IFRS 9: Closing the Gap between Risk and Finance
  • Onward
  • IFRS 9: Closing the Gap between Risk and Finance

    IFRS9 Whitepaper

    Despite some interconnectedness, there remain major differences. Both frameworks have separate definitions of fair value, expected losses and offsetting amongst others. Consequently, an entity should be able to understand and reconcile these differences.

    The two separate worlds of risk and finance, and their frameworks, have much in common; despite being written to achieve different objectives, they often work in a complementary manner.

    How close is convergence?

    After the global financial crisis a number of convergence projects were set out between US standards body, the Financial Accounting Standards Body (FASB), which is responsible for US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and the International Accounting Standards Board. However many projects were delayed and after the last International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Exposure Draft, the two sets of rules were not completely aligned.

    Using an expected loss model was the obvious way forward, as it had already been agreed upon by the IASB and FASB. This opened a potential bridge with risk management measurements.

    • "Would these expected losses be the same if we compared the different publications of the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), FASB and IASB?"
    • "How could the integration between the finance and risk worlds be integrated for expected losses?"

    These questions will be addressed within this paper.

    Request your copy of "IFRS 9: Closing the Gap between Risk and Finance Whitepaper" by completing the form below.  




Please tell us what you think of our content. You can click from 1 to 5 stars with 5 being on the right and highest.




  • Interested in learning more about this topic? Our experts can help.

    Contact Us


Give Us Your Opinion


What is your top risk management priority heading into 2015?

      
    • TILA-RESPA Tool Kit Brochure Image