Lease Accounting Standard Inches Forward; Despite disagreements about how to report leases, standard setters held firm on putting all of them on the balance sheet.

March 20, 2014 | US
Lease Accounting Standard Inches Forward
Despite disagreements about how to report leases, standard setters held firm Wednesday on putting all of them on the balance sheet.
David M. Katz
Rather than going back to the future, the Financial Accounting Standards Boardapparently moved closer to the completion of a final new standard governing lease accounting by stepping forward to the past.At the conclusion of a meeting of FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board that stretched over the last two days, the boards “reached consistent conclusions on important areas of lease accounting,” they said in a joint statement immediately following the meeting.
More fundamentally, the standard setters continued to agree on the need to require corporate lessees to report all lease transactions on their balance sheets rather than in the footnotes of their financial statements, as they do for certain kinds of leases currently. But the boards diverged sharply on whether there should be a distinction between different kinds of leases.
For its part, FASB members held to a position that differences in the economic underpinnings of leases must be reflected on corporate balance sheets. While varying the definitions in the boards’ most recent lease-accounting proposal —reportedly the last one available for public comment — FASB feels that there should be two kinds of leases.
Under the boards’ May 16, 2013, exposure draft (Topic 842), companies would separate their leases according to the type of asset they’re leasing: Type A leases (equipment, including anything from aircraft to office copiers) or Type B leases (real estate, including land and buildings). The two types of leases would be accounted for on the balance sheet in different ways.
That marked a distinct change from current U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, which distinguish only between capital and operating leases. At the boards’ meeting, FASB members agreed to return to the distinction under GAAP, though, rather than distinguish leases by the type of asset being leased.
As they would under the exposure draft, FASB members continue to want lessees to treat the liabilities on their Type A leases as “front loaded.” Much in the way that they account for capital leases today, Type A lessees would assume they have already bought the asset, estimate its amortized costs over the length of the lease and allot the costs in line with the depreciation of the asset’s value over time. Type A lessees would thus record more expense in the early years of the lease than they would later on.
Further, FASB continues to think that lessees should account for their Type B payments in roughly equal amounts over time. They would recognize the total lease cost on a straight-line basis over the lease term — like recording the same rent expense for office space each month, for instance.
As they’ve been prone to do, however, IASB members held to the dictum that simpler is better. All leases, they tentatively agreed among themselves at the meeting, should be treated as the purchase of the right of use (ROU) of an asset and accounted for as Type A. No distinction should be made for leases that are apparently rentals.
Another area of disagreement between the two boards appears to be how to account for leases of “small-ticket” items – office equipment like personal computers, for example, priced at, say, $100,000 or less. IASB appears to want to jettison such accounting altogether, while FASB would want to include it.
Nevertheless, the boards have reached apparent convergence on the issue of when to account for options to extend or to terminate a lease, agreeing that a lessee should reassess the lease term only if a significant event or “a significant change in circumstances that are within the control of the lessee” has happened. The boards will be meeting at various times over the next few months in an attempt to iron out their differences on a final lease-accounting standard.
2 thoughts on “Lease Accounting Standard Inches Forward”
Pingback: FASB and IASB Work on Resolving Lease Accounting Differences – Accounting TodayAccounting Business News UK | Accounting Business News UK
Prof. Morris McInnes says:
03/20/14 at 6:15 pm
I think this is one of the least-well considered initiatives of FASB in some time. What has prompted this? Investors and financial statement readers are well aware of off-balance sheet financing and the related footnotes; they don’t need a complete revision of standards that have worked well enough – if the Enrons of the world are intent on deception they will find another way. We don’t need a change that will wreck our time-series analyses following the companies in our investment portfolios. Only the analysts will profit from this, and attorneys as debt covenants are re-negotiated en-masse.
Leave well enough alone!!

About bambooinnovator
Kee Koon Boon (“KB”) is the co-founder and director of HERO Investment Management which provides specialized fund management and investment advisory services to the ARCHEA Asia HERO Innovators Fund (, the only Asian SMID-cap tech-focused fund in the industry. KB is an internationally featured investor rooted in the principles of value investing for over a decade as a fund manager and analyst in the Asian capital markets who started his career at a boutique hedge fund in Singapore where he was with the firm since 2002 and was also part of the core investment committee in significantly outperforming the index in the 10-year-plus-old flagship Asian fund. He was also the portfolio manager for Asia-Pacific equities at Korea’s largest mutual fund company. Prior to setting up the H.E.R.O. Innovators Fund, KB was the Chief Investment Officer & CEO of a Singapore Registered Fund Management Company (RFMC) where he is responsible for listed Asian equity investments. KB had taught accounting at the Singapore Management University (SMU) as a faculty member and also pioneered the 15-week course on Accounting Fraud in Asia as an official module at SMU. KB remains grateful and honored to be invited by Singapore’s financial regulator Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) to present to their top management team about implementing a world’s first fact-based forward-looking fraud detection framework to bring about benefits for the capital markets in Singapore and for the public and investment community. KB also served the community in sharing his insights in writing articles about value investing and corporate governance in the media that include Business Times, Straits Times, Jakarta Post, Manual of Ideas, Investopedia, TedXWallStreet. He had also presented in top investment, banking and finance conferences in America, Italy, Sydney, Cape Town, HK, China. He has trained CEOs, entrepreneurs, CFOs, management executives in business strategy & business model innovation in Singapore, HK and China.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: