1—The need for change
All leases create assets and liabilities
Leases provide a source of financing. A lessee obtains an asset and incurs a
liability when it enters into a lease. This view is held not only by the IASB
but also by the majority of investors and analysts, many regulators, standardsetters and accounting firms, and some preparers.
Contrary to that view, at present, most leases are not reported on a lessee’s
balance sheet.
The significance of the missing information varies by industry and region and
between entities. However, for many lessees, the effect on reported leverage
can be substantial.
Long-term liabilities of heaviest users of off balance
sheet leases1 understated by:
20% Europe
23% North America
46% Asia Pacific
Investors and analysts frequently adjust a lessee’s balance
sheet
As required by existing accounting standards, a lessee provides information
about off balance sheet leases in the notes to its financial statements. That
information is, however, limited in content.
Most investors and analysts that we consulted use that information to
estimate assets and liabilities arising from off balance sheet leases. Some try
to estimate the present value of future lease payments. However, because of
the limited information that is available, many others use techniques such
as multiplying the annual lease expense by 8 in order to assess, for example,
total leverage and the capital employed in operations.
These adjustments are made by more sophisticated investors and analysts.
Many investors, however, cannot make adjustments—they are reliant on data
sources such as data aggregators when screening potential investments or
making investment decisions.
The table below shows how the estimate of long-term liabilities can vary
based on the information available and the techniques used based on a
sample of 950 companies.2
Some investors and analysts also adjust a lessee’s income
statement
Most investors and analysts that we consulted view leases as creating ‘debtlike’ liabilities. Accordingly, many think that lease payments incorporate an
interest component.
Under existing accounting standards, a lessee presents lease expenses related
to off balance sheet leases within operating expenses.
When assessing a lessee’s performance, some investors and analysts adjust
a lessee’s income statement, increasing the reported operating result by
removing an estimate of interest on off balance sheet leases from operating
expenses. Others remove the entire off balance sheet lease expense from the
operating result (and adjust for depreciation, amortisation and interest),
arguably to improve comparability between entities that own assets and those
that lease them.
Most investors and analysts want to adjust for off
balance sheet leases.
However, the adjustments made by investors and
analysts can be incomplete or inaccurate, resulting in
over- or under-estimation of a lessee’s assets, liabilities,
interest expense and operating result.
Some do not have the information needed to make
adjustments.
Some lessees choose to provide ‘non-GAAP’ information
that adjusts reported figures to reflect off balance sheet
leases
Why?
Some of the lessees who make such adjustments have told the IASB that they
do this either because they view leases as a significant source of financing or
are responding to requests for that information from investors, analysts or
other users of their financial statements.
How?
Lessees adjust the reported figures by capitalising off balance sheet lease
commitments. Some also apportion the off balance sheet lease expense into
interest and amortisation, or apportion the off balance sheet lease cash flows
into interest and principal repayments.
Who?
Lessees who adjust reported figures include: Air France-KLM, Alaska Airlines,
Easyjet, Emirates, Delta Airlines, SAS Airlines, Shell, Statoil, Kingfisher
(Castorama, B&Q), Foot Locker, Ahold, Sainsbury’s, Whole Foods, Home Retail
Group (Argos, Homebase), Accor, Whitbread (Premier Inn), Deutsche Post,
Travis Perkins, AutoZone, Nordstrom, AP Moeller Maersk, Hochtief.
A lack of comparability
The existing accounting for leases
makes comparisons between entities
difficult
The table below sets out a real-life comparison
of two entities in an industry that uses property,
plant and equipment intensively.
Entity 2 leases about 70 per cent of its equipment
and Entity 1 less than 10 per cent. Important information used by investors and
analysts (for example, total assets and long-term
liabilities) can be significantly affected by the off
balance sheet treatment of leases.
For example, the table below contrasts the figures
reported by the entities with the figures adjusted
for the effects of off balance sheet leases. The
reported figures show that Entity 1 has higherleverage and a higher asset base compared to
Entity 2, when in fact the opposite is true, taking
into account the off balance sheet leases.
The absence of information about leases on the
balance sheet means that investors and analysts
cannot properly compare companies without
adjustments.
Industry Entity 1 Industry Entity 2
Reported Proposals3 Reported Proposals3
And a lack of information
It is not only difficult to make
comparisons–there is also a lack of
information
The exclusion of lease assets and liabilities from
the balance sheet can lead to the presentation of
an incomplete picture of the financial position of
a lessee. For example, for a sample of retail chains that
ultimately went into liquidation, the table below
shows the extent of off balance sheet lease
commitments. This illustrates how vastly different
the leverage and operating flexibility of lessees
can be when the effect of off balance sheet lease
commitments is taken into account.
The liabilities of these companies range from 7
times to more than 90 times higher than the debt
that they reported, when taking into account off
balance sheet lease commitments.
2—A thorough and measured approach
The project proposes a substantial
change to the accounting for leases
In more developed regions, approximately 50 per
cent of listed entities report material off balance
sheet lease commitments.5 The proposed changes
to lease accounting will significantly improve
the transparency of information about those off
balance sheet leases.
The IASB realises that such a big change in
accounting, which would affect many entities,
requires careful consideration. The IASB therefore
recognises the need to understand and carefully
consider the views of interested parties.
As a result the IASB has proceeded cautiously with
the project, going well beyond its due process
requirements. It has sought feedback at each stage
of the project and considered that feedback when
revising the proposals.
Particular efforts have been made to undertake
outreach activities that enable a broad range of
views to be heard including the views of investors
and analysts. Since 2009, the IASB has undertaken
three public consultations on its proposals and
held hundreds of meetings, round tables and
other outreach activities.
Over the past 8 years
• 2009 Discussion Paper (the 2009
DP)
• 2010 Exposure Draft (the 2010 ED)
• 2013 Revised Exposure Draft (the
2013 ED)
• Hundreds of outreach meetings
with investors, analysts, preparers,
regulators, standard-setters,
accounting firms and others
In 2013 the IASB spoke to
approximately 270 investors
and analysts around the world,
conducted preparer fieldwork
meetings and held public round
tables
3—The IASB’s response to the feedback
This section summarises the most important
tentative decisions reached by the IASB in its
redeliberations up to July 2014.
The IASB has focused on the benefits of
information provided to investors and analysts,
but at the same time has considered the cost
and complexity of the proposed change to the
accounting for leases.
This is because, regardless of views on the
recognition of leases, the majority of lessees
are concerned about the cost associated with
implementing the proposals, particularly for large
volumes of small items.
All leases on the balance sheet
The boards have both tentatively decided that
a lessee would be required to recognise assets
and liabilities arising from all leases, with some
exemptions. The model reflects that, at the start
of a lease, the lessee obtains a right to use an asset
for a period of time, and the lessor has provided or
delivered that right.
A majority of investors and analysts that we
consulted supported the recognition of leases on a
lessee’s balance sheet.
Some have suggested merely improving
disclosures. However the boards have concluded
that this would be insufficient to address the
identified deficiencies in existing lease accounting.
In particular the asymmetry of information used
when making investment decisions is a concern
because some investors adjust for off balance sheet
leases (using varied techniques) whereas others do
not.
Leases reported on the balance sheet
The Capital Markets Advisory
Committee, an investor advisory
body to the IASB, stated ‘…while
a disclosure-only solution might be
acceptable to expert users of financial
statements, it would not be helpful to
the majority of investors who require
financial statements to provide them
with clear information from the
outset.’7
Are there any exemptions?
Yes. In response to concerns expressed about
cost and complexity, a lessee is not required to
recognise assets and liabilities for leases of 12
months or less. To address concerns about the
costs to apply the proposals to large volumes
of small items, the IASB is also considering an
exemption for leases of small assets (such as
laptops and office furniture).
The boards have made different tentative decisions
regarding the recognition and presentation of
lease expenses in a lessee’s income statement.
The IASB has tentatively decided to propose
a single lessee model that would require the
recognition of interest and amortisation for all
leases re