Accounting and Audit briefs
Revenue recognition and leases: FASB gives certain entities more time
Private companies and most nonprofits were supposed to implement updated revenue recognition guidance in fiscal year 2019 and updated lease guidance in fiscal year 2021. In the midst of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has decided to give certain entities an extra year to make the changes, if they need it.
Expanded deferral option
On April 8, the FASB agreed to issue a proposal that would have postponed the effective dates for the revenue recognition guidance for franchisors only and the lease guidance for private companies and nonprofit organizations that haven’t already adopted them. In a surprise move, on May 20, the FASB voted to extend the delay for the revenue rules beyond franchisors to all privately owned companies and nonprofits that haven’t adopted the changes. FASB members affirmed a similar delay on the lease rules.
The optional “timeout” is designed to help resource-strapped private companies, the nation’s largest business demographic, better navigate reporting hurdles amid the COVID-19 crisis. A final standard will be issued in early June.
Under the changes, all private companies and nonprofits that haven’t yet filed financial statements applying the updated revenue recognition rules can opt to wait to apply them until annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim reporting periods within annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2020. Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), replaces hundreds of pieces of industry-specific rules with a principles-based five step model for reporting revenue.
FASB members extended the revenue deferral to more private companies and nonprofits to help those that were in the process of closing their books when the COVID-19 crisis hit. Private entities told the board that having to adopt the standards amid the work upheaval created by the pandemic layered on unforeseen challenges. In today’s conditions, compliance may need to take a backseat to operational issues.
Last year, the FASB deferred ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), for private companies from 2020 to 2021. This standard requires companies to report — for the first time — the full magnitude of their long-term lease obligations on the balance sheet.
The FASB’s recent deferral will allow private companies and private nonprofits that haven’t already adopted the updated lease rules to wait to apply them until fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2021, and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022. Public nonprofits that haven’t yet filed financial statements applying the updated lease rules can opt to wait to apply the changes until fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years.
The new revenue recognition and lease accounting rules will require major changes to your organization’s systems and procedures. If you haven’t yet adopted these rules, we can help facilitate the transition.
Benchmarking: Why normalizing adjustments are essential
Financial statements aren’t particularly meaningful without a relevant basis of comparison. There are two types of “benchmarks” that a company’s financials can be compared to — its own historical performance and the performance of other comparable businesses.
Before you conduct a benchmarking study, however, it’s important to make normalizing adjustments to avoid any misleading comparisons. This is especially important when looking at periods that include atypical financial results due to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. But there are a variety of factors that require normalizing adjustments.
Some normalizing adjustments are needed to distinguish between historical results that represent potential ongoing earning power and those that don’t. A one-time revenue (or expense) or gain (or loss) will temporarily distort the company’s results. To more accurately reflect the company’s future earnings potential, you would add back expenses and losses (or subtract the revenues and gains) that aren’t expected to recur.
For example, if a retailer temporarily closed its brick-and-mortar stores during the COVID-19 pandemic, you’d add back the temporary losses to get a clearer picture of operating performance under normal conditions. Likewise, if a company won a $10 million lawsuit, you’d subtract the gain. Other nonrecurring items might include discontinued product lines or expenses incurred in an acquisition.
Other normalizing adjustments compensate for the use of different accounting methods. Because companies’ accounting practices vary widely, comparing them without adjusting their financial statements is like comparing apples to oranges.
Even within the broad confines of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), it’s rare for two companies to follow exactly the same accounting practices. When comparing a company’s results to industry benchmarks, you need to understand how they report transactions.
A small firm, for example, might report earnings when cash is received (cash basis accounting), but its competitor might record a sale when it sends out the invoice (accrual basis accounting). Differences in inventory reporting, pension reserves, depreciation methods, tax accounting practices and cost capitalization vs. expensing policies also are common.
Another type of normalizing adjustment focuses on closely held businesses. They often pay owners based on the company’s cash flow or the owners’ personal needs, not on the market value of services the owners provide. Small businesses also may employ family members, conduct business with affiliates and extend loans to company insiders.
To get a clearer picture of the company’s performance, you’ll need to identify all related-party transactions and inquire whether they occur at “arm’s length.” Also consider reconciling for unusual perquisites provided to insiders, such as season tickets to sporting events, college tuition or company vehicles.
We can help
To complicate matters, normalizing adjustments can affect multiple accounts. While most normalizing adjustments are made to the income statement, some may flow through to the balance sheet. Our accounting professionals can help with these critical adjustments to a company’s financial statements, enabling you to make better-informed business decisions.
Going, going, gone: Going concern assessments in the midst of COVID-19
The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has adversely affected the global economy. Companies of all sizes in all industries are faced with closures of specific locations or complete shutdowns; employee layoffs, furloughs or restrictions on work; liquidity issues; and disruptions to their supply chains and customers. These negative impacts have brought the “going concern” issue to the forefront.
One-year look-forward period
Financial statements are generally prepared under the assumption that the entity will remain a going concern. That is, it’s expected to continue to generate a positive return on its assets and meet its obligations in the ordinary course of business.
Under Accounting Standards Codification Topic 205, Presentation of Financial Statements — Going Concern, the continuation of an entity as a going concern is presumed as the basis for reporting unless liquidation becomes imminent. Even if liquidation isn’t imminent, conditions and events may exist that, in the aggregate, raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern.
Management is responsible for evaluating the going concern assumption. Going concern issues arise when it’s probable that the entity won’t be able to meet its obligations as they become due within one year after the date the financial statements are issued — or available to be issued. (The alternate date prevents financial statements from being held for several months after year end to see if the company survives.)
Making the call
The going concern assumption is evaluated when preparing annual and interim financial statements under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The evaluation is based on qualitative and quantitative information about relevant conditions and events that are known (or reasonably knowable) at the time the evaluation is made.
Examples of warning signs that an entity’s long-term viability may be questionable include:
- A reduction in sales due to store closures,
- A shortage of products and supplies used in manufacturing operations,
- A decline in value of assets held by the company,
- Recurring operating losses or working capital deficiencies,
- Loan defaults and debt restructuring,
- Denial of credit from suppliers,
- Disposals of substantial assets,
- Work stoppages and other labor difficulties,
- Legal proceedings or legislation that jeopardizes ongoing operations,
- Loss of a key franchise, license or patent,
- Loss of a principal customer or supplier, and
- An uninsured or underinsured catastrophe.
If management concludes that there’s substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern, it must consider whether mitigation plans can be effectively implemented within the one-year look-forward period to alleviate the going concern issues.
Reporting going concern issues
Few businesses will escape negative repercussions of the COVID-19 crisis. If your business is struggling, contact us to discuss the going concern assessment. Our auditors can help you understand how the evaluation will affect your balance sheet and disclosures.