Retrospective application of accounting policies involves the adjustment of all opening balances for previous reporting periods for each component of capital, as well as summary indicators for previous reporting periods.

As a result, accounting data must be presented as if the new accounting policy had always been applied.

Example - retrospective application

You recorded an investment in a joint controlled company using method equity participation. In the interests of reporting users, you change the accounting policy by switching to the proportionate consolidation method. This is a voluntary change in accounting policy that must be made retrospectively. You are required to adjust all figures for all comparable periods in your financial statements.

Limitations of retrospective application

Changes in accounting policies should be accounted for retrospectively from the point at which it is practicable.

Example - limitations of retrospective application

Your inventory was accounted for on a FIFO basis. In the interests of users, you change the accounting policy, moving to the weighted average cost method of accounting. The change must be made retrospectively. You are required to adjust all relevant figures for all reporting periods that appear in your financial statements.

Reported reserves information is only available for the last 3 years, although for comparison purposes the financial statements were presented for the last 5 years. Adjustments should be limited to the last 3 years based on the availability of information.

Retrospective application is not feasible unless the cumulative impact on both the opening and closing balance sheets for the reporting period can be determined.

EXAMPLE Adjustments: missing balance sheet At the beginning of the reporting period

In the previous reporting period, you charged borrowing costs as an expense of the period, but now you have decided to capitalize them in accordance with IAS 23.

available to you accounting registers only for the last 3 years, but for the earliest reporting period, the necessary analytical data are not available.

Adjustments should be limited to the last 2 years because you cannot get a detailed balance sheet at the beginning of the earliest reporting period.

More on the topic 2.4. Retrospective application:

1. Retrospective analysis and forecast of gross proceeds from sales
2. The Dangers of Retrospective Myopia Paul F. Miller Jr.
3. 11.2. Retrospective assessment of the effectiveness of real investments

To ensure the comparability of information presented in the financial statements, consistently, from year to year, the same approaches to classifying and accounting for the same items and transactions should be applied. Therefore, in the event of a change in accounting policy, it often becomes necessary to recalculate data from previous periods. Consider the issues of retrospective changes in accounting policies and disclosure of information in such cases.

One of the qualitative characteristics of financial statements is their comparability, which is also considered as the comparability of indicators of the same company for different periods. Measurement and reporting of the results of similar transactions and other events should be carried out consistently, from year to year, in the same way.

However, the accounting policy of a credit institution cannot remain unchanged throughout the entire period of its existence. Both external reasons are possible, for example, the development of financial reporting principles in general, the revision and issuance of new standards, and internal ones - related to changes in financial and economic activity enterprises. In this regard, the comparability of financial statements is implemented not so much by fixing once and for all a specific accounting policy, but by informing users about its basic principles of application in the reporting period, any changes in it in relation to the previous period, the results of these changes and their impact on reporting indicators. .

The choice and application of accounting policies, as well as changes in accounting policies, are governed by IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors. Special attention The standard focuses on retrospective changes in accounting policies and retrospective correction of errors. In our opinion, the main difficulties that credit institutions face when applying IAS 8 are:

• classifying changes in accounting treatment for certain items or transactions, such as a change in accounting policy, the correction of an error, or a change in accounting estimates;
• implementation of a retrospective recalculation of data in cases where this is required by the standard;
• the correct presentation of the financial statements affected by the change in accounting policy and the disclosure of the relevant information in the notes.

Change in accounting policy: basic requirements

Accounting policies are the specific principles, bases, conventions, rules and practices adopted by an entity for the preparation and presentation of financial statements. The accounting policy for the purposes of preparing financial statements in accordance with IFRS must be approved as a separate document by the authorized management body of the credit institution, and the main provisions and changes made to the accounting policy in the reporting period must be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.

The standards do not specify whether the accounting policy should be re-approved for each subsequent reporting period. From this we can conclude that for the purposes of reporting in accordance with IFRS, it is allowed not to approve the next edition of the accounting policy every year, but to continue using the previously existing one, if necessary, making changes to it. Often, changes in accounting policies require retrospective application, so an indication of the initial period of their validity is not so relevant.

Retrospective means applying a new accounting policy to transactions, other events and conditions as if that accounting policy had always been used in the past. In this case, it will be necessary to recalculate and adjust the financial statements of previous periods, which were formed on the basis of the previous accounting policy. Therefore, restated amounts presented as comparatives in the financial statements of the current period will differ from their amounts presented in the financial statements of previous periods.

Promising application of changes in accounting policy is to apply a new accounting policy to transactions, other events and conditions that occurred after the date on which the policy changed. In this case, the recalculation and adjustment of the financial statements of previous periods is not required, and they are disclosed in the financial statements of the current period in the same amounts as before.

Changes to an accounting policy in accordance with paragraph 14 of IAS 8 are permitted if:

• a) a standard requires such a change;
• b) it will result in the financial statements providing reliable and more relevant information about the effect of transactions, other events or conditions on financial position, financial results or movement Money.

However, if an entity applies a new accounting policy in respect of transactions, events or conditions that did not previously exist, they were immaterial or they differ in nature from transactions, events and conditions that took place earlier, then this action is not considered as a change in accounting policies (clause 16 of IAS 8).

Example 1

The Bank has not previously formed liabilities in respect of long-term employee benefits upon retirement, as internal position on remuneration, their payment was provided for, but not guaranteed, to a small circle of persons, and their amount was assessed as extremely insignificant. In 2013, the Board of Directors amended the regulation on remuneration, expanding the circle of persons entitled to receive remuneration and increasing its amount.

As a result, as at 31 December 2013, the bank will incur liabilities for long-term benefits, however, this will not be considered as a voluntary change in accounting policy requiring retrospective application.

In accordance with paragraph 19 of IAS 8, if changes in accounting policies result from the initial application of a standard, they are accounted for in accordance with the specific transitional provisions of that standard, if any. Almost all new and revised standards contain an indication of the annual periods from which they apply, whether early application is permitted, and whether the initial application of this standard should be prospective or retrospective.

For example, IFRS 13 Fair Value, effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, permits early application and must be used prospectively at the beginning of the annual period to which it was originally applied. One of the innovations of this standard is that it does not specify that for an asset traded in an active market, the best evidence of fair value would be its bid quote (ask price).

Example 2

Suppose that until 2013, according to the accounting policy of the credit institution fair value valuable papers, quoted on the stock exchange, was determined as the demand price disclosed by the organizer of the auction at the end of the last trading session before the reporting date. Since January 1, 2013, in connection with the entry into force of IFRS 13, the credit institution has made changes to its accounting policy that provide for the determination of the fair value of securities quoted on the stock exchange based on the closing price of trading disclosed by the organizer of trading on the last day before the reporting date, justifying its choice by the fact that this value will be the closest to the price at which the credit institution could sell securities on the reporting date.

Thus, the fair value of the securities as at 31 December 2013 will be determined by the credit institution in accordance with the amended accounting policy, and the fair value of the securities as of December 31, 2012 - according to the previous accounting policy. Since IFRS 13 is applied prospectively, there is no need to recalculate the fair value of securities at 31 December 2012 in accordance with the new accounting policy.

However, new standards, on the contrary, often require retrospective application. For example, IFRS 9 Financial instruments”, entry into force of which has been deferred until 2015 for the time being, is expected to apply retrospectively.

If an entity voluntarily makes changes to an accounting policy or changes it upon initial application of IFRSs that do not prescribe specific transitional provisions applicable to such a change, then such changes must also be applied retrospectively.

A voluntary change in accounting policy is only possible if it results in the financial statements containing reliable and more relevant information. The concepts of reliability and relevance are given in the "Concepts for the preparation and presentation of financial statements". The reasons why the application of revised accounting policies provides reliable and more relevant information should be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements (paragraph 29 of IAS 8).

However, there are exceptions to the requirement to apply retrospectively an accounting policy in the event of a voluntary change, which are given in paragraph 17 of IAS 8. Thus, the initial application of the asset revaluation policy under IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment is treated as a revaluation and does not require retrospective application. At the same time, no such exception is made for the reverse transition from the revalued cost model to the cost model.

Therefore, if a credit institution previously revalued fixed assets at fair value at each reporting date, and, for example, since 2013 decided not to revaluate and return to the cost accounting model, then such a change in accounting policy will require retrospective application.

Concerning investment property, paragraph 31 of IAS 40 Investment Property indicates that it is unlikely that a change from the fair value model of investment property to the cost model will provide more relevant information.

Voluntary change in accounting policy

The decision to change the accounting policy must be made by the same management body of the bank that is authorized to approve it. If an accounting policy is changed voluntarily, it is appropriate to include reference in the approved change decision to the relevant facts and circumstances in connection with which the revised accounting policy would help to provide more reliable and relevant information. In general, there are two main areas of voluntary changes in accounting policies.

The first is a change in the model or method of accounting for certain objects or operations, when the standards themselves provide the enterprise with a choice of several such models or methods, for example:

• transition between models of accounting for property at a revalued cost or at actual costs;
• transition between methods for determining the cost of interchangeable inventories using the FIFO method or weighted average cost.

The second direction is a change in the accounting policy independently developed by the credit institution regarding certain objects or operations, including in cases where the requirements of none of the standards are applicable. So, for example, separate IFRS are not devoted to such articles as lease rights land plots, advances paid and their impairment, deferred income and expenses, capital investments in rented property, etc. Accordingly, a change in accounting for such transactions will be treated as a voluntary change in accounting policy.

In addition, the requirements of the standards often contain definitions such as “significantly” or “significantly”. The numerical criteria of materiality and significance in each particular case, as a rule, are independently set by the credit institution in its accounting policy, and the impact of the value of these numerical criteria on financial statements can be quite significant.

An example is the accounting for a property, one part of which is used to receive rent and capital appreciation, and the other for the provision of services and for administrative purposes, and parts of such an object cannot be sold separately. Such a property is classified as investment property only when only a minor part of it is intended for use in manufacturing, service or administrative purposes; otherwise, it is classified as property, plant and equipment (paragraph 10 of IAS 40).

Example 3

Suppose that the bank has fixed in its accounting policy the criterion of insignificance described above as 5% of total area and took into account office building, 10% of the total area of ​​which is used to accommodate an additional office, and 90% is leased as a fixed asset according to the cost accounting model. Starting from 2013, for certain reasons, such as rising real estate prices, the bank chose to reflect this property as an investment. In this regard, it was necessary to make changes to the accounting policy, increasing specified criterion up to 15% of the total area of ​​the object.

Since the assessment of significance in this case is not related to uncertainties inherent in economic activity, such as impairment, fair value measurement or timing beneficial use assets, then this change should be interpreted not as a change in an accounting estimate, but as a change in accounting policy. Like any other voluntary change in accounting policy, it must be justified in terms of providing more reliable and relevant information and applied retrospectively.

As a result, not only as of December 31, 2013, but also in comparative information for previous reporting periods, the property in question will be reflected as investment property in accordance with the accounting model chosen by the enterprise for this category.

In some cases, classifying a change in accounting approach as a change in accounting policy or a change in accounting estimates is much more difficult. Under IAS 8, a change in accounting estimate is an adjustment to the carrying amount of an asset or liability that results from an assessment of its current condition and the expected future benefits and obligations associated with it. Such an estimate may need to be revised if the circumstances on which it was based change, or as a result of new information or experience, and the effect of the change in accounting estimates is reflected prospectively from the period in which the change occurs.

For example, a review of the remaining useful life of an asset or its depreciation method refers to changes in accounting estimates (paragraphs 51 and 61 of IAS 16). At the same time, the applicable useful lives different groups fixed assets, as a rule, are fixed in the accounting policy of the enterprise. How should one interpret the situation when the company decided not only to change the useful life of specific items of fixed assets, but also to revise the accounting policy in general in terms of the applicable periods for all groups of fixed assets?

Paragraph 35 of IAS 8 contains the following guidance: “The change in the basis of estimate applied is a change in accounting policy and not a change in an accounting estimate. If it is difficult to distinguish a change in accounting policy from a change in an accounting estimate, it is treated as a change in an accounting estimate.”

Consider the situation with a change in the methodology for the formation of provisions for impairment loan debt. The amount of the allowance for loan impairment is in itself an accounting estimate, as it cannot be determined exactly, but can only be estimated using judgments based on the latest, available and reliable information at each reporting date. However, the specific methodology for constructing such estimates, as a rule, is fixed by the enterprise, and its key provisions are disclosed in the notes to the statements when describing the accounting policy.

Example 4

Previously, when compiling financial statements in accordance with IFRS, the bank did not take into account the received collateral when calculating the amount of provisions for loan impairment. Starting from 2013, it was decided to make changes to the methodology for creating reserves for impairment of loan debt, providing for the adjustment of the amount of reserves depending on the characteristics and value of the received collateral. This did not change the circumstances that could affect accounting estimates, such as changes in legislation on pledges or an increase in the share of loans repaid by the bank by foreclosing collateral.

In this case, a change in the methodology for the formation of reserves can be interpreted precisely as a change in accounting policy with the ensuing need for retrospective application.

Paragraph 53 of IAS 8 specifically states that, under the new accounting policy, later information about past events should not be applied to the prior period to determine assumptions about management intention in the prior period or to estimates recognized, measured or disclosed in previous period amounts.

Example 5

Using the data in Example 4, assume that at 31 December 2012 the originated loan was considered by the bank to be individually unimpaired. In 2013 the loan became impaired due to the deterioration of the financial condition of the borrower. In this case, when recalculating the amount of provisions as of December 31, 2012 due to a retrospective change in methodology, this loan should still be treated as not impaired, as information on the deterioration in financial condition could not yet reasonably be obtained at that date.

Retrospective restatement and disclosure

When retrospectively applying an accounting policy, a credit institution must adjust opening balance each affected component of equity for the earliest period presented and other comparative information disclosed for each prior period presented, as if the new accounting policy had always been applied.

However, the requirements for retrospective application do not apply in cases where it is impracticable to determine the impact relating to a particular period or the cumulative impact of the change, that is, it cannot be determined despite all real attempts to do so. For example, for the retrospective application of accounting policies, primary documents for some transactions were required, but they were already destroyed due to the expiration of the storage period.

It is also impractical to apply a change in accounting policy retrospectively if assumptions about what management's intentions were in those periods or significant estimates are required and information about those estimates cannot be objectively identified.

In such a case, the institution must apply the new accounting policy to the carrying amount of assets or liabilities at the beginning of the earliest period for which retrospective application is practicable and which may be the current period (paragraphs 24-28 of IAS 8).

In addition, it may turn out that the application of the revised accounting policy to transactions and items of previous periods will result in only minor changes in their valuation compared to the previous accounting policy.

For example, the FIFO cost of fast-moving inventories is not expected to differ materially from their cost calculated using the weighted average cost method, but the recalculation of the cost by another method can be quite laborious. In this regard, when assessing the need for a retrospective restatement of financial statements in connection with a change in accounting policy, it is advisable to take into account such a fundamental limitation as the balance between benefits and costs: the costs of providing information to users should not exceed the benefits from it.

This limitation is expressed in the fact that the application of an accounting policy is not mandatory in cases where the effect of this is not significant (clause 8 of IAS (IAS) 8). This right can be extended to the retrospective application of accounting policies, when it will not have a significant impact on the financial statements. However, it will be necessary to preliminary calculations for previous periods under the revised accounting policy in order to reasonably assert that the effect of its application is insignificant, as well as to reconcile the estimated effect with the materiality level established by the credit institution. In this case, you can focus on the same level of materiality that is set for significant errors of previous years that are subject to retrospective correction.

A significant part of Russian credit organizations prepares reports in accordance with IFRS using the transformation method, therefore, in the case of retrospective changes to the accounting policy, it will be enough to return to the transformation tables for previous reporting dates and make the necessary adjustments line by line. Such adjustments should reflect the resulting differences in the valuation of financial statement items between the old and revised accounting policies at each previous reporting date (reporting period), respectively.

If a voluntary change in accounting policy or the initial application of a standard affects the current or previous period, except when it is practically impossible to determine the amount of the adjustment, and also could affect future periods, the credit institution must disclose the following information (paragraphs 28, 29 of IAS 8):

• the nature of the change and the reasons why applying the new accounting policy provides reliable and more relevant information (when the accounting policy is changed voluntarily);
• its name, an indication that changes in accounting policies are made in accordance with its transitional provisions, a description of these transitional provisions and their possible impact on future periods, as well as the nature of the changes in accounting policies themselves (when applying a new or revised IFRS).

In both cases, the following quantitative and practical information is disclosed:

1. the amount of the adjustment for the current and each period presented, to the extent practicable: for each affected financial statement line item and for basic and diluted earnings per share if IAS 33 Earnings per Share is applied by the institution ;
2. the amount of the adjustment relating to periods before those presented, to the extent practicable;
3. if retrospective application is impracticable for a particular prior period or periods before those presented, the circumstances that led to the existence of that condition and a description of how and from when the change in accounting policy was applied.

This disclosure is not required to be repeated in the financial statements of subsequent periods.

It is important that the effect of the new accounting policy on the financial statements is disclosed not only in relation to previous periods for which the financial statements have already been prepared, but also for the current reporting period. As a result, in order to include all the necessary disclosures in the notes, a financial institution actually needs to calculate the values ​​of financial statement items for current period both under the new and under the previous accounting policy.

In the case of retrospective application of accounting policies in the financial statements, the amount of comparative information increases. According to paragraph 39 of IAS (IAS) 1 “Presentation of Financial Statements”, in such a situation, a credit institution must present at least three statements of financial position, two statements of other types and related notes in the financial statements. Statements of financial position are presented as of:

• the end of the current period;
• the end of the previous period (which coincides with the beginning of the current period);
• beginning of the earliest comparative period.

Finally, in accordance with paragraphs 106, 110 of IAS (IAS) 1 in the statement of changes in the composition own funds Disclosures must be made about the total amounts of adjustments for each component of equity separately as a result of changes in accounting policies. Such adjustments are subject to disclosure for each prior period and at the beginning of the current period.

Example 6

In 2013, the bank decided to change its accounting policy in relation to the real estate accounting model, namely, to switch from the previously used revalued cost accounting model to the actual cost accounting model. This transition was due to significant fluctuations market prices on real estate and lack of intention to sell or change the purpose of the use of objects in the future.

As discussed above, such a change in accounting model should be treated as a voluntary change in accounting policy that is subject to retrospective application. Therefore, the cost of property, plant and equipment at all previous reporting dates, as far as possible, should be restated without reflecting the revaluation. Profit and loss items related to fixed assets should also be recalculated (for example, accumulated depreciation for the period, financial result from the disposal of fixed assets, etc.), as well as the amount of deferred taxes due to changes in the carrying value of fixed assets should be adjusted . Accordingly, it is necessary to recalculate the value of such capital items as the revaluation fund for fixed assets and retained earnings.

Due to a retrospective change in accounting policy in the financial statements for 2013, it is necessary to present a statement of financial position (and notes thereto) for three dates: December 31, 2013, December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, and the remaining statements - for two years: 2013 and 2012. The indicators in all reports, except for the statement of changes in equity, should already be given in a recalculated value in accordance with the revised accounting policy.

The statement of changes in equity must disclose adjustments to each component of equity for equity balances as at 31 December 2011 and 31 December 2012, and for 2012 comprehensive income. the composition of equity for the year ended December 31, 2013, is given in table. one.

The notes to the financial statements in the section relating to changes in accounting policies should contain relevant information about the change and retrospective application of accounting policies.

An exemplary text of such disclosure, as well as quantification the impact of changes in accounting policies on the financial statements is given below:

“In 2013, the Bank decided to change its accounting policy for property, plant and equipment, namely, to apply the cost accounting model (net of accumulated depreciation and impairment) for all groups of property, plant and equipment. In previous reporting periods, this model was used for all groups of fixed assets, with the exception of objects real estate for which the revalued cost model was applied (net of accumulated depreciation).

Management expects the change in accounting policy to provide more reliable and relevant information, as the real estate market is subject to strong price fluctuations, which can result in the fair value of properties either above or below their value in use.

The Bank does not expect to sell or change the use of properties classified as property, plant and equipment in the foreseeable future, and intends to continue to use them for service or administrative purposes. In this regard, the Bank's management believes that accounting for all groups of property, plant and equipment, including real estate, based on the model at cost less accumulated depreciation and impairment, will provide more relevant and reliable information that reflects the way in which future economic benefits from property, plant and equipment will be obtained.

Under IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors, the change in accounting policy was accounted for retrospectively. To this end, the opening balance of each affected component has been adjusted equity for the earliest period presented (2012) and other related amounts disclosed for each prior period presented, as if the new accounting policy had always been applied. Also pending tax assets(liabilities) were restated due to a change in the carrying amount of property, plant and equipment due to a change in accounting policy.

The adjustment to each component of equity for each prior period and at the beginning of the current period is shown in the statement of changes in equity. The changes introduced into the accounting policy did not affect the indicators of the cash flow statement”.

In table. Tables 2 and 3 show the impact of the change in accounting policy on the Bank's financial statements as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012.

A similar table in the note should also be provided to compare the figures under the new and previous accounting policies as at 31 December 2011.

Table 1

Statement of changes in equity for the year ended 31 December 2013 (thousand rubles)

table 2

Impact of changes in accounting policies on the financial statements of the Bank as of December 31, 2013 (thousand rubles)

Table 3

Impact of changes in accounting policies on the financial statements of the Bank as of December 31, 2012 (thousand rubles)

conclusions

A change in accounting policy is often applied retrospectively to ensure that comparable, reliable and relevant information is provided in the financial statements. At the same time, the retrospective application of changes in accounting policies sometimes requires significant labor costs both for the preparation of the necessary calculations and for the disclosure of relevant information. Particular attention should be paid to the issue of classification of certain amendments: changes in accounting policies, changes in accounting estimates, corrections of errors from previous periods.

IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements requires financial statements to present fairly the financial position, financial performance and cash flows of an entity, so compliance with IFRS financial statements should result in fair presentation. In turn, this requires an entity to select and apply accounting policies that generate meaningful, reliable, comparable and understandable information.

IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors sets out criteria for selecting and changing accounting policies, accounting for and disclosing changes in accounting policies. At the same time, accounting policies are understood as specific principles, rules and practices applied by an organization for the preparation and presentation of financial statements.

For the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Russian legislation rules for choosing, justifying and disclosing accounting policies by organizations that are legal entities, are established in the Accounting Regulations "Accounting Policy of the Organization" PBU 1/98, approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 09.12.1998 N 60n, (hereinafter - PBU 1/98). An accounting policy is a set of methods chosen by an organization to maintain accounting- initial observation value measurement, the current grouping and the final generalization of the facts of economic activity".

Regulation PBU 1/98, like the standard IAS (IAS) 8, requires the consistent application of the accounting policy adopted by the organization from one reporting period to another, and also determines the procedure for changing it.

A change in the accounting policy of an organization can be made in the following cases:

• legislative changes Russian Federation or regulatory acts on accounting;
• development by the organization of new methods of accounting, which implies a more reliable presentation of the facts of economic activity in the accounting and reporting of the organization or less laboriousness of the accounting process without reducing the degree of reliability of information;
• a significant change in the conditions of activity (reorganization, change of owners, change in types of activities, etc.).

IAS 8 requires that an accounting policy be changed only when the change:

• dictated by a standard or interpretation of IFRS;
• results in the financial statements providing more reliable information about the effect of transactions, other events or conditions on an entity's financial position, financial performance or cash flows.

  This refers to two methods (approaches) to reflect the consequences of a change in accounting policies (application of accounting policies):

prospective application, i.e. "the application of the new accounting policy to transactions, other events and circumstances that occurred after the date the accounting policy was changed"<1>;

retrospective application, i.e. "applying a new accounting policy to transactions, other events and conditions as if the new accounting policy had always been applied"<2>.

<1>See International Financial Reporting Standards 2006: Russian translation O.M-A. Askeri, V.I. Tarusina and L.E. Khodyrev. M.: Askeri-Assa, 2006. S. 62.
<2>There. S. 61.

IAS 8 requires changes in accounting policies to be applied retrospectively in almost all cases except:

• situations where changes are made in connection with a newly adopted standard or interpretation containing transitional provisions that specifically prescribe the first application of that standard or the interpretation and accounting for a related change in accounting policy;
• situations where "it is practically impossible to determine either the impact of this change on a specific period or its cumulative impact"<3>.

<3>There. S. 61, § 23.

The term "practically impossible" is specifically defined in IAS 8 and means a situation where an entity, having made all reasonable efforts to comply with the requirements of IFRS, still failed to comply with these requirements.

When it is not practicable to "determine the period-specific aspects of the effect of a change in accounting policy on comparative information covering one or more prior periods presented, an entity applies the new accounting policy to book values assets and liabilities as at the beginning of the earliest period for which retrospective application is practicable." This period may in particular be the current period. In doing so, the entity "makes an appropriate adjustment to the opening balance of each affected component of equity for that period" .

When “at the beginning of the current period it is impracticable to determine even the cumulative effect of applying a new accounting policy on all prior periods, an entity adjusts the related comparative information so as to apply the new accounting policy prospectively with the most early date for which this is practically possible.

Therefore, an entity adjusts comparative information but disregards that portion of the cumulative adjustment to assets, liabilities and equity that relates to periods prior to that date. That is, prospective application in the context of the requirements of § 25 IAS 8 assumes that the new accounting policy is applied not from the date of its actual application in the current reporting period, but from the date when it is practically possible to apply it to the comparative information disclosed in the financial statements.

In accordance with IAS 8 § 22, upon retrospective application, an entity adjusts the opening balance of each affected component of equity for the earliest period presented in the financial statements and other comparative amounts relating to prior periods disclosed in the financial statements for the current period, as if the new accounting policy had always been applied.

If we consider the Russian rules for the preparation of financial statements, it should be noted that the requirement to provide comparative information in the financial statements is specified in the Accounting Regulations "Accounting statements of an organization" (PBU 4/99), approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 06.07.1999 N 43n, ( hereinafter - PBU 4/99). Paragraph 10 of PBU 4/99 prescribes that "for each numerical indicator of financial statements, except for the report compiled for the first reporting period, data must be provided for at least two years - the reporting and the previous reporting ones."

This paragraph also contains a requirement to adjust comparative information: "If comparative data for the period preceding the reporting period, for any reason, is not comparable with data for the reporting period, including in cases related to a change in accounting policy, then comparative data is subject to adjustment , based on the rules established by regulatory enactments on accounting. Each significant adjustment must be disclosed in the notes to the balance sheet and income statement, together with an indication of the reasons that caused this adjustment. "

Paragraph 21 of PBU 1/98 indicates that the consequences of a change in accounting policies that can have a significant impact on the financial position, cash flow or financial results of the organization's activities are reflected in the financial statements based on the requirement to present numbers for at least two years. If this requirement is met, one should proceed from the assumption that the changed method of accounting was applied from the first moment of occurrence of the facts of economic activity of this type.

Thus, in RAS 1/98 we are talking on a retrospective method of recording the effects of a change in accounting policy, similar to the retrospective approach provided in IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors.

Retrospective accounting is used in all cases, except for those situations when a monetary assessment of the consequences of a change in accounting policy in relation to previous reporting periods cannot be made with sufficient reliability. In these situations, the modified accounting method is applied to the relevant business transactions and the facts of economic activity that took place only after the introduction of such a method, i.e. in fact, perspective reflection is applied.

If we consider the procedure for reflecting in accounting and reporting the consequences of changes in accounting policies when applying the retrospective method, then it should be noted that accounting data, as well as financial reporting indicators, for previous reporting periods are not adjusted, i.e. no accounting entries are made and reporting indicators do not change.

The reflection of the consequences of a change in accounting policy consists in adjusting the comparative data included in the financial statements for the reporting (current) period for the periods preceding this reporting period. Adjustments are also made to balances at the beginning of the year in the financial statements of the current year.

Adjustments to comparative information and opening balances should be made in the so-called inter-reporting period, without affecting the financial results (income and expenses) of both the reporting (current) period and previous reporting periods. In other words, the "inter-reporting period" can be called the period between two dates: the reporting date of the previous annual financial statements and the starting date of the subsequent (current) annual financial statements. As a rule, this is the period between December 31 and January 1 of the following year.

It should be noted that, unlike IAS 8, PBU 1/98 does not provide for the rules (accounting methods) for accounting for these adjustments in cases of a change in accounting policy.

In accordance with paragraph 20 of PBU 1/98, the consequences of a change in accounting policies are reflected in accounting and reporting in the manner prescribed by the relevant legislation or regulation.

Unfortunately, as a rule, Russian regulations, regulating the rules of accounting and reporting, do not contain requirements for reflecting the consequences of a change in accounting policy. The exception is the Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated November 27, 2006 N 154n (hereinafter - Order N 154n), which approved the Accounting Regulation "Accounting for assets and liabilities, the value of which is expressed in foreign currency"(PBU 3/2006), on the example of which we will explain the procedure for accounting for the consequences of changes in accounting policies.

Clause 3 of Order No. 154n establishes that "organizations that are legal entities under the legislation of the Russian Federation (with the exception of credit institutions and budget institutions), carry out in accounting as of January 1, 2007 recalculation into rubles of the value of funds expressed in foreign currency in settlements (including for loan obligations) with legal and individuals payable on the basis of the terms of the contracts (regardless of the terms of their conclusion) in rubles.

In addition, Order No. 154n provides for the procedure for reflecting in accounting and reporting the consequences of a change in accounting policy in connection with the new rules for accounting for exchange rate differences.

Differences arising from the recalculation of funds in settlements are credited to the account of retained earnings (uncovered loss), i.e. reflected on account 84 "Retained earnings ( uncovered loss)". This approach is consistent with the requirements of IAS 8 when applying the retrospective method, when adjustments affecting previous reporting periods associated with the introduction of a new accounting policy are charged to equity.

However, the indication in Order No. 154n that, as of January 1, 2007, it is necessary to recalculate only the funds in settlements, and not all assets and liabilities, limits the use of the retrospective method.

Based on this, when switching to the application of RAS 3/2006, the organization must determine:

1. whether it recalculates only funds in settlements in accordance with the norms of Order N 154n;
2. or she, guided by paragraph 21 of PBU 1/98, applies the retrospective approach in full, i.e. recalculates not only funds in settlements, but also other assets and liabilities, the value of which is expressed (for comparative information - was expressed in 2006) in foreign currency (conditional monetary units), but is (was) payable in rubles.

The recalculation of funds in settlements in accordance with the requirements of Order No. 154n will not require accounting entries, but will only affect reporting indicators as of January 1, 2007.

If an entity applies the hindsight method, if restatement adjustments could have a material effect on its financial position, cash flows or financial performance, the entity would need to retrospectively revise its financial statements for 2006 to generate comparative information that will be presented in annual accounts for 2007

The procedure for reflecting adjustments in connection with the recalculation of funds in the calculations will be considered using the example below.

Example. As of January 1, 2007, the organization in the balance sheet under the item " Accounts payable"there is an account payable in foreign currency in the amount of 10,000 euros. According to the agreement, the payment of accounts payable is made in rubles at the exchange rate of the Bank of Russia on the date of payment. The said debt arose in 2006, when the exchange rate of the Bank of Russia amounted to 34.80 rubles / euro, and was reflected in accounting on account 60 "Settlements with suppliers and contractors" in the amount of 345,000 rubles The exchange rate of the Bank of Russia as of January 1, 2007 was 34.70 rubles / euro (conditional rate).

Accounts payable in the amount of 10,000 euros are subject to recalculation at the exchange rate as of January 1, 2007 and after recalculation will amount to 347,000 rubles. (€10,000 x RUB/€34.70).

The difference from the recalculation in the amount of 1000 rubles. (348,000 rubles - 347,000 rubles) should be attributed to an increase in the credit balance (decrease in the debit balance) on account 84 "Retained earnings (uncovered loss)" while reducing accounts payable on account 60 "Settlements with suppliers and contractors".

The results of this recalculation do not affect the financial statements for 2006.

In the balance sheet (form N 1 according to OKUD) as of January 1, 2007, the following should be changed:

• the opening balance in the section "Capital and reserves" under the item "Retained earnings (uncovered loss)" in column 3 "At the beginning of the reporting year" - increased by 1000 rubles;
• the opening balance under the item "Accounts payable" in column 3 "At the beginning of the reporting year" - reduced by 1000 rubles.

In addition, the results of the recalculation are reflected in Sect. I "Change in equity" of the statement of changes in capital (form N 3 according to OKUD) for 2007 in column 6 "Retained earnings (uncovered loss)" under the item "Changes in accounting policy" for reporting year.

In the case of recalculation of financial statements for previous reporting periods (comparative indicators for 2006 presented in the financial statements for 2007) in comparable conditions, i.e. provided that the new accounting policy has always been applied (hindsight), the following indicators will be affected:

• in column 4 "For the same period of the previous year" in the income statement (form N 2 according to OKUD) under the items "Other income", "Other expenses";
• in columns 5 and 6 "For the same period of the previous year" in the table "Breakdown of individual profits and losses" under the item " Exchange differences in foreign currency."

With a retrospective approach, in accordance with clause 21 of PBU 1/98, in order to prepare comparative information that will be presented in the financial statements for 2007, the initial value of assets, which was formed taking into account sum differences, should also be reviewed.

In addition, fulfilling the requirements of clause 22 of PBU 1/98, it is necessary to disclose in the explanatory note:

• the reason for the change in accounting policy;
• assessment of the consequences of changes in monetary terms (in relation to the reporting year and each other period, the data for which are included in the financial statements for the reporting year);
• an indication that the corresponding data of the periods preceding the reporting year included in the financial statements for the reporting year have been adjusted.

N.V. Bushmeleva

Leading expert

CJSC AF "CBA"

The organization is a small business, applies PBU 18

The procedure for determining the materiality of errors must be fixed in the accounting policy of the organization. A significant error of the previous reporting year, identified after the approval of the reporting, is corrected in the manner provided for in paragraph 9 of PBU 22/2010: 1) entries on the relevant accounting accounts in the current reporting period. In this case, the corresponding account in the entries is the account of retained earnings (uncovered loss); The recalculation of the comparative indicators of the financial statements is carried out by correcting the indicators of the financial statements, as if the error of the previous reporting period had never been made (retrospective recalculation).

Retrospective restatement of financial statements

Please explain with an example how to draw up a retrospective balance sheet.

9 PBU 22/2010 it is emphasized: a retrospective recalculation is made in relation to comparative indicators starting from the previous reporting period presented in the financial statements for the current reporting year in which the corresponding error was made.

This implies the conclusion that a retrospective recalculation is made when compiling financial statements for the reporting year in which the error was detected.

• Correspondence of invoices How it is reflected in accounting (190 kB)
• Correspondence of accounts As reflected in accounting (193 kB)
• Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 28_06_2010 N 63н (rev_ dated 06_04_201 (61 kB)
• Article Correction of material accounting errors (111 kB)
• Article Errors in accounting and reporting (Lvova I_ (121 kB)

Good afternoon.

Please explain the situation: Our company (at USNO 15%) in the 1st and 2nd quarters of 2018 paid a minimum tax of 1% (was tax loss). In Q3 based on….

Retrospective restatement of financial statements: Is it all that complicated?

Dt 99-NP Kt 68-NP - 30,000 rubles. (150,000 x 20%) - additional income tax was charged for 2010 based on the results of the discovered material error 2010.

Dt 84 Kt 99-NP - 30,000 rubles. – adjusted net profit in 2010, as a result of a significant error found in 2010.

Eliminate tax consequences The last date for filing income tax returns for 2010 is March 28, 2011.

The business identified the 2013 bug in June 2014

The business identified the 2013 error in June 2014.

The error was recognized as significant, therefore, it became necessary to carry out a retrospective recalculation of the balance sheet indicators. Is it necessary to carry out this recalculation when compiling the balance sheet as of 06/30/2014?

No, don't.

A retrospective recalculation of the relevant indicators must be made when compiling the balance sheet for 2014 (that is, as of December 31, 2014).

Paragraph 9 of PBU 22/2010 emphasizes: retrospective recalculation is carried out in relation to comparative indicators starting from the previous reporting period presented in the financial statements for the current reporting year in which the corresponding error was made.

This implies the conclusion that a retrospective recalculation is made when compiling financial statements for the reporting year in which the error was detected. This approach is not accidental.

Changes in accounting legislation in 2010

misuse of information available at the date of signing the financial statements unfair actions of the organization's officials Under what conditions does an error not fall under the concept of "error" in accordance with PBU 22/2010 1.

II. Error Correction Procedure

4. Identified errors and their consequences are subject to mandatory correction.

5. An error in the reporting year, detected before the end of this year, is corrected by entries in the relevant accounting accounts in the month of the reporting year in which the error was discovered.

The error of the reporting year, revealed after the end of this year, but before the date of signing the financial statements for this year, is corrected by entries in the relevant accounting accounts for December of the reporting year (the year for which the annual financial statements are prepared).

7. A significant error of the previous reporting year, revealed after the date of signing the financial statements for this year, but before the date of submission of such statements to the shareholders of the joint-stock company, members of the company with limited liability, public authority, body local government or other body authorized to exercise the rights of the owner, etc., is corrected in the manner prescribed by paragraph 6 of this Regulation. If the specified financial statements were presented to any other users, then they must be replaced with statements in which the identified material error has been corrected (revised financial statements).

8. A significant error of the previous reporting year, revealed after the submission of financial statements for this year to the shareholders of a joint-stock company, participants in a limited liability company, a state authority, a local government body or another body authorized to exercise the rights of the owner, etc., but before the date of approval of such reporting in accordance with the procedure established by the legislation of the Russian Federation, is corrected in the manner established by paragraph 6 of these Regulations. At the same time, the revised financial statements disclose information that these financial statements replace the originally presented financial statements, as well as the grounds for compiling the revised financial statements.

The revised financial statements are submitted to all addresses to which the original financial statements were submitted.

9. A significant error of the previous reporting year, identified after the approval of the financial statements for this year, is corrected:

1) entries on the relevant accounting accounts in the current reporting period. In this case, the corresponding account in the entries is the account of retained earnings (uncovered loss);

2) by recalculating the comparative indicators of the financial statements for the reporting periods reflected in the financial statements of the organization for the current reporting year, except when it is impossible to establish a connection between this error and a specific period or it is impossible to determine the impact of this error on a cumulative total in relation to all previous reporting periods.

The recalculation of the comparative indicators of the financial statements is carried out by correcting the indicators of the financial statements, as if the error of the previous reporting period had never been made (retrospective recalculation).

Retrospective recalculation is made in relation to comparative indicators starting from the previous reporting period presented in the financial statements for the current reporting year in which the corresponding error was made.

Organizations that have the right to apply simplified methods of accounting, including simplified accounting (financial) statements, may correct a significant error of the previous reporting year, identified after the approval of the accounting statements for this year, in the manner prescribed by clause 14 of this Regulation, without a retrospective recalculation.

(The paragraph was introduced by the Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated November 8, 2010 N 144n, as amended by Orders of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated April 27, 2012 N 55n, dated April 6, 2015 N 57n)

(see text in previous)

10. In case of correction of a significant error of the previous reporting year, identified after the approval of the financial statements, the approved financial statements for the previous reporting periods are not subject to revision, replacement and re-submission to users of the financial statements.

If a significant error was made before the beginning of the earliest of the previous reporting periods presented in the financial statements for the current reporting year, the opening balances for the relevant items of assets, liabilities and equity at the beginning of the earliest of the reporting periods presented are subject to adjustment.

12. If it is not possible to determine the effect of a material error on one or more of the prior reporting periods presented in the financial statements, the entity shall adjust the opening balance of the relevant asset, liability and equity items at the beginning of the earliest period for which restatement is possible.

13. The impact of a material error on the previous reporting period cannot be determined if complex and (or) numerous calculations are required, during which it is impossible to isolate information that indicates the circumstances that existed on the date of the error, or it is necessary to use information obtained after the date of approval of the financial statements for such prior reporting period.

14. An error of the previous reporting year, which is not significant, detected after the date of signing the financial statements for this year, is corrected by entries in the relevant accounting accounts in the month of the reporting year in which the error was discovered. Profit or loss resulting from the correction of this error is included in other income or expenses of the current reporting period.

Gumerova R.R.

There are two approaches to reflecting changes in accounting policies:

perspective;

retrospective.

The essence of the prospective approach is that the change in indicators in connection with a change in the accounting policy of the organization is carried out at the beginning or during the year from which new accounting methods are introduced.

When using the retrospective approach, the change in indicators caused by the change in accounting policy is made by adjusting the incoming balances in the statements. At the same time, no entries are made in the accounting accounts, because adjustment is carried out in the inter-reporting period.

Until recently in normative documents a forward-looking approach was preferred. For example, in the canceled Methodological recommendations on the procedure for the formation of indicators accounting organizations(Order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation dated June 28, 2000 No. 60n p. 58) it was indicated that if, when clarifying the accounting policy, for the next reporting year, the organization considers it inappropriate to accrue reserves upcoming expenses, then the balances of the reserves, for which in in due course there are carry-over balances, as of January 1 of the year following the reporting year, are subject to joining the financial result with reflection in the organization's accounting records for January. Based on the foregoing, in January of the following year, when writing off carry-over balances of reserves, the formation of which is not provided for in the reporting year, it was necessary to make an entry in accounting - Dt 96 Kt 91 and reflect the resulting income in the income statement in the composition others.

A feature of the retrospective approach is that the change in indicators caused by a change in accounting policies is not reflected in accounting, but is made by changing the incoming balances in the interreporting period, i.e. in the period between two reports, when the income statement is not formed, and the profit and loss account is closed, since the balance sheet has been reformed. Since income and expenses cannot be recognized in the interreporting period, the write-off of the balance of reserves should be carried out for the only source available in this period - retained earnings of the organization.

In the explanations, this operation must be disclosed not only in the section on the accounting policy of the organization, but also in the section on retained earnings.

PBU 1/2008 "Accounting policy of the organization" is based precisely on the retrospective approach. In particular, paragraphs 21-23 of this document indicate that in the event of a change in the accounting policy of the organization, the opening balance sheet is formed on the basis of the condition that the changed method of accounting was applied from the first moment the facts of economic activity of this type arose. Therefore, the reflection of the consequences of a change in accounting policy consists in adjusting the corresponding data for previous years included in the financial statements for the reporting year. This procedure should always be applied, except in cases where a monetary assessment of the consequences of a change in accounting policy in relation to periods preceding the reporting period cannot be made with sufficient reliability. In this case, the changed method of accounting is applied to the relevant facts of economic activity that took place only after the introduction of such a method.

Retrospective reflection of the consequences of the change

accounting policy

According to paragraph 15 of PBU 1/2008, if the organization has made a change in accounting policy in the prescribed manner, the consequences of the change in accounting policy caused by reasons other than those specified in paragraph 14 of PBU 1/2008, and which had or could have a significant impact on the financial position of the organization, financial the results of its activities and (or) cash flows are reflected in the financial statements retrospectively, except for cases when the assessment in monetary terms of such consequences in relation to periods preceding the reporting period cannot be made with sufficient reliability.

At the same time, attention is drawn to the fact that, based on the order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated April 28, 2017 N 69n, retrospective reflection of the consequences of a change in accounting policy consists, among other things, in adjusting for the earliest date of the incoming balance presented in the financial statements, not only under the item "Unallocated profit (uncovered loss)", but also (or) on other balance sheet items.

Financial statements should be comparable to each other, provide useful information users who are interested not only in the current financial condition companies, cash flows, capital flow and results of economic activity for the current period, but also general trends financial indicators. To create the possibility of assessing financial reporting indicators in dynamics, the company must consistently apply the same principles and rules for accounting and preparing financial statements and clearly describe in the explanatory note to it any deviation from the rules established by the accounting policy.

Each financial statement is the result of a selection of certain accounting principles and methods from the entire spectrum allowed by the standards. The company chooses one or another accounting policy based on the specifics of the business and economic reality. Over time, the expectations and goals of the company change, as well as the methods and standards of accounting and financial reporting are improved, which leads to the need to make changes to the accounting policies of companies.

REFERENCES

1. I.N. Girfanova Features of the circulation of fixed assets [Text] / I.N. Girfanova // Collection of articles Status and prospects for increasing the production of high-quality products Agriculture"Organizational and economic aspects of the agro-industrial complex" - Ufa: Bashkir State Agrarian University, 2013. - 88-90 p.

2. I.N. Girfanova On accounting for bonus payments to employees commercial organizations[Text] / I.N. Girfanova// Collection of articles Topical issues of accounting, economic analysis and Audit: Theory and Practice " Actual problems accounting, analysis and audit" - Ufa: Bashkir State Agrarian University, 2009 - 139-140 p.

3. G.Ya.Ostaev The need to introduce budgeting in organizations [Text] / G.Ya.Ostaev// Collection of articles Accounting in budgetary and non-profit organizations"Problems.

Homogeneous requirements for netting

In accounting practice, two approaches have been adopted to reflect changes in accounting policies - prospective and retrospective.

A promising approach is that the change in indicators, due to the change of certain provisions of the accounting policy of the organization, is carried out at the beginning or during the year from which new accounting methods are introduced. The retrospective approach is that the change in indicators due to a change in accounting policies is carried out by adjusting the incoming balances in the statements. In this case, no entries are made in the accounting, tk. adjustment of incoming balances is carried out in the inter-reporting period.

Until recently in Russian system regulation accounting, preference was given to the prospective approach:

“If, when clarifying the accounting policy for the next reporting year, the organization considers it inappropriate to accrue reserves for future expenses, then the balances of the reserves for which carry-over balances take place in the prescribed manner, as of January 1 of the year following the reporting year, are subject to joining the financial result of the organization with reflection in the accounting of the organization for January. ( Guidelines on the procedure for the formation of indicators of the financial statements of the organization (approved by order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation of June 28, 2000 No. 60n, currently not applied), clause 58.)

Thus, the following entries should have been made in January:

debit account 96 credit account 91 – reflects the write-off of carry-over balances of reserves, the formation of which is not provided for in the reporting year (under the item of non-operating income).’

Another example:

“When an organization transfers from the beginning of the reporting year in accordance with the adopted accounting policy to the procedure for recognizing commercial and management expenses fully in the cost of sold products, goods, works, services as expenses for ordinary species business expenses and (or) distribution costs not written off in the last reporting year are subject to inclusion in the cost of products, goods, works, services sold at the beginning of the reporting year, or the organization may decide to evenly include these amounts in the cost of products, goods, works sold , services during certain period time (for example, a quarter, half a year).” (Ibid., para. 27)

In this case, the following entries should have been made in January:

debit account 90 (97) credit account 44 – reflected the write-off of the carry-over balance of selling expenses to the cost price sold products, works, services.

In the case of choosing a uniform write-off method, during the first year of applying the new accounting policy, it was necessary to make entries on the debit of account 90 and the credit of account 97 up to the complete write-off of the entire amount of the carry-over balance.

In the explanatory note to the financial statements, operations to reflect changes in accounting policies should have been disclosed not only in the section on the accounting policy of the organization, but also in the case of the materiality of the amounts written off, in the section on its income and expenses.

Thus, a feature of the prospective approach was that the outgoing balances of the reporting of the previous year fully corresponded to the incoming balances of the reporting of the next year, and the income and expenses formed by changing the accounting policy formed the financial result of the year from which the new accounting policy began to be applied. With this approach, it was rather difficult to understand where any adjustments should have appeared in the income statement:

“Column 4 of the report is filled in on the basis of the data in column 3 of the report for the previous year. If the data for the same period of the previous year is not comparable with the data for the reporting period, then the first of these data are subject to adjustment based on changes in accounting policies, legislative and other regulations. In this case, corrective entries in accounting are not made. ”(Ibid., paragraph 63.)

Indeed, if the write-off balances should have been reflected in accounts 90 or 91, then why “corrective entries were not made” and how should the data in column 4 be corrected (after all, no amounts were written off to these accounts last year)?

The confusion and discrepancies were due precisely to the confusion of the two approaches: paragraphs 58 and 27 cited above reflect a forward-looking approach, while paragraph 63 reflects a retrospective one. The principal feature of the latter is precisely that the change in indicators due to a change in accounting policies is not reflected in account entries, but is carried out by changing incoming balances in the interreporting period. Since neither income nor expenses can be recognized in the inter-reporting period (It is called inter-reporting because it is “located” between two reports, i.e. during this period the profit and loss account is not formed, and the profit and loss account itself is closed , since the reformation of the balance sheet has already taken place), then the write-off of the balance of reserves or selling expenses should be carried out at the expense of the only source available during this period - the retained earnings of the organization.

In the explanatory note to the reporting this operation should be disclosed not only in the section on the accounting policy of the organization, but also in the section on its unallocated net profit.

Thus, the transition to a retrospective approach completely eliminated possible confusion and inconsistencies in regulatory documents: the main document on this issue- PBU 1/98 (Regulations on Accounting "Accounting Policy of the Organization" PBU 1/98 (approved by order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation dated 09.12.98 No. 60n).) - is based precisely on the retrospective approach (see paragraphs 21–23). It states that in the event of a change in accounting policy, the opening balance sheet is formed on the basis of the condition that the changed method of accounting was applied from the first moment the facts of economic activity of this type arose. Therefore, the reflection of the consequences of a change in accounting policy consists in adjusting the corresponding data for previous years included in the financial statements for the reporting year.

This procedure is applied except in cases where a monetary assessment of the consequences of a change in accounting policy in relation to periods preceding the reporting period cannot be made with sufficient reliability. In cases where a monetary assessment of the consequences of a change in accounting policies in relation to periods preceding the reporting period cannot be made with sufficient reliability, the changed method of accounting is applied to the relevant facts of economic activity that occurred only after the introduction of such a method.

The second plus from the transition to this approach is the approximation of Russian accounting practices to international standards: in IFRS, the prospective approach is less preferable, because. forces in current year recognize income or expenses actually generated in previous reporting periods (The need to take into account the principles of IFRS for Russian enterprises due to the goals of the reform of Russian accounting, specified in the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 06.03.98 No. 283 “On approval of the accounting reform program in accordance with international standards financial statements).

The main disadvantage of the retrospective approach is that a change in accounting policy forces the accountant to change the amount of the organization's net profit, which leads to two problems:

In the case of an increase in net profit, the legislation does not contain any special instructions that this increase should not be used to pay dividends. Such a ban can be withdrawn only indirectly, therefore, in practice, it is possible that these funds will be directed to dividends in the absence of appropriate volumes working capital which will significantly worsen the financial position of the organization;
- in the event of a decrease in net profit, the accountant violates the requirements of civil law (Civil Code of the Russian Federation) and corporate law (Laws "On joint-stock companies” and “On Limited Liability Companies”), according to which the expenditure of profits is an inalienable right of the owners of the organization.

Both problems are explained by a certain weakness Russian accounting, its unwillingness to reflect the peculiarities of the relationship of the organization with the owners.

Thus, with the adoption of new Instructions on the procedure for compiling and presenting financial statements (Order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation dated July 22, 2003 No. 67n), the prospective approach is completely replaced by the retrospective approach. Next, we will consider an example of how to apply it in practice.

Recalculation of financial statements due to a change in accounting policy

We will consider the reflection of a change in accounting policy using the example of a change in the valuation of the write-off of inventories (IPZ). According to PBU 5/98 (Regulations on accounting "Accounting for inventories" PBU 5/01 (approved by order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation dated 09.06.2001 No. 44n, subject to subsequent changes and additions), clause 16.) when releasing inventories (except goods accounted for at the sale value) into production and other disposal, their assessment is carried out in one of the following ways:

At the cost of each unit;
- at the average cost;
- at the cost of the first in time acquisition of inventories (FIFO method);
- at the cost of the latest acquisition of inventories (LIFO method).

Let the organization in 2003 keep records of the write-off of inventories using the LIFO method, and in 2004 a decision was made to switch to accounting for the write-off of inventories at the average cost. In this case, the accountant, in accordance with the requirements of PBU 1/98, must calculate the opening balance sheet as of 01.01.04, based on the condition that the changed method of accounting was applied from the first moment the facts of economic activity of this type arose. In practice, it is not always possible to recalculate the cost of inventories written off from the moment a given organization was founded (from the moment it began its production activities), therefore it is assumed that the recalculation is done only on the basis of the data of the previous year. For this calculation, we need the following data: as of January 1, 2003, the organization had 100 inventory units of 3 thousand rubles each. per unit, total valuation of reserves at the beginning of 2003 - 300 thousand rubles. During the year, the stocks of this group entered the warehouse and were released into production; the data is given in the table:

Using the LIFO method during 2003, the organization obtained the following results at the end of the year:

Thus, for 2003, for each date of operations with stocks, 4 were made on the debit of account 10 accounting records in the amount of 360, 200, 400 and 300 thousand rubles. (total 1260 thousand rubles), and on the credit of account 10 - 5 accounting entries in the amount of 210, 560, 30, 300 and 375 thousand rubles. (total 1475 thousand rubles). Means:

• 1475 thousand rubles were written off for expenses.
• the balance as of January 1, 2004 was 300 + 1260 - 1475 = 85 thousand rubles.

To check the correctness of the calculations, this balance can be determined in another way - by multiplying the amount of stocks at the end of the period by the cost estimate of a unit of stocks: 5 x 5 + 20 x 3 \u003d 85 thousand rubles.
Now we must calculate what data the organization would have received in 2003 if it had used average grade MPZ:

Thus, in 2003, according to the new accounting policy, the organization had to make 4 accounting entries in the debit of account 10 (in the analytics for this group of reserves) in the amount of 360, 200, 400 and 300 thousand rubles. (total 1260 thousand rubles), and for the loan - 5 entries in the amount of 210, 552.5, 32.5, 279 and 380.3 thousand rubles. (total 1454.3 thousand rubles). Means:

• 1454.3 thousand rubles would have been written off as expenses;
• the balance as of January 1, 2004 would be 300 + 1260 – 1454.3 = 105.7 thousand rubles.

To check the correctness of the calculations, this balance can be determined in another way - by multiplying the amount of stocks at the end of the period by the cost estimate of a unit of stocks: 25 x 4.226 = 105.7 thousand rubles.

Reflection of changes in accounting policies in financial statements

After making the appropriate calculations, the accountant must perform the following steps:

1. In the explanatory note to the reporting for 2003, in the section on accounting policy, indicate that in 2003, when writing off inventories, the organization evaluated them using the LIFO method (see paragraph 27 of PBU 5/01), and starting from 2004 it will evaluate at an average cost (see paragraph 23 PBU 1/98).
2. In explanatory note to the accounts for 2004 (and in case of drawing up explanations to interim reporting- in the first and all subsequent explanations to quarterly reporting) include a provision that in 2004 the organization changed the method of assessing the inventory when writing off and an indication that the corresponding data for 2003 included in the financial statements for 2004 were adjusted as necessary (see paragraph 22 of PBU 1/98).
3. Reflect the change in the balance sheet indicators (form No. 1).

4. Reflect changes in the indicators of the income statement (form No. 2).

5. Fill in the relevant indicators of the statement of changes in equity (Form No. 3).

Thus, a change (in our example, an increase) in net profit is reflected in the financial statements between December 31, 2003 and January 1, 2004 - in the inter-reporting period. It is important to emphasize that the indicator of retained earnings should be changed due to a change in accounting policy in all three forms by the same amount (in our example, it was increased by 21 thousand rubles).

Changes in the legislation of the Russian Federation and (or) regulatory legal acts on accounting;

Development by the organization of new ways of accounting. The use of a new method of accounting involves improving the quality of information about the object of accounting;

Significant change in business conditions. A significant change in the business conditions of an organization may be associated with reorganization, changes in activities, etc.

It is not considered a change in the accounting policy to approve the method of accounting for the facts of economic activity that differ in essence from the facts that took place earlier, or arose for the first time in the activities of the organization.

11. Changes in accounting policies must be justified and executed in the manner prescribed by paragraph 8 of these Regulations.

12. A change in accounting policy is made from the beginning of the reporting year, unless otherwise stipulated by the reason for such a change.

13. The consequences of a change in accounting policies that have had or are capable of having a significant impact on the financial position of the organization, the financial results of its activities and (or) cash flows are estimated in monetary terms. Estimation in monetary terms of the consequences of changes in accounting policies is made on the basis of data verified by the organization as of the date from which the changed method of accounting is applied.

14. The consequences of a change in accounting policy caused by a change in the legislation of the Russian Federation and (or) regulatory legal acts on accounting are reflected in accounting and reporting in the manner established by the relevant legislation of the Russian Federation and (or) regulatory legal act on accounting. If the relevant legislation of the Russian Federation and (or) regulatory legal act on accounting do not establish the procedure for reflecting the consequences of a change in accounting policies, then these consequences are reflected in accounting and reporting in the manner established by paragraph 15 of these Regulations.

15. The consequences of a change in accounting policy caused by reasons other than those specified in paragraph 14 of these Regulations, and which had or could have a significant impact on the financial position of the organization, the financial results of its activities and (or) cash flows, are reflected in the financial statements retrospectively, for except where monetary estimates of such effects for periods prior to the reporting period cannot be made with sufficient reliability.

When reflecting retrospectively the consequences of a change in accounting policy, it is assumed that the changed method of accounting has been applied since the occurrence of facts of economic activity of this type. Retrospective reflection of the consequences of a change in accounting policy consists in adjusting the opening balance under the item "Retained earnings (uncovered loss)" and (or) other balance sheet items as of the earliest date presented in the accounting (financial) statements, as well as the values ​​of related items of the financial statements disclosed for each period presented in the financial statements, as if the new accounting policy had been applied since the occurrence of the facts of economic activity of this type.

(see text in previous edition)

In cases where a monetary assessment of the consequences of a change in accounting policies in relation to periods preceding the reporting period cannot be made with sufficient reliability, the changed method of accounting is applied to the relevant facts of economic activity that occurred after the introduction of the changed method (prospectively).

15.1. Organizations that have the right to apply simplified methods of accounting, including simplified accounting (financial) reporting, may reflect in their financial statements the consequences of changes in accounting policies that have had or may have a significant impact on the financial position of the organization, the financial results of its activities and (or) cash flows. funds, prospectively, except for cases when a different procedure is established by the legislation of the Russian Federation and (or) a regulatory legal act on accounting.

(see text in previous edition)

16. Changes in accounting policies that have had or may have a significant impact on the financial position of the organization, the financial results of its activities and (or) cash flows are subject to separate disclosure in the financial statements.