2018年-普华永道全球_EITF_observer_-_Summary_of_the_June_7_2018_meeting_5页_222kb

报告摘要

EITF June 7, 2018 Meeting Summary

Core Content Overview

The June 7, 2018 EITF meeting addressed several accounting issues related to cloud computing arrangements, revenue contracts, and episodic television series. The discussions aimed to align current accounting practices with evolving industry standards and to provide clarity on the recognition and classification of certain financial items.

Main Issues and Key Findings

Issue 17-A: Implementation Costs in Cloud Computing Arrangements

Background: Current GAAP requires implementation costs in cloud computing arrangements with a license to be capitalized under ASC 350-40. However, for service contracts without a license, the guidance is unclear.
Final Consensus: Implementation costs in cloud computing arrangements that are considered service contracts should be capitalized using the same model as for software licenses.
Key Points:
- Capitalized costs should be expensed over the hosting arrangement term, including renewal periods.
- Expenses should be presented in the same income statement line as hosting fees.
- Capitalized costs should be classified as prepayments on the balance sheet.
- The impairment model under ASC 350-40 applies, with the unit of accounting being the module of the hosting arrangement.
- Minor clarifications to the definition of a hosting arrangement were made.
- Disclosures include nature of the arrangement, amounts capitalized, amortized, and impaired, and significant judgments.
- Transition methods: Prospective or retrospective, with prospective applying to eligible costs after adoption date.
- Effective date for public business entities: Fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted.

Issue 18-A: Recognition of Assumed Liability in Revenue Contracts

Background: When an entity adopts ASC 606, it must account for assumed liabilities in revenue contracts acquired in a business combination. There was diversity in practice on whether only legal obligations or performance obligations should be recognized.
Consensus-for-Exposure: An acquirer should recognize a liability for a performance obligation in a revenue contract using the definition in ASC 606.
Key Points:
- Performance obligations include constructive obligations and customary business practices.
- The fair value of the performance obligation should be based on incremental costs to support the revenue contract, not on the acquiree's carry-over basis.
- Fair value is not affected by the timing of fixed consideration payments.
- Direct costs to fulfill a performance obligation should be considered in measuring the liability.
- The Task Force agreed to use a prospective transition method.

Issue 18-B: Improvements to Accounting for Episodic Television Series

Background: The FASB requested the EITF to review the cost capitalization guidance for episodic content in ASC 926-20, considering changes in the media industry.
Discussion Outcome:
- The Task Force tentatively decided to align cost capitalization for episodic content with that of films, removing the content distinction.
- Amortization guidance remains unchanged to allow flexibility.
- The impairment model for film and licensed content should be aligned, with the unit of account at the lowest level where cash flows are largely independent.
- Additional indicators of impairment at the title level were proposed, but concerns were raised about increased costs and lack of clarity on reassessing useful life.
- The Task Force instructed the FASB staff to perform further outreach on these issues and related disclosures.

Issue 15-F: Classification of Cash Receipts and Payments in Statement of Cash Flows

Background: ASU 2016-15 revised the classification of cash flows related to beneficial interests in securitized trade receivables, categorizing them as investing activities.
Comment Letter: A letter raised concerns that this classification reduced the relevance of the statement of cash flows.
Task Force Recommendation:
- No reconsideration of the classification is needed, as the letter did not provide new information.
- The Task Force recommended the FASB retain its original conclusion.
- An implementation issue regarding revolving structures was noted and will be discussed in a future meeting.

Next Steps

Issue 17-A: If ratified by the FASB, the final consensus will be issued as a final ASU.
Issue 18-A: The consensus-for-exposure will be issued as a proposed ASU.
Issue 18-B: The Task Force will continue deliberations at a future meeting.
Issue 15-F: The FASB will address the revolving structures issue in a future meeting.