IFRS for SMEs Q&A 30-1 Recycling of cumulative exchange differences on disposal of a subsidiary
- Completed
- Completed
- Rasmus Sommer
Description
The IFRS Foundation's SME Implementation Group, which assists the IASB in supporting the implementation of the IFRS for SMEs, published on 21 November 2011 the draft Q&A Recycling of cumulative exchange differences on disposal of a subsidiary.
The draft Q&A includes a response to the question whether cumulative exchange differences that arise on translation into a presentation currency are prohibited from being recognised in profit or loss on disposal of the subsidiary. The paragraphs in the IFRS for SMEs dealing with translation to the presentation currency are silent on this issue. It is stated in the response that a paragraph in the section on consolidation and separate financial statements deals with the issue and prohibits recycling of the mentioned differences.
On 1 December 2011 EFRAG issued its draft comment letter in response to the draft Q&A. The comment deadline was 18 January 2012. EFRAG did not receive any comment letters.
On 31 January 2012 EFRAG issued its comment letter in response to the draft Q&A. EFRAG agreed with the answer provided in the draft Q&A but did not think the Q&A should be issued.
Show more...
The draft Q&A includes a response to the question whether cumulative exchange differences that arise on translation into a presentation currency are prohibited from being recognised in profit or loss on disposal of the subsidiary. The paragraphs in the IFRS for SMEs dealing with translation to the presentation currency are silent on this issue. It is stated in the response that a paragraph in the section on consolidation and separate financial statements deals with the issue and prohibits recycling of the mentioned differences.
On 1 December 2011 EFRAG issued its draft comment letter in response to the draft Q&A. The comment deadline was 18 January 2012. EFRAG did not receive any comment letters.
On 31 January 2012 EFRAG issued its comment letter in response to the draft Q&A. EFRAG agreed with the answer provided in the draft Q&A but did not think the Q&A should be issued.
