The IFRS income statement follows certain formatting requirements and options different from US GAAP.
From the IFRS Institute - Nov 15, 2018
The IFRS presentation guidelines for annual financial statements are generally less prescriptive than SEC regulation, but may still surprise US private companies. IFRS preparers have some flexibility in selecting their income statement format and which line items, headings and subtotals are to be presented on the face of the statement. In this article we highlight key considerations affecting preparers when choosing the structure, format and contents of the income statement and other presentation matters.
Single statement vs. two statements
Under IAS 1[1], the income statement is the primary financial statement used to provide an understanding of a company’s performance and operations over a defined period of time. Because of its importance, its format is often debated and scrutinized by preparers, users, regulators, standard setters and others.
Under IFRS, the income statement is labeled ‘statement of profit or loss’. Like US GAAP, the income statement captures most, but not all, revenues, income and expenses. Other items of comprehensive income (OCI) do not flow through profit and loss. Examples include the fair value remeasurement of certain equity instruments, remeasurements of defined benefit plans, and the effective portion of cash flow hedges change in fair value.
Items of profit and loss and OCI can be presented as:
The selected structure is applied consistently.
Format and content of the income statement
Although the format of the income statement is not prescribed, certain items require presentation, if material, either on the face of the income statement or disclosed in the notes to the financial statements. Here we highlight certain items common for commercial or industrial companies and how they should be presented in the income statement.
Common items 'requiring' presentation on the face of the income statement
Common items that may be presented on the face of the income statement 'or' disclosed in the notes to the financial statements
Comparison with US GAAP
Unlike IFRS, SEC regulation [2] prescribes the format and minimum line items to be presented for SEC registrants. For non-SEC registrants, there is limited guidance on the presentation of the income statement or statement of comprehensive income, like IFRS.
Another accounting policy election is the presentation of expenses by either their function or nature. This determination should be based on which approach is most relevant and reliable and often depends on the company, the industry in which it operates and its users’ needs.
When expenses are presented by function they are allocated to, for example, cost of sales, selling or administrative activities. At a minimum, under this method companies present cost of sales separately from other expenses. This election requires the use of IT systems, defined processes and internal controls to make sure the allocations are appropriate. In our experience, most US companies present their expenses by function.
The presentation of expenses by nature is less complex. For example, expenses may be disaggregated as purchases of materials, transport costs, depreciation and amortization, personnel costs and advertising costs. A mixed presentation is not permitted. This means, for instance, that it’s not possible to present impairment losses on nonfinancial assets or amortization and depreciation in separate line items in a presentation by function.
Regardless of the approach used, companies need to ensure the presentation is not misleading and is relevant to the understanding of the financial statements. Lastly, if presenting expenses by function, companies are required to include additional information on the nature of expenses (e.g. depreciation, amortization and staff costs) in the notes to the financial statements.
Comparison with US GAAP
Unlike IFRS, US GAAP has no requirement for expenses to be classified according to their nature or function. SEC regulations prescribe expense classification requirements, unlike IFRS.
Presenting additional line items, headings and subtotals
IAS 1 allows companies to use additional line items, headings and subtotals in the income statement “if such presentation is relevant to an understanding of the company’s financial performance.” The standard allows for judgment when determining what to present and how to present it, rather than prescribing a format or specifying all the possible items.
Given that IFRS does not define gross profit, operating results or many other common subtotals, there’s flexibility when adding and defining new line items in the income statement. Many companies disclose ‘operating profit‘ or ’results from operating activities‘ as a subtotal before profit or loss in the income statement. As a general rule, all additional line items and subtotals should be clearly labeled and presented, made up of items recognized and measured using IFRS, and calculated consistently across periods. Further, items shouldn’t be displayed with more prominence than other items required in the income statement.
Unusual or exceptional items
IFRS does not describe events or items of income or expense as ‘unusual’ or ‘exceptional’. However, the presentation, disclosure or characterization of an item as extraordinary is prohibited.
We believe it is possible to characterize items as unusual or exceptional under certain conditions. This should be infrequent and reserved for items that justify a prominence greater than that achieved by separate presentation and disclosure – e.g. a natural disaster. Those items should also be classified by nature or function, in the same way as usual or non-exceptional amounts. Lastly, companies should provide an explanation of the nature of the amount and why the item has been classified in this manner.
Given the significant judgment involved, companies should exercise caution when presenting items as unusual or exceptional. For example, although often infrequent and significant, the costs associated with a restructuring event generally wouldn’t qualify.
