Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
When you're analyzing financial statements, you're not just reading numbers—you're interpreting information that's been shaped by specific accounting standards. IFRS provides the rulebook that determines how companies recognize revenue, when they record assets and liabilities, and what they must disclose. Understanding these standards isn't optional; it's the foundation for comparing companies across industries and borders, spotting red flags in financial reporting, and making informed investment decisions.
You're being tested on your ability to apply these standards analytically, not just define them. Examiners want to see that you understand the underlying principles—concepts like substance over form, matching, prudence, and faithful representation. Each standard below illustrates one or more of these principles in action. Don't just memorize the standard numbers; know what problem each standard solves and how it affects the financial statements you'll be analyzing.
These standards establish the core rules for when items appear on financial statements and how they're initially valued. They answer the fundamental question: what qualifies as an asset, liability, or expense?
Compare: IAS 2 vs. IAS 12—both apply prudence but in different contexts. IAS 2 prevents asset overstatement through NRV testing, while IAS 12 requires recognizing deferred tax liabilities even when payment is uncertain. If asked about conservative accounting principles, these standards demonstrate prudence in action.
These standards govern assets that provide economic benefits over multiple periods. The key analytical concept is matching—spreading costs over the periods that benefit from the asset's use.
Compare: IAS 16 vs. IAS 38—both address long-term assets but with different recognition thresholds. Tangible assets (IAS 16) are generally easier to recognize because physical existence is clear. Intangible assets require proving identifiability and control, explaining why internally generated goodwill is never recognized. FRQ tip: when asked about asset recognition challenges, contrast these standards.
Modern revenue standards shift focus from risks and rewards to control transfer—a fundamental change that affects when companies can book revenue and how they must disclose contract details.
Compare: IFRS 15's control approach vs. legacy risks-and-rewards—the shift means revenue timing can change significantly for complex contracts. A construction company might recognize revenue over time (as control transfers progressively) rather than at completion. Analysts must understand these timing differences when comparing pre- and post-IFRS 15 financials.
These standards determine when and how companies must recognize obligations—both certain liabilities and uncertain future commitments. The analytical focus is on completeness of liability recognition.
Compare: IAS 37 vs. IFRS 16—both create liabilities but with different certainty levels. Lease liabilities (IFRS 16) are contractually fixed and highly predictable. Provisions (IAS 37) involve estimation uncertainty and judgment about probability. When analyzing leverage ratios post-IFRS 16, remember that lease liabilities are now included, making historical comparisons tricky.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Asset Recognition Criteria | IAS 16, IAS 38, IAS 2 |
| Liability Recognition | IFRS 16, IAS 37, IFRS 9 |
| Measurement at Fair Value | IAS 16 (revaluation), IAS 36, IFRS 9 |
| Prudence/Conservatism | IAS 2 (lower of cost/NRV), IAS 36, IAS 37 |
| Revenue Timing | IFRS 15 (five-step model) |
| Deferred Recognition | IAS 12 (deferred tax), IFRS 16 (lease liability) |
| Impairment Testing | IAS 36, IAS 38, IFRS 9 (ECL model) |
| Disclosure Requirements | All standards—especially IFRS 15, IFRS 16, IAS 37 |
Which two standards both require impairment testing but apply to fundamentally different asset types? What triggers testing under each?
Compare the recognition criteria for a provision under IAS 37 with the recognition of a lease liability under IFRS 16. Why might one appear on the balance sheet when the other doesn't?
A company capitalizes development costs under IAS 38 but expenses similar research costs. What principle explains this difference, and how would you verify the treatment is appropriate?
IFRS 15 replaced the risks-and-rewards approach with control transfer. For a software company selling licenses with ongoing support, how might this change affect revenue timing compared to legacy standards?
If an FRQ asks you to assess a company's "true" leverage position, which standards would you examine beyond traditional debt, and what adjustments might be necessary for meaningful peer comparison?