As we enter into another audit busy season, I have started my standard exercise of compiling a list of frequently encountered audit and accounting issues that require research, additional analysis and often times detailed disclosures and even material adjustments to my client’s financials. An oft-recurring theme is the existence of related party transactions and how such transactions are recorded and disclosed.
Below are a few frequently asked questions on this subject that merit our attention: (more…)
Diversity in practice led the FASB to revisit the GAAP guidance for the Statement of Cash Flows that has been around since 1987 with the issuance FASB No. 95. Many people thought aspects of these rules were confusing (and contradictory, at times), or even missing entirely. In fact, restatements of public company financial statements often relate to issues with the Statement of Cash Flows (as noted in an earlier post).
Originally planned as a comprehensive project, the FASB altered course to focus efforts on just the most confusing areas, resulting in new guidance covering nine specific issues. The good news is that most of these issues rarely apply to nonpublic tech companies in the Silicon Valley. Eight issues are covered in ASU No. 2016-15 “Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” issued in August 2016. Several of the issues that might be encountered include handling proceeds from insurance claims, distributions from equity method investees, and contingent consideration payments made after a business combination. Mid-sized companies outside of specific industries would rarely run into the remaining issues. (more…)
My first post about the FASB GAAP Simplification Initiative was in April 2015, and I have posted since then about specific GAAP changes under this umbrella that seemed to bestow the most widespread consequences for companies in Silicon Valley. Now seems like a good time to look back over the past year and a half for other GAAP simplification subjects you might not know about, but are not exactly esoteric topics. (more…)
A recent survey conducted by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) estimates that fraud losses for a typical organization amount to 5% of total revenues each year with median losses to the tune of $150,000. More than one‐fifth of such losses hit the million dollar mark. The most common type of fraud: asset misappropriation with median losses of $125,000 comprised 83% of all fraud cases reported while financial statement fraud schemes made up just 10% of the total fraud cases, but caused the greatest median loss at nearly $1 million. The frauds reportedly lasted 18 months before being detected. The most telling fact was that private companies logged the highest median loss of $180,000 in comparison to public companies, government, non-profit and other sectors. (more…)
Continuing along on its accounting and reporting simplification efforts (see April 15, 2015 post), on March 30, 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09 (ASU) Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. This ASU changes certain accounting requirements, as well as simplifies some of the underlying assumptions and calculations for the accounting measures. Certain provisions apply to all companies, with additional reliefs available only to nonpublic companies. (more…)
The updated guidance, issued in April 2015, covers fees paid by a customer in a cloud computing arrangement. Guidance for cloud computingvendors (or providers) already existed before this “Simplification Initiative” clarification. For more on the “Simplification Initiative”, see my previous post. This guidance for customers is applicable to private companies beginning with calendar year 2016, although earlier application is allowed. (more…)
Last Spring I wrote in this blog about the FASB’s “Simplification Initiative” (see April 15, 2015 post). Since that time, a number of projects with the premise of simplification have been concluded and several are ongoing. On November 20, 2015, the FASB issued another Accounting Standards Update (ASU) under the umbrella of Simplification that will affect most companies because it relates to Deferred Income Taxes.
Just in time for the holidays…
Although it’s not “official” yet, FASB voted on November 11th to proceed with a ballot draft of a new leasing standard that has been under consideration for a decade. This means that deliberations have concluded (decisions have been made) and the final FASB vote should occur in early 2016. When that happens, it’s “official”.
The new revenue recognition standard, or ASU 2014-09, was issued in May 2014. As we first started digesting the standard, we posted a blog on the 5-step process of revenue recognition (September 10, 2014 post). Due to the sweeping changes associated with this standard, it became clear early on that implementing the new standard was going to be a process. As a follow-up, we included an implementation update in the blog (March 18, 2015 post) but once again, there are more twists and turns for the newly issued standard.