(a) An assistant of yours has been criticised over a piece of assessed work that he produc

Question

(a) An assistant of yours has been criticised over a piece of assessed work that he produced for his study course for giving the definition of a non-current asset as ‘a physical asset of substantial cost, owned by the company, which will last longer than one year’.

Required:

Provide an explanation to your assistant of the weaknesses in his definition of non-current assets when

compared to the International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB) view of assets. (4 marks)

(b) The same assistant has encountered the following matters during the preparation of the draft financial statements of Darby for the year ending 30 September 2009. He has given an explanation of his treatment of them.

(i) Darby spent $200,000 sending its staff on training courses during the year. This has already led to an

improvement in the company’s efficiency and resulted in cost savings. The organiser of the course has stated that the benefits from the training should last for a minimum of four years. The assistant has therefore treated the cost of the training as an intangible asset and charged six months’ amortisation based on the average date during the year on which the training courses were completed. (3 marks)

(ii) During the year the company started research work with a view to the eventual development of a new

processor chip. By 30 September 2009 it had spent $1·6 million on this project. Darby has a past history

of being particularly successful in bringing similar projects to a profitable conclusion. As a consequence the

assistant has treated the expenditure to date on this project as an asset in the statement of financial position.

Darby was also commissioned by a customer to research and, if feasible, produce a computer system to

install in motor vehicles that can automatically stop the vehicle if it is about to be involved in a collision. At

30 September 2009, Darby had spent $2·4 million on this project, but at this date it was uncertain as to

whether the project would be successful. As a consequence the assistant has treated the $2·4 million as an

expense in the income statement. (4 marks)

(iii) Darby signed a contract (for an initial three years) in August 2009 with a company called Media Today to

install a satellite dish and cabling system to a newly built group of residential apartments. Media Today will

provide telephone and television services to the residents of the apartments via the satellite system and pay

Darby $50,000 per annum commencing in December 2009. Work on the installation commenced on

1 September 2009 and the expenditure to 30 September 2009 was $58,000. The installation is expected

to be completed by 31 October 2009. Previous experience with similar contracts indicates that Darby will

make a total profit of $40,000 over the three years on this initial contract. The assistant correctly recorded

the costs to 30 September 2009 of $58,000 as a non-current asset, but then wrote this amount down to

$40,000 (the expected total profit) because he believed the asset to be impaired.

The contract is not a finance lease. Ignore discounting. (4 marks)

Required:

For each of the above items (i) to (iii) comment on the assistant’s treatment of them in the financial

statements for the year ended 30 September 2009 and advise him how they should be treated under

International Financial Reporting Standards.

Note: the mark allocation is shown against each of the three items above.

Answer 1

正确答案：
(a)Therearefourelementstotheassistant’sdefinitionofanon-currentassetandheissubstantiallyincorrectinrespectofallofthem.Thetermnon-currentassetswillnormallyincludeintangibleassetsandcertaininvestments;theuseoftheterm‘physicalasset’wouldbespecifictotangibleassetsonly.Whilstitisusuallythecasethatnon-currentassetsareofrelativelyhighvaluethisisnotadefiningaspect.Awastepaperbinmayexhibitthecharacteristicsofanon-currentasset,butonthegroundsofmaterialityitisunlikelytobetreatedassuch.Furthermorethepastcostofanassetmaybeirrelevant;nomatterhowmuchanassethascost,itistheexpectationoffutureeconomicbenefitsflowingfromaresource(normallyintheform.offuturecashinflows)thatdefinesanassetaccordingtotheIASB’sFrameworkforthepreparationandpresentationoffinancialstatements.Theconceptofownershipisnolongeracriticalaspectofthedefinitionofanasset.Itisprobablythecasethatmostnoncurrentassetsinanentity’sstatementoffinancialpositionareownedbytheentity;however,itistheabilityto‘control’assets(includingpreventingothersfromhavingaccesstothem)thatisnowadefiningfeature.Forexample:thisisanimportantcharacteristicintreatingafinanceleaseasanassetofthelesseeratherthanthelessor.Itisalsotruethatmostnon-currentassetswillbeusedbyanentityformorethanoneyearandapartofthedefinitionofproperty,plantandequipmentinIAS16Property,plantandequipmentreferstoanexpectationofuseinmorethanoneperiod,butthisisnotnecessarilyalwaysthecase.Itmaybethatanon-currentassetisacquiredwhichprovesunsuitablefortheentity’sintendeduseorisdamagedinanaccident.Inthesecircumstancesassetsmaynothavebeenusedforlongerthanayear,butneverthelesstheywerereportedasnon-currentsduringthetimetheywereinuse.Anon-currentassetmaybewithinayearoftheendofitsusefullifebut(unlessasaleagreementhasbeenreachedunderIFRS5Non-currentassetsheldforsaleanddiscontinuedoperations)wouldstillbereportedasanon-currentassetifitwasstillgivingeconomicbenefits.Anotherdefiningaspectofnon-currentassetsistheirintendedusei.e.heldforcontinuinguseintheproduction,supplyofgoodsorservices,forrentaltoothersorforadministrativepurposes.(b)(i)TheexpenditureonthetrainingcoursesmayexhibitthecharacteristicsofanassetinthattheyhaveandwillcontinuetobringfutureeconomicbenefitsbywayofincreasedefficiencyandcostsavingstoDarby.However,theexpenditurecannotberecognisedasanassetonthestatementoffinancialpositionandmustbechargedasanexpenseasthecostisincurred.Themainreasonforthislieswiththeissueof’control’;itisDarby’semployeesthathavethe‘skills’providedbythecourses,buttheemployeescanleavethecompanyandtaketheirskillswiththemor,throughaccidentorinjury,maybedeprivedofthoseskills.AlsothecapitalisationofstafftrainingcostsisspecificallyprohibitedunderInternationalFinancialReportingStandards(specificallyIAS38Intangibleassets).(ii)Thequestionspecificallystatesthatthecostsincurredtodateonthedevelopmentofthenewprocessorchipareresearchcosts.IAS38statesthatresearchcostsmustbeexpensed.Thisismainlybecauseresearchistherelativelyearlystageofanewprojectandanyfuturebenefitsaresofarinthefuturethattheycannotbeconsideredtomeetthedefinitionofanasset(probablefutureeconomicbenefits),despitethegoodrecordofsuccessinthepastwithsimilarprojects.Althoughtheworkontheautomaticvehiclebrakingsystemisstillattheresearchstage,thisisdifferentinnaturefromthepreviousexampleastheworkhasbeencommissionedbyacustomer,Assuch,fromtheperspectiveofDarby,itisworkinprogress(acurrentasset)andshouldnotbewrittenoffasanexpense.Anoteofcautionshouldbeaddedhereinthatthequestionsaysthatthesuccessoftheprojectisuncertainwhichpresumablymeansitmaynotbecompleted.ThisdoesnotmeanthatDarbywillnotreceivepaymentfortheworkithascarriedout,butitshouldbecheckedtothecontracttoensurethattheamountithasspenttodate($2·4million)willberecoverable.Intheeventthatsay,forexample,thecontractstatedthatonly$2millionwouldbeallowedforresearchcosts,thiswouldplacealimitonhowmuchDarbycouldtreatasworkinprogress.Ifthiswerethecasethen,forthisexample,Darbywouldhavetoexpense$400,000andtreatonly$2millionasworkinprogress.(iii)Thequestionsuggeststhecorrecttreatmentforthiskindofcontractistotreatthecostsoftheinstallationasanon-currentassetand(presumably)depreciateitoveritsexpectedlifeof(atleast)threeyearsfromwhenitbecomesavailableforuse.Inthiscasetheassetwillnotcomeintouseuntilthenextfinancialyear/reportingperiodandnodepreciationneedstobeprovidedat30September2009.Thecapitalisedcoststodateof$58,000shouldonlybewrittendownifthereisevidencethattheassethasbecomeimpaired.Impairmentoccurswheretherecoverableamountofanassetislessthanitscarryingamount.Theassistantappearstobelievethattherecoverableamountisthefutureprofit,whereas(inthiscase)itisthefuture(net)cashinflows.Thusanyimpairmenttestat30September2009shouldcomparethecarryingamountof$58,000withtheexpectednetcashflowfromthesystemof$98,000($50,000perannumforthreeyearslessfuturecashoutflowstocompletiontheinstallationof$52,000(seenotebelow)).Asthefuturenetcashflowsareinexcessofthecarryingamount,theassetisnotimpairedanditshouldnotbewrittendownbutshownasanon-currentasset(underconstruction)atcostof$58,000.Note:asthecontractisexpectedtomakeaprofitof$40,000onincomeof$150,000,thetotalcostsmustbe$110,000,withcoststodateat$58,000thisleavescompletioncostsof$52,000.