years.

AG175. Because of the relationship between the expected life and the risk of a default occurring, the change in credit risk cannot be assessed simply by comparing the change in the absolute risk of a default occurring over time. For example, if the risk of a default occurring for a financial instrument with an expected life of 10 years at initial recognition is identical to the risk of a default occurring on that financial instrument when its expected life in a subsequent period is only five years, that may indicate an increase in credit risk. This is because the risk of a default occurring over the expected life usually decreases as time passes if the credit risk is unchanged and the financial instrument is closer to maturity. However, for financial instruments that only have significant payment obligations close to the maturity of the financial instrument the risk of a default occurring may not necessarily decrease as time passes. In such a case, an entity should also consider other qualitative factors that would demonstrate whether credit risk has increased significantly since initial recognition.

AG176. An entity may apply various approaches when assessing whether the credit risk on a financial instrument has increased significantly since initial recognition or when measuring expected credit losses. An entity may apply different approaches for different financial instruments. An approach that does not include an explicit probability of default as an input per se, such as a credit loss rate approach, can be consistent with the requirements in this Standard, provided that an entity is able to separate the changes in the risk of a default occurring from changes in other drivers of expected credit losses, such as collateral, and considers the following when making the assessment:

1. The change in the risk of a default occurring since initial recognition;

2. The expected life of the financial instrument; and

3. Reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort that may affect credit risk.

AG177. The methods used to determine whether credit risk has increased significantly on a financial instrument since initial recognition should consider the characteristics of the financial instrument (or group of financial instruments) and the default patterns in the past for comparable financial instruments. Despite the requirement in paragraph 81, for financial instruments for which default patterns are not concentrated at a specific point during the expected life of the financial instrument, changes in the risk of a default occurring over the next 12 months may be a reasonable approximation of the changes in the lifetime risk of a default occurring. In such cases, an entity may use changes in the risk of a default occurring over the next 12 months to determine whether credit risk has increased significantly since initial recognition, unless circumstances indicate that a lifetime assessment is necessary.

AG178. However, for some financial instruments, or in some circumstances, it may not be appropriate to use changes in the risk of a default occurring over the next 12 months to determine whether lifetime expected credit losses should be recognised. For example, the change in the risk of a default occurring in the next 12 months may not be a suitable basis for determining whether credit risk has increased on a financial instrument with a maturity of more than 12 months when:

1. The financial instrument only has significant payment obligations beyond the next 12 months;

2. Changes in relevant macroeconomic or other credit-related factors occur that are not adequately reflected in the risk of a default occurring in the next 12 months; or

3. Changes in credit-related factors only have an impact on the credit risk of the financial instrument (or have a more pronounced effect) beyond 12 months.

AG179. When determining whether the recognition of lifetime expected credit losses is required, an entity shall consider reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort and that may affect the credit risk on a financial instrument in accordance with paragraph 90(c). An entity need not undertake an exhaustive search for information when determining whether credit risk has increased significantly since initial recognition.

AG180. Credit risk analysis is a multifactor and holistic analysis; whether a specific factor is relevant, and its weight compared to other factors, will depend on the type of product, characteristics of the financial instruments and the borrower as well as the geographical region. An entity shall consider reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort and that is relevant for the particular financial instrument being assessed. However, some factors or indicators may not be identifiable on an individual financial instrument level. In such a case, the factors or indicators should be assessed for appropriate portfolios, groups of portfolios or portions of a portfolio of financial instruments to determine whether the requirement in paragraph 75 for the recognition of lifetime expected credit losses has been met.

AG181. The following non-exhaustive list of information may be relevant in assessing changes in credit risk:

1. Significant changes in internal price indicators of credit risk as a result of a change in credit risk since inception, including, but not limited to, the credit spread that would result if a particular financial instrument or similar financial instrument with the same terms and the same counterparty were newly originated or issued at the reporting date.

2. Other changes in the rates or terms of an existing financial instrument that would be significantly different if the instrument was newly originated or issued at the reporting date (such as more stringent covenants, increased amounts of collateral or guarantees, or higher revenue coverage) because of changes in the credit risk of the financial instrument since initial recognition.

3. Significant changes in external market indicators of credit risk for a particular financial instrument or similar financial instruments with the same expected life. Changes in market indicators of credit risk include, but are not limited to:

   1. The credit spread;

   2. The credit default swap prices for the borrower;

   3. The length of time or the extent to which the fair value of a financial asset has been less than its amortised cost; and

   4. Other market information related to the borrower, such as changes in the price of a borrower’s debt and equity instruments.

4. An actual or expected significant change in the financial instrument’s external credit rating.

5. An actual or expected internal credit rating downgrade for the borrower or decrease in behavioural scoring used to assess credit risk internally. Internal credit ratings and internal behavioural scoring are more reliable when they are mapped to external ratings or supported by default studies.

6. Existing or forecast adverse changes in business, financial or economic conditions that are expected to cause a significant change in the borrower’s ability to meet its debt obligations, such as an actual or expected increase in interest rates or an actual or expected significant increase in unemployment rates.

7. An actual or expected significant change in the operating results of the borrower. Examples include actual or expected declining revenues or margins, increasing operating risks, working capital deficiencies, decreasing asset quality, increased balance sheet leverage, liquidity, management problems or changes in the scope of operation or organisational structure (such as the discontinuance of a segment of the entity) that results in a significant change in the borrower’s ability to meet its debt obligations.

8. Significant increases in credit risk on other financial instruments of the same borrower.

9. An actual or expected significant adverse change in the regulatory, economic, or technological environment of the borrower that results in a significant change in the borrower’s ability to meet its debt obligations, such as a decline in the demand for the borrower’s sales product because of a shift in technology.

10. Significant changes in the value of the collateral supporting the obligation or in the quality of third-party guarantees or credit enhancements, which are expected to reduce the borrower’s economic incentive to make scheduled contractual payments or to otherwise have an effect on the probability of a default occurring. For example, if the value of collateral declines because house prices decline, borrowers in some jurisdictions have a greater incentive to default on their mortgages.

11. A significant change in the quality of the guarantee provided by an entity’s owners (or an individual’s guarantors) if the entity’s owners (or guarantors) have an incentive and financial ability to prevent default by capital or cash infusion.

12. Significant changes, such as reductions in financial support from a controlling entity or other affiliate or an actual or expected significant change in the quality of credit enhancement, that are expected to reduce the borrower’s economic incentive to make scheduled contractual payments. Credit quality enhancements or support include the consideration of the financial condition of the guarantor and/or, for interests issued in securitisations, whether subordinated interests are expected to be capable of absorbing expected credit losses (for example, on the loans underlying the security).

13. Expected changes in the loan documentation including an expected breach of contract that may lead to covenant waivers or amendments, interest payment holidays, interest rate step-ups, requiring additional collateral or guarantees, or other changes to the contractual framework of the instrument.

14. Significant changes in the expected performance and behaviour of the borrower, including changes in the payment status of borrowers in the economic entity (for example, an increase in the expected number or extent of delayed contractual payments).

15. Changes in the entity’s credit management approach in relation to the financial instrument; i.e., based on emerging indicators of changes in the credit risk of the financial instrument, the entity’s credit risk management practice is expected to become more active or to be focused on managing the instrument, including the instrument becoming more closely monitored or controlled, or the entity specifically intervening with the borrower.

16. Past due information, including the rebuttable presumption as set out in paragraph 83.

AG182. In some cases, the qualitative and non-statistical quantitative information available may be sufficient to determine that a financial instrument has met the criterion for the recognition of a loss allowance at an amount equal to lifetime expected credit losses. That is, the information does not need to flow through a statistical model or credit ratings process in order to determine whether there has been a significant increase in the credit risk of the financial instrument. In other cases, an entity may need to consider other information, including information from its statistical models or credit ratings processes. Alternatively, the entity may base the assessment on both types of information, i.e., qualitative factors that are not captured through the internal ratings process and a specific internal rating category at the reporting date, taking into consideration the credit risk characteristics at initial recognition, if both types of information are relevant.

AG183. The rebuttable presumption in paragraph 83 is not an absolute indicator that lifetime expected credit losses should be recognised, but is presumed to be the latest point at which lifetime expected credit losses should be recognised even when using forward-looking information (including macroeconomic factors on a portfolio level).

AG184. An entity can rebut this presumption. However, it can do so only when it has reasonable and supportable information available that demonstrates that even if contractual payments become more than 30 days past due, this does not represent a significant increase in the credit risk of a financial instrument. For example when non-payment was an administrative oversight, instead of resulting from financial difficulty of the borrower, or the entity has access to historical evidence that demonstrates that there is no correlation between significant increases in the risk of a default occurring and financial assets on which payments are more than 30 days past due, but that evidence does identify such a correlation when payments are more than 60 days past due.

AG185. An entity cannot align the timing of significant increases in credit risk and the recognition of lifetime expected credit losses to when a financial asset is regarded as credit-impaired or an entity’s internal definition of default.

AG186. The credit risk on a financial instrument is considered low for the purposes of paragraph 82, if the financial instrument has a low risk of default, the borrower has a strong capacity to meet its contractual cash flow obligations in the near term and adverse changes in economic and business conditions in the longer term may, but will not necessarily, reduce the ability of the borrower to fulfil its contractual cash flow obligations. Financial instruments are not considered to have low credit risk when they are regarded as having a low risk of loss simply because of the value of collateral and the financial instrument without that collateral would not be considered low credit risk. Financial instruments are also not considered to have low credit risk simply because they have a lower risk of default than the entity’s other financial instruments or relative to the credit risk of the jurisdiction within which an entity operates.

AG187. To determine whether a financial instrument has low credit risk, an entity may use its internal credit risk ratings or other methodologies that are consistent with a globally understood definition of low credit risk and that consider the risks and the type of financial instruments that are being assessed. An external rating of ‘investment grade’ is an example of a financial instrument that may be considered as having low credit risk. However, financial instruments are not required to be externally rated to be considered to have low credit risk. They should, however, be considered to have low credit risk from a market participant perspective taking into account all of the terms and conditions of the financial instrument.

AG188. Lifetime expected credit losses are not recognised on a financial instrument simply because it was considered to have low credit risk in the previous reporting period and is not considered to have low credit risk at the reporting date. In such a case, an entity shall determine whether there has been a significant increase in credit risk since initial recognition and thus whether lifetime expected credit losses are required to be recognised in accordance with paragraph 75.

AG189. In some circumstances, the renegotiation or modification of the contractual cash flows of a financial asset can lead to the derecognition of the existing financial asset in accordance with this Standard. When the modification of a financial asset results in the derecognition of the existing financial asset and the subsequent recognition of the modified financial asset, the modified asset is considered a ‘new’ financial asset for the purposes of this Standard.

AG190. Accordingly the date of the modification shall be treated as the date of initial recognition of that financial asset when applying the impairment requirements to the modified financial asset. This typically means measuring the loss allowance at an amount equal to 12-month expected credit losses until the requirements for the recognition of lifetime expected credit losses in paragraph 75 are met. However, in some unusual circumstances following a modification that results in derecognition of the original financial asset, there may be evidence that the modified financial asset is credit-impaired at initial recognition, and thus, the financial asset should be recognised as an originated credit-impaired financial asset. This might occur, for example, in a situation in which there was a substantial modification of a distressed asset that resulted in the derecognition of the original financial asset. In such a case, it may be possible for the modification to result in a new financial asset which is credit- impaired at initial recognition.

AG191. If the contractual cash flows on a financial asset have been renegotiated or otherwise modified, but the financial asset is not derecognised, that financial asset is not automatically considered to have lower credit risk. An entity shall assess whether there has been a significant increase in credit risk since initial recognition on the basis of all reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort. This includes historical and forward-looking information and an assessment of the credit risk over the expected life of the financial asset, which includes information about the circumstances that led to the modification. Evidence that the criteria for the recognition of lifetime expected credit losses are no longer met may include a history of up-to-date and timely payment performance against the modified contractual terms. Typically a borrower would need to demonstrate consistently good payment behaviour over a period of time before the credit risk is considered to have decreased. For example, a history of missed or incomplete payments would not typically be erased by simply making one payment on time following a modification of the contractual terms.

AG192. Expected credit losses are a probability-weighted estimate of credit losses (i.e., the present value of all cash shortfalls) over the expected life of the financial instrument. A cash shortfall is the difference between the cash flows that are due to an entity in accordance with the contract and the cash flows that the entity expects to receive. Because expected credit losses consider the amount and timing of payments, a credit loss arises even if the entity expects to be paid in full but later than when contractually due.

AG193. For financial assets, a credit loss is the present value of the difference between:

1. The contractual cash flows that are due to an entity under the contract; and

2. The cash flows that the entity expects to receive.

AG194. For undrawn loan commitments, a credit loss is the present value of the difference between:

1. The contractual cash flows that are due to the entity if the holder of the loan commitment draws down the loan; and

2. The cash flows that the entity expects to receive if the loan is drawn down.

AG195. An entity’s estimate of expected credit losses on loan commitments shall be consistent with its expectations of drawdowns on that loan commitment, i.e., it shall consider the expected portion of the loan commitment that will be drawn down within 12 months of the reporting date when estimating 12- month expected credit losses, and the expected portion of the loan commitment that will be drawn down over the expected life of the loan commitment when estimating lifetime expected credit losses.

AG196. For a financial guarantee contract, the entity is required to make payments only in the event of a default by the debtor in accordance with the terms of the instrument that is guaranteed. Accordingly, cash shortfalls are the expected payments to reimburse the holder for a credit loss that it incurs less any amounts that the entity expects to receive from the holder, the debtor or any other party. If the asset is fully guaranteed, the estimation of cash shortfalls for a financial guarantee contract would be consistent with the estimations of cash shortfalls for the asset subject to the guarantee.

AG197. For a financial asset that is credit-impaired at the reporting date, but that is not a purchased or originated credit-impaired financial asset, an entity shall measure the expected credit losses as the difference between the asset’s gross carrying amount and the present value of estimated future cash flows discounted at the financial asset’s original effective interest rate. Any adjustment is recognised in surplus or deficit as an impairment gain or loss.

AG198. When measuring a loss allowance for a lease receivable, the cash flows used for determining the expected credit losses should be consistent with the cash flows used in measuring the lease receivable in accordance with PBE IPSAS 13 Leases.

AG199. An entity may use practical expedients when measuring expected credit losses if they are consistent with the principles in paragraph 90. An example of a practical expedient is the calculation of the expected credit losses on receivables using a provision matrix. The entity would use its historical credit loss experience (adjusted as appropriate in accordance with paragraphs AG215–AG216) for receivables to estimate the 12-month expected credit losses or the lifetime expected credit losses on the financial assets as relevant. A provision matrix might, for example, specify fixed provision rates depending on the number of days that a trade receivable is past due (for example, 1 per cent if not past due, 2 per cent if less than 30 days past due, 3 per cent if more than 30 days but less than 90 days past due, 20 per cent if 90–180 days past due etc). Depending on the diversity of its customer base, the entity would use appropriate groupings if its historical credit loss experience shows significantly different loss patterns for different customer segments. Examples of criteria that might be used to group assets include geographical region, product type, customer rating, collateral or trade credit insurance and type of customer (such as other government entities or individuals).

AG200. Paragraph 81 requires that when determining whether the credit risk on a financial instrument has increased significantly, an entity shall consider the change in the risk of a default occurring since initial recognition.

AG201. When defining default for the purposes of determining the risk of a default occurring, an entity shall apply a default definition that is consistent with the definition used for internal credit risk management purposes for the relevant financial instrument and consider qualitative indicators (for example, financial covenants) when appropriate. However, there is a rebuttable presumption that default does not occur later than when a financial asset is 90 days past due unless an entity has reasonable and supportable information to demonstrate that a more lagging default criterion is more appropriate. The definition of default used for these purposes shall be applied consistently to all financial instruments unless information becomes available that demonstrates that another default definition is more appropriate for a particular financial instrument.

AG202. In accordance with paragraph 92, the maximum period over which expected credit losses shall be measured is the maximum contractual period over which the entity is exposed to credit risk. For loan commitments and financial guarantee contracts, this is the maximum contractual period over which an entity has a present contractual obligation to extend credit.

AG203. However, in accordance with paragraph 93, some financial instruments include both a loan and an undrawn commitment component and the entity’s contractual ability to demand repayment and cancel the undrawn commitment does not limit the entity’s exposure to credit losses to the contractual notice period. For example, revolving credit facilities, such as line of credit provided by a government owned bank, can be contractually withdrawn by the lender with as little as one day’s notice. However, in practice lenders continue to extend credit for a longer period and may only withdraw the facility after the credit risk of the borrower increases, which could be too late to prevent some or all of the expected credit losses. These financial instruments generally have the following characteristics as a result of the nature of the financial instrument, the way in which the financial instruments are managed, and the nature of the available information about significant increases in credit risk:

1. The financial instruments do not have a fixed term or repayment structure and usually have a short contractual cancellation period (for example, one day);

2. The contractual ability to cancel the contract is not enforced in the normal day-to-day management of the financial instrument and the contract may only be cancelled when the entity becomes aware of an increase in credit risk at the facility level; and

3. The financial instruments are managed on a collective basis.

AG204. When determining the period over which the entity is expected to be exposed to credit risk, but for which expected credit losses would not be mitigated by the entity’s normal credit risk management actions, an entity should consider factors such as historical information and experience about:

1. The period over which the entity was exposed to credit risk on similar financial instruments;

2. The length of time for related defaults to occur on similar financial instruments following a significant increase in credit risk; and

3. The credit risk management actions that an entity expects to take once the credit risk on the financial instrument has increased, such as the reduction or removal of undrawn limits.

AG205. The purpose of estimating expected credit losses is neither to estimate a worst-case scenario nor to estimate the best-case scenario. Instead, an estimate of expected credit losses shall always reflect the possibility that a credit loss occurs and the possibility that no credit loss occurs even if the most likely outcome is no credit loss.

AG206. Paragraph 90(a) requires the estimate of expected credit losses to reflect an unbiased and probability- weighted amount that is determined by evaluating a range of possible outcomes. In practice, this may not need to be a complex analysis. In some cases, relatively simple modelling may be sufficient, without the need for a large number of detailed simulations of scenarios. For example, the average credit losses of a large group of financial instruments with shared risk characteristics may be a reasonable estimate of the probability-weighted amount. In other situations, the identification of scenarios that specify the amount and timing of the cash flows for particular outcomes and the estimated probability of those outcomes will probably be needed. In those situations, the expected credit losses shall reflect at least two outcomes in accordance with paragraph 91.

AG207. For lifetime expected credit losses, an entity shall estimate the risk of a default occurring on the financial instrument during its expected life. 12-month expected credit losses are a portion of the lifetime expected credit losses and represent the lifetime cash shortfalls that will result if a default occurs in the 12 months after the reporting date (or a shorter period if the expected life of a financial instrument is less than 12 months), weighted by the probability of that default occurring. Thus, 12- month expected credit losses are neither the lifetime expected credit losses that an entity will incur on financial instruments that it predicts will default in the next 12 months nor the cash shortfalls that are predicted over the next 12 months.

AG208. Expected credit losses shall be discounted to the reporting date, not to the expected default or some other date, using the effective interest rate determined at initial recognition or an approximation thereof. If a financial instrument has a variable interest rate, expected credit losses shall be discounted using the current effective interest rate determined in accordance with paragraph AG160.

AG209. For purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets, expected credit losses shall be discounted using the credit-adjusted effective interest rate determined at initial recognition.

AG210. Expected credit losses on lease receivables shall be discounted using the same discount rate used in the measurement of the lease receivable in accordance with PBE IPSAS 13.

AG211. The expected credit losses on a loan commitment shall be discounted using the effective interest rate, or an approximation thereof, that will be applied when recognising the financial asset resulting from the loan commitment. This is because for the purpose of applying the impairment requirements, a financial asset that is recognised following a draw down on a loan commitment shall be treated as a continuation of that commitment instead of as a new financial instrument. The expected credit losses on the financial asset shall therefore be measured considering the initial credit risk of the loan commitment from the date that the entity became a party to the irrevocable commitment.

AG212. Expected credit losses on financial guarantee contracts or on loan commitments for which the effective interest rate cannot be determined shall be discounted by applying a discount rate that reflects the current market assessment of the time value of money and the risks that are specific to the cash flows but only if, and to the extent that, the risks are taken into account by adjusting the discount rate instead of adjusting the cash shortfalls being discounted.

AG213. For the purpose of this Standard, reasonable and supportable information is that which is reasonably available at the reporting date without undue cost or effort, including information about past events, current conditions and forecasts of future economic conditions. Information that is available for financial reporting purposes is considered to be available without undue cost or effort.

AG214. An entity is not required to incorporate forecasts of future conditions over the entire expected life of a financial instrument. The degree of judgement that is required to estimate expected credit losses depends on the availability of detailed information. As the forecast horizon increases, the availability of detailed information decreases and the degree of judgement required to estimate expected credit losses increases. The estimate of expected credit losses does not require a detailed estimate for periods that are far in the future—for such periods, an entity may extrapolate projections from available, detailed information.

AG215. An entity need not undertake an exhaustive search for information but shall consider all reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort and that is relevant to the estimate of expected credit losses, including the effect of expected prepayments. The information used shall include factors that are specific to the borrower, general economic conditions and an assessment of both the current as well as the forecast direction of conditions at the reporting date. An entity may use various sources of data, that may be both internal (entity-specific) and external. Possible data sources include internal historical credit loss experience, internal ratings, credit loss experience of other entities and external ratings, reports and statistics. Entities that have no, or insufficient, sources of entity- specific data may use peer group experience for the comparable financial instrument (or groups of financial instruments).

AG216. Historical information is an important anchor or base from which to measure expected credit losses. However, an entity shall adjust historical data, such as credit loss experience, on the basis of current observable data to reflect the effects of the current conditions and its forecasts of future conditions that did not affect the period on which the historical data is based, and to remove the effects of the conditions in the historical period that are not relevant to the future contractual cash flows. In some cases, the best reasonable and supportable information could be the unadjusted historical information, depending on the nature of the historical information and when it was calculated, compared to circumstances at the reporting date and the characteristics of the financial instrument being considered. Estimates of changes in expected credit losses should reflect, and be directionally consistent with, changes in related observable data from period to period (such as changes in unemployment rates, property prices, commodity prices, payment status or other factors that are indicative of credit losses on the financial instrument or in the group of financial instruments and in the magnitude of those changes). An entity shall regularly review the methodology and assumptions used for estimating expected credit losses to reduce any differences between estimates and actual credit loss experience.

AG217. When using historical credit loss experience in estimating expected credit losses, it is important that information about historical credit loss rates is applied to groups that are defined in a manner that is consistent with the groups for which the historical credit loss rates were observed. Consequently, the method used shall enable each group of financial assets to be associated with information about past credit loss experience in groups of financial assets with similar risk characteristics and with relevant observable data that reflects current conditions.

AG218. Expected credit losses reflect an entity’s own expectations of credit losses. However, when considering all reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort in estimating expected credit losses, an entity should also consider observable market information about the credit risk of the particular financial instrument or similar financial instruments.

AG219. For the purposes of measuring expected credit losses, the estimate of expected cash shortfalls shall reflect the cash flows expected from collateral and other credit enhancements that are part of the contractual terms and are not recognised separately by the entity. The estimate of expected cash shortfalls on a collateralised financial instrument reflects the amount and timing of cash flows that are expected from foreclosure on the collateral less the costs of obtaining and selling the collateral, irrespective of whether foreclosure is probable (i.e., the estimate of expected cash flows considers the probability of a foreclosure and the cash flows that would result from it). Consequently, any cash flows that are expected from the realisation of the collateral beyond the contractual maturity of the contract should be included in this analysis. Any collateral obtained as a result of foreclosure is not recognised as an asset that is separate from the collateralised financial instrument unless it meets the relevant recognition criteria for an asset in this or other Standards.

AG220. If an entity reclassifies financial assets in accordance with paragraph 54, paragraph 94 requires that the reclassification is applied prospectively from the reclassification date. Both the amortised cost measurement category and the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category require that the effective interest rate is determined at initial recognition. Both of those measurement categories also require that the impairment requirements are applied in the same way. Consequently, when an entity reclassifies a financial asset between the amortised cost measurement category and the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category:

1. The recognition of interest revenue will not change and therefore the entity continues to use the same effective interest rate.

2. The measurement of expected credit losses will not change because both measurement categories apply the same impairment approach. However if a financial asset is reclassified out of the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category and into the amortised cost measurement category, a loss allowance would be recognised as an adjustment to the gross carrying amount of the financial asset from the reclassification date. If a financial asset is reclassified out of the amortised cost measurement category and into the fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense measurement category, the loss allowance would be derecognised (and thus would no longer be recognised as an adjustment to the gross carrying amount) but instead would be recognised as an accumulated impairment amount (of an equal amount) in other comprehensive revenue and expense and would be disclosed from the reclassification date.

AG221. However, an entity is not required to separately recognise interest revenue or impairment gains or losses for a financial asset measured at fair value through surplus or deficit. Consequently, when an entity reclassifies a financial asset out of the fair value through surplus or deficit measurement category, the effective interest rate is determined on the basis of the fair value of the asset at the reclassification date. In addition, for the purposes of applying paragraphs 73–93 to the financial asset from the reclassification date, the date of the reclassification is treated as the date of initial recognition.

AG222. Paragraph 106 permits an entity to make an irrevocable election to present in other comprehensive revenue and expense changes in the fair value of an investment in an equity instrument that is not held for trading. This election is made on an instrument-by-instrument (i.e., share-by-share) basis. Amounts presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense shall not be subsequently transferred to surplus or deficit. However, the entity may transfer the cumulative gain or loss within net assets/equity. Dividends or similar distributions on such investments are recognised in surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraph 107 unless the dividend clearly represents a recovery of part of the cost of the investment.

AG223. Unless paragraph 44 applies, paragraph 41 requires that a financial asset is measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense if the contractual terms of the financial asset give rise to cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding and the asset is held in a management model whose objective is achieved by both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets. This measurement category recognises information in surplus or deficit as if the financial asset is measured at amortised cost, while the financial asset is measured in the statement of financial position at fair value. Gains or losses, other than those that are recognised in surplus or deficit in accordance with paragraphs 111–112, are recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense. When these financial assets are derecognised, cumulative gains or losses previously recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense are reclassified to surplus or deficit.This reflects the gain or loss that would have been recognised in surplus or deficit upon derecognition if the financial asset had been measured at amortised cost.

AG224. An entity applies PBE IPSAS 4 to financial assets and financial liabilities that are monetary items in accordance with PBE IPSAS 4 and denominated in a foreign currency. PBE IPSAS 4 requires any foreign exchange gains and losses on monetary assets and monetary liabilities to be recognised in surplus or deficit. An exception is a monetary item that is designated as a hedging instrument in a cash flow hedge (see paragraph 140), a hedge of a net investment (see paragraph 142) or a fair value hedge of an equity instrument for which an entity has elected to present changes in fair value in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106 (see paragraph 137).

AG225. For the purpose of recognising foreign exchange gains and losses under PBE IPSAS 4, a financial asset measured at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 41 is treated as a monetary item. Accordingly, such a financial asset is treated as an asset measured at amortised cost in the foreign currency. Exchange differences on the amortised cost are recognised in surplus or deficit and other changes in the carrying amount are recognised in accordance with paragraph 111.

AG226. Paragraph 106 permits an entity to make an irrevocable election to present in other comprehensive revenue and expense subsequent changes in the fair value of particular investments in equity instruments. Such an investment is not a monetary item. Accordingly, the gain or loss that is presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 106 includes any related foreign exchange component.

AG227. If there is a hedging relationship between a non-derivative monetary asset and a non-derivative monetary liability, changes in the foreign currency component of those financial instruments are presented in surplus or deficit.

AG228. When an entity designates a financial liability as at fair value through surplus or deficit, it must determine whether presenting in other comprehensive revenue and expense the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk would create or enlarge an accounting mismatch in surplus or deficit. An accounting mismatch would be created or enlarged if presenting the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk in other comprehensive revenue and expense would result in a greater mismatch in surplus or deficit than if those amounts were presented in surplus or deficit.

AG229. To make that determination, an entity must assess whether it expects that the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk will be offset in surplus or deficit by a change in the fair value of another financial instrument measured at fair value through surplus or deficit. Such an expectation must be based on an economic relationship between the characteristics of the liability and the characteristics of the other financial instrument.

AG230. That determination is made at initial recognition and is not reassessed. For practical purposes the entity need not enter into all of the assets and liabilities giving rise to an accounting mismatch at exactly the same time. A reasonable delay is permitted provided that any remaining transactions are expected to occur. An entity must apply consistently its methodology for determining whether presenting in other comprehensive revenue and expense the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk would create or enlarge an accounting mismatch in surplus or deficit. However, an entity may use different methodologies when there are different economic relationships between the characteristics of the liabilities designated as at fair value through surplus or deficit and the characteristics of the other financial instruments. PBE IPSAS 30 Financial Instruments: Disclosures requires an entity to provide qualitative disclosures in the notes to the financial statements about its methodology for making that determination.

AG231. If such a mismatch would be created or enlarged, the entity is required to present all changes in fair value (including the effects of changes in the credit risk of the liability) in surplus or deficit. If such a mismatch would not be created or enlarged, the entity is required to present the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk in other comprehensive revenue and expense.

AG232. Amounts presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense shall not be subsequently transferred to surplus or deficit. However, the entity may transfer the cumulative gain or loss within net assets/equity.

AG233. The following example describes a situation in which an accounting mismatch would be created in surplus or deficit if the effects of changes in the credit risk of the liability were presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense. A Mortgage and Housing Corporation provides loans to customers and funds those loans by selling bonds with matching characteristics (e.g., amount outstanding, repayment profile, term and currency) in the market. The contractual terms of the loan permit the mortgage customer to prepay its loan (i.e., satisfy its obligation to the bank) by buying the corresponding bond at fair value in the market and delivering that bond to the Mortgage and Housing Corporation. As a result of that contractual prepayment right, if the credit quality of the bond worsens (and, thus, the fair value of the Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s liability decreases), the fair value of the Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s loan asset also decreases. The change in the fair value of the asset reflects the mortgage customer’s contractual right to prepay the mortgage loan by buying the underlying bond at fair value (which, in this example, has decreased) and delivering the bond to the Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Consequently, the effects of changes in the credit risk of the liability (the bond) will be offset in surplus or deficit by a corresponding change in the fair value of a financial asset (the loan). If the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk were presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense there would be an accounting mismatch in surplus or deficit. Consequently, the Mortgage and Housing Corporation is required to present all changes in fair value of the liability (including the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk) in surplus or deficit.

AG234. In the example in paragraph AG233, there is a contractual linkage between the effects of changes in the credit risk of the liability and changes in the fair value of the financial asset (i.e., as a result of the mortgage customer’s contractual right to prepay the loan by buying the bond at fair value and delivering the bond to the Mortgage and Housing Corporation). However, an accounting mismatch may also occur in the absence of a contractual linkage.

AG235. For the purposes of applying the requirements in paragraphs 108 and 109, an accounting mismatch is not caused solely by the measurement method that an entity uses to determine the effects of changes in a liability’s credit risk. An accounting mismatch in surplus or deficit would arise only when the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk (as defined in PBE IPSAS 30) are expected to be offset by changes in the fair value of another financial instrument. A mismatch that arises solely as a result of the measurement method (i.e., because an entity does not isolate changes in a liability’s credit risk from some other changes in its fair value) does not affect the determination required by paragraphs 108 and

109. For example, an entity may not isolate changes in a liability’s credit risk from changes in liquidity risk. If the entity presents the combined effect of both factors in other comprehensive revenue and expense, a mismatch may occur because changes in liquidity risk may be included in the fair value measurement of the entity’s financial assets and the entire fair value change of those assets is presented in surplus or deficit. However, such a mismatch is caused by measurement imprecision, not the offsetting relationship described in paragraph AG229 and, therefore, does not affect the determination required by paragraphs 108 and 109.

AG236. PBE IPSAS 30 defines credit risk as ‘the risk that one party to a financial instrument will cause a financial loss for the other party by failing to discharge an obligation’. The requirement in paragraph 108(a) relates to the risk that the issuer will fail to perform on that particular liability. It does not necessarily relate to the creditworthiness of the issuer. For example, if an entity issues a collateralised liability and a non-collateralised liability that are otherwise identical, the credit risk of those two liabilities will be different, even though they are issued by the same entity. The credit risk on the collateralised liability will be less than the credit risk of the non-collateralised liability. The credit risk for a collateralised liability may be close to zero.

AG237. For the purposes of applying the requirement in paragraph 108(a), credit risk is different from asset- specific performance risk. Asset-specific performance risk is not related to the risk that an entity will fail to discharge a particular obligation but instead it is related to the risk that a single asset or a group of assets will perform poorly (or not at all).

AG238. The following are examples of asset-specific performance risk:

1. A liability with a unit-linking feature whereby the amount due to investors is contractually determined on the basis of the performance of specified assets. The effect of that unit-linking feature on the fair value of the liability is asset-specific performance risk, not credit risk.

2. A liability issued by a structured entity with the following characteristics. The entity is legally isolated so the assets in the entity are ring-fenced solely for the benefit of its investors, even in the event of bankruptcy. The entity enters into no other transactions and the assets in the entity cannot be hypothecated. Amounts are due to the entity’s investors only if the ring-fenced assets generate cash flows. Thus, changes in the fair value of the liability primarily reflect changes in the fair value of the assets. The effect of the performance of the assets on the fair value of the liability is asset-specific performance risk, not credit risk.

AG239. For the purposes of applying the requirement in paragraph 108(a), an entity shall determine the amount of change in the fair value of the financial liability that is attributable to changes in the credit risk of that liability either:

1. As the amount of change in its fair value that is not attributable to changes in market conditions that give rise to market risk (see paragraphs AG240 and AG241); or

2. Using an alternative method the entity believes more faithfully represents the amount of change in the liability’s fair value that is attributable to changes in its credit risk.

AG240. Changes in market conditions that give rise to market risk include changes in a benchmark interest rate, the price of another entity’s financial instrument, a commodity price, a foreign exchange rate or an index of prices or rates.

AG241. If the only significant relevant changes in market conditions for a liability are changes in an observed (benchmark) interest rate, the amount in paragraph AG239(a) can be estimated as follows:

1. First, the entity computes the liability’s internal rate of return at the start of the period using the fair value of the liability and the liability’s contractual cash flows at the start of the period. It deducts from this rate of return the observed (benchmark) interest rate at the start of the period, to arrive at an instrument-specific component of the internal rate of return.

2. Next, the entity calculates the present value of the cash flows associated with the liability using the liability’s contractual cash flows at the end of the period and a discount rate equal to the sum of (i) the observed (benchmark) interest rate at the end of the period and (ii) the instrument- specific component of the internal rate of return as determined in (a).

3. The difference between the fair value of the liability at the end of the period and the amount determined in (b) is the change in fair value that is not attributable to changes in the observed (benchmark) interest rate. This is the amount to be presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 108(a).

AG242. The example in paragraph AG241 assumes that changes in fair value arising from factors other than changes in the instrument’s credit risk or changes in observed (benchmark) interest rates are not significant. This method would not be appropriate if changes in fair value arising from other factors are significant. In those cases, an entity is required to use an alternative method that more faithfully measures the effects of changes in the liability’s credit risk (see paragraph AG239(b)). For example, if the instrument in the example contains an embedded derivative, the change in fair value of the embedded derivative is excluded in determining the amount to be presented in other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 108(a).

AG243. As with all fair value measurements, an entity’s measurement method for determining the portion of the change in the liability’s fair value that is attributable to changes in its credit risk must make maximum use of relevant observable inputs and minimum use of unobservable inputs.

AG244. Derivatives that are embedded in hybrid contracts, but that are not separately accounted for, cannot be designated as separate hedging instruments.

AG245. An entity’s own equity instruments are not financial assets or financial liabilities of the entity and therefore cannot be designated as hedging instruments.

AG246. For hedges of foreign currency risk, the foreign currency risk component of a non-derivative financial instrument is determined in accordance with PBE IPSAS 4.

AG247. This Standard does not restrict the circumstances in which a derivative that is measured at fair value through surplus or deficit may be designated as a hedging instrument, except for some written options. A written option does not qualify as a hedging instrument unless it is designated as an offset to a purchased option, including one that is embedded in another financial instrument (for example, a written call option used to hedge a callable liability).

AG248. For hedges other than hedges of foreign currency risk, when an entity designates a non-derivative financial asset or a non-derivative financial liability measured at fair value through surplus or deficit as a hedging instrument, it may only designate the non-derivative financial instrument in its entirety or a proportion of it.

AG249. A single hedging instrument may be designated as a hedging instrument of more than one type of risk, provided that there is a specific designation of the hedging instrument and of the different risk positions as hedged items. Those hedged items can be in different hedging relationships.

AG250. A firm commitment to acquire an operation in a PBE combination cannot be a hedged item, except for foreign currency risk, because the other risks being hedged cannot be specifically identified and measured. Those other risks are general business risks.

AG251. An equity method investment cannot be a hedged item in a fair value hedge. This is because the equity method recognises in surplus or deficit the investor’s share of the investee’s surplus or deficit, instead of changes in the investment’s fair value. For a similar reason, an investment in a consolidated controlled entity cannot be a hedged item in a fair value hedge. This is because consolidation recognises in surplus or deficit the controlled entity’s surplus or deficit, instead of changes in the investment’s fair value. A hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation is different because it is a hedge of the foreign currency exposure, not a fair value hedge of the change in the value of the investment.

AG252. Paragraph 125 permits an entity to designate as hedged items aggregated exposures that are a combination of an exposure and a derivative. When designating such a hedged item, an entity assesses whether the aggregated exposure combines an exposure with a derivative so that it creates a different aggregated exposure that is managed as one exposure for a particular risk (or risks). In that case, the entity may designate the hedged item on the basis of the aggregated exposure. For example:

1. An entity may hedge a given quantity of highly probable oil purchases in 15 months’ time against price risk (based on US dollars) using a 15-month futures contract for oil. The highly probable oil purchases and the futures contract for oil in combination can be viewed as a 15-month fixed-amount US dollar foreign currency risk exposure for risk management purposes (i.e., like any fixed-amount US dollar cash outflow in 15 months’ time).

2. An entity may hedge the foreign currency risk for the entire term of a 10-year fixed-rate debt denominated in a foreign currency. However, the entity requires fixed-rate exposure in its functional currency only for a short to medium term (say two years) and floating rate exposure in its functional currency for the remaining term to maturity. At the end of each of the two-year intervals (i.e., on a two-year rolling basis) the entity fixes the next two years’ interest rate exposure (if the interest level is such that the entity wants to fix interest rates). In such a situation an entity may enter into a 10-year fixed-to-floating cross-currency interest rate swap that swaps the fixed-rate foreign currency debt into a variable-rate functional currency exposure. This is overlaid with a two-year interest rate swap that—on the basis of the functional currency—swaps variable-rate debt into fixed-rate debt. In effect, the fixed-rate foreign currency debt and the 10- year fixed-to-floating cross-currency interest rate swap in combination are viewed as a 10-year variable-rate debt functional currency exposure for risk management purposes.

AG253. When designating the hedged item on the basis of the aggregated exposure, an entity considers the combined effect of the items that constitute the aggregated exposure for the purpose of assessing hedge effectiveness and measuring hedge ineffectiveness. However, the items that constitute the aggregated exposure remain accounted for separately. This means that, for example:

1. Derivatives that are part of an aggregated exposure are recognised as separate assets or liabilities measured at fair value; and

2. If a hedging relationship is designated between the items that constitute the aggregated exposure, the way in which a derivative is included as part of an aggregated exposure must be consistent with the designation of that derivative as the hedging instrument at the level of the aggregated exposure. For example, if an entity excludes the forward element of a derivative from its designation as the hedging instrument for the hedging relationship between the items that constitute the aggregated exposure, it must also exclude the forward element when including that derivative as a hedged item as part of the aggregated exposure. Otherwise, the aggregated exposure shall include a derivative, either in its entirety or a proportion of it.

AG254. Paragraph 127 states that in consolidated financial statements the foreign currency risk of a highly probable forecast transaction within an economic entity may qualify as a hedged item in a cash flow hedge, provided that the transaction is denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of the entity entering into that transaction and that the foreign currency risk will affect consolidated surplus or deficit. For this purpose an entity can be a controlling entity, controlled entity, associate, joint arrangement or branch. If the foreign currency risk of a forecast transaction within the economic entity does not affect consolidated surplus or deficit, the transaction cannot qualify as a hedged item. This is usually the case for royalty payments, interest payments or management charges between members of the same economic entity, unless there is a related external transaction. However, when the foreign currency risk of a forecast transaction within an economic entity will affect consolidated surplus or deficit, the transaction within the economic entity can qualify as a hedged item. An example is forecast sales or purchases of inventories between members of the same economic entity if there is an onward sale of the inventory to a party external to the economic entity. Similarly, a forecast sale of plant and equipment within the economic entity from the entity that manufactured it to an entity that will use the plant and equipment in its operations may affect consolidated surplus or deficit. This could occur, for example, because the plant and equipment will be depreciated by the purchasing entity and the amount initially recognised for the plant and equipment may change if the forecast transaction within the economic entity is denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of the purchasing entity.

AG255. If a hedge of a forecast transaction within an economic entity qualifies for hedge accounting, any gain or loss is recognised in, and taken out of, other comprehensive revenue and expense in accordance with paragraph 140. The relevant period or periods during which the foreign currency risk of the hedged transaction affects surplus or deficit is when it affects consolidated surplus or deficit.