IPSAS Outlook. IPSAS issues for public finance management executives. July Contents

Transcription

1 July 2015 IPSAS Outlook IPSAS issues for public finance management executives Contents The IPSASB maps out future strategy and work plan IPSASB publishes RPG 3 IPSAS 35 an overview IPSASB update Resources p2 p3 p5 p7 p11 The IPSASB maps out future strategy and work plan Following a public consultation in 2014, the Board has published the decisions reached on its strategy and future work plan, which we outline in this article. IPSASB publishes recommended practice guideline on reporting service performance information RPG 3 Reporting Service Performance Information aims to help users to evaluate the services provided by public sector entities. Read our overview of the RPG here. IPSAS 35 Consolidated Financial Statements an overview IPSAS 35 is developed based on IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements and only departs from IFRS 10 on public sector-specific circumstances. This article outlines the requirements of IPSAS 35. IPSASB update Look here for an update on the active projects on the IPSASB s agenda. Resources Look here for our IPSAS resources. A message from Thomas Müller-Marqués Berger Welcome to this month s edition of IPSAS Outlook, which will bring you insights into recent IPSAS developments and emerging issues. In addition, we will bring you regular reports on IPSAS projects from around the world as we share some of the experiences of our Global IPSAS network. I hope you will find this of assistance to your organization. We welcome your feedback on IPSAS Outlook. Please contact us at thomas.mueller-marques.berger@de.ey.com. Thomas Müller-Marqués Berger, IPSAS Global Leader

2 The IPSASB maps out future strategy and work plan Following a public consultation in 2014, the IPSASB has published its future strategy and work plan for 2015 and beyond. In this article, we look at the decisions the Board has made. Background In March 2014, the IPSASB issued for public consultation, the IPSASB Strategy Consultation, which closed for comments at the end of July Through the consultation, the Board sought input on its strategy and the priority of individual projects in the IPSASB s work program from After consideration and deliberation of the feedback received, the strategy was subsequently approved by the Board at its December 2014 meeting, and the work plan was approved at the March and June 2015 meetings. Strategy The vast majority of respondents supported the strategic objective proposed in the strategy consultation document, which is: Strengthening public financial management and knowledge globally through increasing adoption of accrual-based IPSASs by: Developing high-quality public sector financial reporting standards Developing other publications for the public sector Raising awareness of the IPSASs and the benefits of their adoption The IPSASB in their strategy also identified the inputs, outputs and outcome of achieving its strategic objective. Work plan In order to achieve the desired strategic outcome, the Board needs to establish a work plan for developing high quality public sector financial reporting standards and other guidance for public sector entities. The IPSASB considers a number of factors when making its decision on whether to initiate a project and assessing its relative priority: Significance for the public sector Urgency of the issue Gaps in standards IFRS convergence Alignment with Government Finance Statistics (GFS) Considering these factors, together with resource limitations, the Board decided to add the following projects to its work plan: Cash basis IPSAS review Employee benefits (IPSAS 25 Employee Benefits update) Exchange and non-exchange revenue Non-exchange expenses Framework consequential amendments Public sector measurement Heritage assets Infrastructure assets Strengthening public financial management and knowledge globally through increasing adoption of accrual-based IPSASs INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOME Funding Staff IPSASB members Stakeholder input Operational procedures Developing high-quality financial reporting standards and other publications for the public sector Undertaking presentations, speeches and other outreach activities in order to engage with stakeholders That decision-making and accountability of public sector entities are improved and global fiscal stability and sustainability are enhanced by credible and transparent financial reporting that results from the adoption of accrualbased IPSASs Source: IPSASB Strategy and Work Plan Feedback 2 IPSAS Outlook July 2015

3 IPSASB publishes recommended practice guideline on reporting service performance information On 31 March 2015, the IPSASB published Recommended Practice Guideline 3 Reporting Service Performance Information (RPG or RPG 3). Service performance information is important to users for their evaluation of the services provided by public sector entities. It also helps users to assess the entities efficient and effective use of resources to deliver those services. RPG 3 provides guidance to support the quality of service performance information reported by entities and offers guidance for entities planning to start their report of service performance information. This article provides an overview of RPG 3. Background The objective of the IPSASB is to provide entities that report service performance information in general purpose financial reports with a principles-based framework. Public sector entities worldwide provide constituents with a huge variety of services across jurisdictions. These entities operate under different legislative requirements and reporting frameworks and have varied levels of experience with such reporting. Therefore, the RPG is intentionally non-prescriptive and more principles-based so as to facilitate adoption and adaptation by public sector entities. Reporting and presenting service performance information Entities are not required to comply with this RPG to be compliant with IPSASs. Nevertheless, they are encouraged to follow this RPG when they report service performance information. Presentation of service performance information should be appropriate to the entity s service performance objectives and should meet the qualitative characteristics of financial reporting. In addition, a service performance report would enable a user to assess the extent, efficiency and effectiveness of the entity s service performance. When used in combination with the information in an entity s financial statements, service performance information should enable users to assess the entity s finances in the context of its achievement of service performance objectives and vice versa. Types of performance indicators In the RPG, five different types of performance indicators are defined and described as follows: Inputs: the resources used by an entity to provide outputs Outputs: the services provided by an entity to recipients external to the entity Outcomes: the impacts on society, which occur as a result of, or are reasonably attributable to, the entity s outputs Efficiency: the relationship between (a) inputs and outputs; or (b) inputs and outcomes Effectiveness: the relationship between actual results and service performance objectives The resources used by an entity may include human resources, capital assets (e.g. land, buildings, and vehicles), cash, other financial assets and intangible assets (e.g., intellectual property). Inputs may be reported in terms of costs incurred or quantities used to produce outputs. The receipt of services by external recipients is a critical factor in deciding whether services are outputs (rather than services consumed internally). Impacts on society may include, for instance, impact on educational achievement, poverty levels, crime rates and the health of different groups within a society. The efficiency of an entity is deemed to have improved if the same quantity and quality of outputs can be produced at a lower cost than before. If an entity operates effectively as a service provider, the actual results will be better compared with its planned results. IPSAS Outlook July

4 Display or disclosure 1 The RPG distinguishes between information for display and information for disclosure. The following information should be displayed for each relevant service: Service performance objectives Performance indicators Total costs of services Information should be disclosed so that users: Understand the basis of displayed service performance information Receive a concise overview of the entity s service performance, which highlights the main issues relevant to their assessment of that service performance How we see it Although the principles-based approach that the IPSASB took on service performance reporting could reduce comparability between entities, the guidance would allow entities to tailor the type of information that they need to report to their stakeholders within the framework of RPG 3. The nature of services provided by these entities is likely to be highly diverse, therefore, the performance indicators (quantitative and qualitative) would likely differ between entities in any case. Organization of service performance information An entity may choose to present its service performance information either together with the financial statements or separately. However, there are several factors to be considered when making this decision: The extent to which service performance information needs to be reviewed within the context of financial statements Whether users needs are met if the information is located separately Whether the qualitative characteristics of financial reporting are enhanced Jurisdiction-specific requirements Whether there are any cost constraints Additionally, the connection between displayed information and disclosed information must be clear to a user. Ultimately, the information presented by an entity should convey a coherent, integrated view of the entity s service performance. 1 Paragraph 8.15 of the IPSASB s Conceptual Framework states that information selected for display communicates key messages in a GPFR, while information selected for disclosure makes displayed information more useful by providing detail that will help users to understand the displayed information. 4 IPSAS Outlook July 2015

5 IPSAS 35 Consolidated Financial Statements an overview In January 2015, the IPSASB issued IPSASs 34-38, which replaced IPSASs 6-8, as part of their ongoing convergence with IFRS. IPSAS 35 Consolidated Financial Statements is developed based on IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements and only departs from IFRS 10 in respect of public sector-specific circumstances. This article outlines the requirements of IPSAS 35. Scope IPSAS 35 applies to all controlling entities, unless they meet the exceptions specified in the standard (including the investment entity exception). One of the issues that the Board spent a considerable amount of time deliberating is the application of the consolidation requirement for public sector entities. The scale and complexity of public sector entities involvement with other entities has increased significantly in recent years. Government intervention has been a contributory factor to governments (and other public sector entities) having a broad range of interests in other entities, some of which would give rise to control, as defined in IPSAS 35. The implications of consolidating controlled entities conducting private sector activities, or where control is intended to be temporary, has led some constituents to question whether consolidation of all controlled entities was justified, considering the costs and benefits of the exercise. Nevertheless, consolidated financial statements would provide users with a panoramic view of a government s activities and balance sheet, including the risks associated with a government s holdings and its performance on a whole. IPSAS 6 Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements, the predecessor standard to IPSAS 35, allowed entities to account for controlled entities as financial instruments if control was intended to be temporary. However, that proved to be highly judgemental and users of financial statements were concerned whether that reflected the risk exposures from those investments. After considering the arguments for and against consolidation of such temporarily controlled entities, the Board eventually decided not to require a different accounting treatment for such entities. In other words, temporarily controlled entities would have to be consolidated if deemed to be controlled by the government in accordance with IPSAS 35, as this approach would provide stakeholders and users with more useful information for accountability and decision-making purposes. In the scoping section of the standard, the IPSASB explicitly referred to the consolidation of for-profit government business enterprises (GBEs), with no exception provided. Determining control and power An entity controls another entity when it is exposed, or has rights, to variable benefits from its involvement with the other entity and has the ability to affect the nature and amount of those benefits through its power over the other entity. Thus, an entity controls another entity if, and only if, the entity has all of the following: Power over the other entity Exposure, or rights, to variable benefits from its involvement with the other entity The ability to use its power over the other entity to affect the nature or amount of the benefits from its involvement with the other entity An entity has power over another entity when it has existing rights that give it the current ability to direct the relevant activities, i.e., the activities that significantly affect the nature or amount of the benefits from its involvement with the other entity. The right to direct the financial and operating policies of another entity indicates that an entity has the ability to direct the relevant activities of another entity; this is frequently the way in which power is demonstrated in the public sector. Power arises from rights. In some cases, assessing power is straightforward, such as when power over another entity is obtained directly and solely from the voting rights granted by equity instruments such as shares, and can be assessed by considering the voting rights from those shareholdings. However, public sector entities often obtain power over another entity from rights other than voting rights. An entity may have rights conferred by binding arrangements. These rights may give an entity power to require the other entity to deploy assets or incur liabilities in a way that affects the nature or amount of benefits received by the first-mentioned entity. The assessment of whether such rights give rise to power over another entity may be complex and require consideration of the various factors collectively. An entity can have power over another entity even if it does not have responsibility for the day-to-day operation of the other entity or the manner in which prescribed functions are performed by that other entity. Legislation may give statutory bodies or statutory officers, powers to carry out their IPSAS Outlook July

6 functions independently of government. The existence of statutory powers to operate independently does not, of itself, preclude an entity having the ability to direct the operating and financial policies of another entity with statutory powers so as to obtain benefits. For example, the independence of a central bank in relation to monetary policy does not preclude the possibility of the central bank being controlled. All facts and circumstances must be considered. The standard also clarifies that regulatory control alone does not necessarily give rise to power. For example, governments may enact regulations to protect the health and safety of the community by restricting the sale or use of dangerous goods, but such conditions would not typically give rise to power under IPSAS 35. In addition, economic dependence alone, does not give rise to power as defined in this standard. For example, an entity s activities may predominantly be funded by grants from a single entity, but this has to be considered together with the other factors of control before concluding that the entity is controlled by its grantor. Benefits in the public sector context The second criterion for control is the exposure, or rights, to variable benefits from the other entity. Benefits could be financial, non-financial, or both. Financial benefits include returns on investment such as dividends or similar distributions and are sometimes referred to as returns. In the public sector, non-financial benefits might be more common than financial benefits, and can include: The ability to benefit from the specialized knowledge of another entity The value to the entity of the other entity undertaking activities that assist the entity in achieving its objectives Improved outcomes More efficient delivery of outcomes More efficient or effective production and delivery of goods and services Having an asset and related services available earlier than would otherwise be the case Having a higher level of service quality than would otherwise be the case In the public sector context, the assessment of variable nonfinancial benefits could be challenging as non-financial benefits may be difficult to identify. An entity needs to consider the substance of the arrangement with the other entity, regardless of the legal form of the benefits. Link between power and benefits An entity controls another entity if it not only has power over the other entity being assessed for control and exposure or rights to variable benefits from its involvement with the other entity, but also has the ability to use its power to affect the nature or amount of the benefits from its involvement with the other entity being assessed for control. Delegated power It is common for public sector entities to be responsible for carrying out government policy. In some cases they may have the authority to act in their own right, therefore would be acting as a principal. In other cases, they may act as an agent for a government minister or another entity. For example, a government department may operate under a delegation of power from a government minister. The department uses its own discretion in making decisions and taking actions and is not subject to direction from the minister. In such cases, the department is acting in its own right and would need to apply the other requirements of IPSAS 35 to determine whether it controls another entity. The scope of the department s decision-making authority over another entity would be a significant factor in distinguishing whether it is acting as an agent or as a principal. Transition and effective date IPSAS 35 is effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2017, with earlier application permitted. If an entity early adopts this standard, it must adopt IPSASs 34, 36, 37 & 38 2 at the same time. Retrospective application of IPSAS 35 is required. How we see it Compared to IPSAS 6, IPSAS 35 provides more prescriptive guidance and the definition of control has been revised significantly. Furthermore, the exemption from consolidation of temporarily controlled entities does not exist in IPSAS 35. Therefore, entities ought to assess the changes between IPSAS 6 and IPSAS 35 thoroughly to ensure that the requirements in the new standard are applied appropriately. 2 IPSAS 34 Separate Financial Statements; IPSAS 36 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures; IPSAS 37 Joint Arrangements; IPSAS 38 Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities 6 IPSAS Outlook July 2015

7 IPSASB update What s new? The IPSASB has recently issued the following publications: Projects Consultation paper (CP): Recognition and measurement of social benefits Exposure draft 56: The Applicability of IPSASs RPG 3 Reporting Service Performance Information IPSASB Strategy 2015 Forward: An Overview Publication On 29 July 2015, the IPSASB issued the CP on recognition and measurement of social benefits for comment. This CP builds on the IPSASB s previous work on accounting for social benefits while also developing new ideas. The CP is open for comment until 31 January ED 56 was issued on 29 July 2015 and proposes to revise the preface to IPSASs to provide the characteristics of public sector entities for which IPSASs are intended. It also proposes to delete the definition of GBEs. The comment period of the ED ends on 30 November On 31 March 2015, the IPSASB issued RPG 3. See page 3 for further details of this RPG. On 17 March 2015, the IPSASB published an Overview of its Strategy 2015 Forward. See page 2 for further details. IPSASB Meeting June 2015 Projects Social benefits Cash basis IPSAS review Summary of current discussions The IPSASB discussed, and approved, the draft CP on social benefits at this meeting. The CP outlines the accounting treatment of social benefits and the Board s preliminary views on each of these approaches: Obligating event approach Social contract approach Insurance approach The CP is issued end of July 2015 with a six-month comment period. At this meeting, the IPSASB considered possible approaches to overcome obstacles to the adoption of the cash basis IPSAS Financial Reporting Under the Cash Basis of Accounting, that arise as a result of the requirements relating to consolidation, external assistance and third party payments. The IPSASB also confirmed that the role of the Cash Basis IPSAS is as an intermediate step for an entity to transit to accrual basis IPSAS, rather than an end in itself. Therefore, the role of the encouraged disclosures in the standard is to support an entity s transition to compliance with the accrual basis IPSASs. Consequential changes from Chapters 1-4 of the Conceptual Framework The IPSASB agreed to revise IPSAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements, as follows: Deletion of the appendix to IPSAS 1, which consists of a summary of consequential changes (QCs) and constraints on relevant and reliable information. These QCs and constraints were drawn from the International Accounting Standards Committee s 1989 Conceptual Framework. Update the sections of IPSAS 1 dealing with the hierarchy of sources for the selection of accounting policies when there is no IPSAS that specifically applies to a transaction, event or condition. These revisions will acknowledge the IPSASB s Conceptual Framework and the QCs and constraints in the Framework. IPSAS Outlook July

8 Projects Revenue Summary of current discussions The IPSASB considered an issues paper (IP) about the performance obligation approach to accounting for revenue. The IP explained why a performance obligation approach was a reasonable basis for accounting for some (but not all) revenue transactions in the public sector. The IPSASB agreed that the performance obligation approach should be further explored for accounting for some public sector revenue. The IPSASB also agreed that IPSAS 23 Revenue from Non-Exchange Transactions (Taxes and Transfers) was likely to be a useful starting point for revenue transactions, for which there are no performance obligations. However, the IPSASB noted that there are a number of issues with IPSAS 23 that would need to be considered as part of that process. A further IP about the performance obligation approach to accounting for some public sector revenue will be presented at the next meeting. Non-exchange expenses The IPSASB started discussion on the non-exchange expenses project at this meeting. Project scope The IPSASB considered a number of factors that should be considered in establishing the project scope, including: performance obligations; eligibility requirements; appropriations; social risks; and the recipients of government transfers. Recognition of non-exchange expenses The IPSASB discussed possible approaches to the recognition of non-exchange expenses and considered the possibility of adopting the basic approaches that will be proposed in the social benefits CP for this project. The IPSASB staff was directed to develop an IP for the next meeting to further address scope of the project, definition of non-exchange transactions, and specific recognition and measurement issues, including the potential of developing symmetrical accounting for nonexchange expenses and revenues. Public sector financial instruments Government business enterprises The IPSASB discussed the following at this meeting: Scope of the CP - The IPSASB agreed that a comprehensive CP would take too long to develop and concluded that staff should proceed to develop a CP covering monetary gold, currency in circulation and IMF-related transactions. These issues relate primarily to monetary authorities and, therefore, are relevant to a different constituency than the other issues in the scope of the project - statutory receivables, statutory payables and public sector specific securitizations. These issues will be addressed in a separate project. Measurement approaches of monetary gold Definition and measurement of currency in circulation The IPSASB approved for issue, ED 56 The Applicability of IPSASs at this meeting. The objective of this ED is to remove the GBE definition in IPSAS 1 and propose consequential amendments in IPSASs and RPGs. The definition of GBE has been criticised by constituents as ambiguous and difficult to implement. Therefore, the IPSASB is proposing to remove the definition of GBE and provide a description of the characteristics of public sector entities for which IPSASs are intended. The ED is expected to be issued in Q with a comment period of four months. Public sector combinations The IPSASB discussed classification of public sector combinations by reference to both control and a range of other factors, including: Consideration paid would be an indicator of an acquisition, whereas no consideration paid would be an indicator of an amalgamation Decision-making is a factor to be taken into account, and encompasses compulsion, citizens rights (such as a referendum) and common control Accountability is not a factor in its own right, but something that is referred to in assessing whether the overall classification decision is appropriate Both a change of sector and ownership interests, are part of the control criteria, and need not be considered independently 8 IPSAS Outlook July 2015

9 Projects Summary of current discussions The IPSASB also discussed various scenarios of combinations and their preliminary views are summarized in the following table: Scenario Purchases at market value Bargain purchase Donated operations Nationalizations Bail-outs Classification Acquisition Acquisition if transferred from private sector entity; may be amalgamation if transferred from not-for-profit entity Acquisition if transferred from private sector; may be amalgamation if transferred from not-for-profit Acquisition Acquisition Public sector combinations wholly in the public sector but not under common control: The transfer of operations from one level of government to another existing level of government Territorial boundaries being rearranged to create three municipalities out of two original municipalities Two municipalities combining to form a single municipality (includes creation of a new municipality) Acquisition (view expressed by some Board members) Amalgamation Amalgamation Public sector combinations under common control Amalgamation Emissions trading schemes The IPSASB considered the following for development of the Emissions Trading Schemes (ETS) CP: Three accounting approaches were reviewed relating to an administrator s involvement in ETS. Approach 1 treats emissions allowances (EAs) as similar to issued currency, Approach 2 treats EAs as similar to intangible assets such as a licenses or permits, while Approach 3 focuses exclusively on revenue from cash flows generated by selling EAs (or transferring EAs for a subsidized price). Four approaches for participants accounting were also discussed. These were developed through collaboration with International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) staff. The IASB had discussed the same four approaches at its June meeting, and identified one further approach. The IPSASB directed its staff to continue to work closely with IASB staff to identify and evaluate approaches for consideration at the next IPSASB meeting. The IPSASB also decided that the CP should discuss ETS accounting issues raised by international agreements and the role of agents administering an ETS on behalf of an ETS administrator. The next steps are for staff to develop, with input from the task-based group (TBG), a first draft of the ETS CP and a further IP for the next Board meeting. IPSAS Outlook July

10 Projects Work plan Summary of current discussions The Board approved the following projects at this meeting: Public sector measurement Infrastructure assets Heritage assets The project on public sector measurement will be carried out in two phases. Initially, the project will identify the measurement requirements in the current suite of IPSASs, except for those IPSASs dealing with financial instruments, and assess the extent to which they are in accordance with the Framework. The second phase will determine priorities for addressing dislocations between current IPSASs and the Framework and the approach to implementation guidance. The projects on heritage assets and infrastructure assets will develop accounting requirements and guidance, including disclosures, for these classes of asset, which have particular significance in the public sector. The heritage assets project will commence in Q3, The infrastructure assets project will be aligned with the public sector measurement project and is not projected to commence until Q IPSASB governance update The Board was provided with an update on the development of the new governance arrangement of the Board. The Public Interest Committee (PIC) held its first meeting in March The PIC comprises representatives of the World Bank, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the IMF and the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions. The PIC will review the IPSASB s governance arrangements and advise the IPSASB on the public interest responsiveness of the processes and structures of the IPSASB; and promote the public interest in the standard-setting activities of the IPSASB. The IPSASB and IFAC will also set up a Consultative Advisory Group (CAG). The CAG will provide advice on matters such as the IPSASB s strategy, work program and agenda, including project priorities, and advice on projects, including views on technical issues that may impede the adoption of IPSASs. The IPSASB approved the terms of reference for the CAG. The aim is for this oversight infrastructure to be in place in IPSAS Outlook July 2015

11 Resources IPSAS Training EY, the Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy (CIPFA), and IASeminars jointly offer a comprehensive range of training courses on IPSAS. The following table provides an overview of the upcoming IPSAS courses in 2015: Course Date Place Course 3020: IPSAS Fundamentals - Accruals Basis (4 days) 17 Aug 20 Aug 2015 Zanzibar Course 3000: IPSAS (Accruals Basis) - Immersion Workshop (8 days) 18 Aug 27 Aug 2015 London Course 3011: IPSAS Fundamentals - Comprehensive Workshop (5 days) 14 Sep-18 Sep 2015 Lagos Course 3011: IPSAS Fundamentals - Comprehensive Workshop (5 days) 19 Oct-23 Oct 2015 London Course 3081: IPSAS - Technical Update (1 day) 26 Oct-26 Oct 2015 London Course 3401: IPSAS - Presentation, Disclosure and Financial Reports (2 days) 27 Oct-28 Oct 2015 London Course 3500: IPSAS - First-Time Adoption, Transition and Implementation (2 days) 27 Oct-28 Oct 2015 London Course 3220: IPSAS - For Revenues (1 day) 29 Oct-29 Oct 2015 London Course 3285: IPSAS - For Employee Benefits and Provisions (1 day) 30 Oct-30 Oct 2015 London Course 3011: IPSAS Fundamentals - Comprehensive Workshop (5 days) 16 Nov-20 Nov 2015 Accra Course 3011: IPSAS Fundamentals - Comprehensive Workshop (5 days) 23 Nov-27 Nov 2015 Nairobi Course 3081: IPSAS - Technical Update (1 day) 30 Nov-30 Nov 2015 Nairobi Course 3011: IPSAS Fundamentals - Comprehensive Workshop (5 days) 07 Dec-11 Dec 2015 Cape Town Course 3130: IPSAS (Accruals Basis) - Overview (2 days) 07 Dec-08 Dec 2015 London Course 3500: IPSAS - First-Time Adoption, Transition and Implementation (2 days) 14 Dec-15 Dec 2015 Cape Town Course 3081: IPSAS - Technical Update (1 day) 16 Dec-16 Dec 2015 Cape Town For registration and further details of courses offered in 2015 and 2016, visit IPSAS Outlook July

12 The publications below are available on ey.com/ipsas IPSAS Explained A snapshot of GAAP differences between IPSAS and IFRS We have published an updated second edition of our practical guide to IPSAS, IPSAS Explained. This guide provides decision-makers in the public sector with an overview of IPSAS and the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board. This book is available for purchase from Wiley, at This publication summarizes the key differences between IPSAS and IFRS. It further explains the sources and reasons for differences between the two frameworks. Model Public Sector Group Toward transparency EY has undertaken a study to assess the current state of public sector accounting from a global perspective. This new research provides a better understanding of what governments are doing well, and where there is scope for improvement. The aim of this set of financial statements is to bridge the gap between the theory, as outlined in the standards and the way such information needs to be presented in the financial statements. This first edition of illustrative annual consolidated financial statements of Model Public Sector Group are prepared in accordance with IPSAS in issue at 30 June 2013 and effective for annual periods beginning on 1 January IPSAS Outlook July 2015

13 EY s Public Sector Accounting webcast: IPSAS Update 2014 Public Finance International is a website supported by EY and developed in conjunction with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy to provide informed news and comment on developments in public financial management internationally, raise awareness of the need for good governance and connect a global community of like-minded public financial management professionals. IPSAS Poster We hosted a discussion on the latest developments in the area of international public sector accounting back in December In this webcast, we provide a progress update on key projects currently on the IPSAS Board s agenda, as well as developments in its governance and oversight. We also cover IPSAS adoption and implementation around the world, including the status of EPSAS (European Public Sector Accounting Standards) for EU Member States and New Zealand s progress on implementing IPSAS. For the archived on-demand version of this webcast, visit live Since 2010 EY has published a poster outlining key facts about IPSASs and ongoing IPSASB projects. IPSAS Outlook July

14 EY Assurance Tax Transactions Advisory About EY EY is a global leader in assurance, tax, transaction and advisory services. The insights and quality services we deliver help build trust and confidence in the capital markets and in economies the world over. We develop outstanding leaders who team to deliver on our promises to all of our stakeholders. In so doing, we play a critical role in building a better working world for our people, for our clients and for our communities. EY refers to the global organization and may refer to one or more of the member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients. For more information about our organization, please visit ey.com. The move to International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) is an important initiative in public sector accounting, the impact of which stretches far beyond accounting to affect every key decision you make, not just how you report it. We have developed the global resources people and knowledge to support our client teams. And we work to give you the benefit of our broad sector experience, our deep subject matter knowledge and the latest insights from our work worldwide. It s how Ernst & Young makes a difference EYGM Limited. All Rights Reserved. EYG No. AU3366 ED None In line with EY s commitment to minimize its impact on the environment, this document has been printed on paper with a high recycled content. This material has been prepared for general informational purposes only and is not intended to be relied upon as accounting, tax, or other professional advice. Please refer to your advisors for specific advice. ey.com