Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Impact of IFRS:
Oil and Gas
kpmg.com/ifrs
KPMG International
Contents
Overview of the IFRS conversion process
3
5
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
22
23
24
26
28
30
30
30
31
32
Contact us
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
30
30
IBC
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Foreword
Accounting for oil and gas activities
presents many difficulties. Significant
upfront investment, uncertainty over
prospects and long project lives have
led to a variety of approaches being
developed by companies, and a range of
country-specific guidance for the sector.
As countries around the world adopt
IFRS, accounting approaches for
affected companies may need to be
reassessed.
Many countries converted to IFRS in
2005 and conversions are imminent
for other countries such as Canada and
South Korea in 2011 and Mexico in 2012.
Japan has permitted the early adoption
of IFRS by listed companies from years
ending on or after 31 March 2010 and is
expected to announce a final decision
on whether to mandate adoption
in 2012. The US will likely announce
later in 2011 or 2012 its plan as to how
IFRS might be incorporated into the
financial reporting requirements for
USdomestic issuers.
As countries adopt a single set of
high quality, global accounting and
financial reporting standards, there
should be greater global consistency
and transparency. However, it is
recognised that extractive activities
is an area in which there is little IFRS
guidance. There is also variation in
practice between companies applying
IFRS, which was highlighted in KPMGs
survey The Application of IFRS: Oil and
Gas published in October 2008.
This publication looks at some of the
main accounting issues across oil and
gas companies. It considers currently
effective standards and notes future
developments that could impact
accounting in the sector.
Jimmy Daboo
Global Energy & Natural Resources
Auditing and Accounting Leader
KPMG in the UK
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Joint arrangements
Revenue recognition
Reserves reporting
Financial instruments
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Discussion Paper
Extractive Activities
IFRS6 Exploration for and Evaluation of
Mineral Resources was intended only as a
temporary measure. The future of accounting
for E&E expenditure is not yet clear.
The International Accounting Standards Board
(IASB) issued a discussion paper Extractive
Activities in April 2010. The discussion paper
outlines a revised framework for accounting for
extractive activities. A decision on whether the
Extractive Activities project should be added to the
IASBs active agenda is expected when the IASB
considers responses to its Agenda Consultation 2011,
which are due by 30November 2011.
If the IASB adds a project on extractive activities to its
active agenda, then it will take the discussion paper and
the 141 comment letters received as the basis for its initial
deliberations.
The discussion paper and responses are discussed
throughout this section of the publication. It is clear that
there is currently variation in accounting and opinions
between companies in the extractive industries, and the
discussion paper generated significant interest in the oil and gas
sector. Respondents were supportive of a project to address the
accounting for extractive activities, although many respondents
did not agree with the project teams specific proposals. The
responses to the discussion paper highlight the range of opinions
on the future of accounting for oil and gas operations under IFRS.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
IFRS does not define either successful efforts or modified full cost accounting, despite these
being the two most common accounting approaches applied by IFRS companies
The costs involved in E&E and
development activities are considerable,
and often there are years between
the start of exploration and the
commencement of production. Even
with todays advanced technology,
exploration is a risky and complex activity.
These factors create specific challenges
in accounting for E&E expenditure.
There was no IFRS that specifically
addressed E&E activities until IFRS6
became effective in 2006. IFRS 6 was
intended to be a temporary standard
while the IASB undertook an in-depth
project on extractive activities. With
that in mind, the standard was written
with a view to allowing companies to
carry over to IFRS their previous GAAP
practices to a large extent.
Traditionally under national GAAPs, oil
and gas companies have accounted
for E&E costs using one of two broadly
defined methods: the successful
efforts method or the full cost method.
However, as there is no single accepted
definition of either method under IFRS,
the application of these approaches
canvary.
Capitalisation of E&E
expenditure
IFRS 6 relaxes asset recognition
requirements for E&E expenditure
Without the benefit of IFRS 6,
expenditure would not be recognised
as an asset unless it is probable that
it will give rise to future economic
benefits. This would mean that
expenditure on an exploration activity
likely would be expensed until the
earlier of the time atwhich:
the estimated fair value less costs
to sell of the exploration prospect is
positive; and
Classification
Classification of expenditure forms
the basis of presentation and
subsequent measurement of assets
E&E assets are a separate class of
asset that is measured initially at cost.
E&E assets are classified as tangible
or intangible assets depending on their
nature. Tangible E&E assets may include
the items of plant and equipment
used for exploration activity, such as
vehicles and drilling rigs. Intangible
E&E assets may include costs of
exploration permits and licences as
well as depreciation of tangible assets
consumed in developing intangible
assets such as exploratory wells.
First-time adoption
Oil and gas deemed cost election
There is an oil and gas industry-specific
exemption in IFRS 1 First-time Adoption
of IFRS. Oil and gas companies can
elect to measure E&E assets at the
amount determined under previous
GAAP at the date of transition to IFRS.
Development and production assets can
be measured at the amount determined
for the cost centre under previous GAAP,
with an allocation to the underlying
assets on a pro rata basis using reserve
volumes or reserve values at transition
date.
This exemption can assist oil and gas
companies in preparing their first IFRS
financial statements without having to
revisit all previous accounting for these
items.
For more information on the reliefs
available on the adoption of IFRS, we
recommend that you refer to KPMGs
publication IFRS Handbook: First-time
Adoption of IFRS.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
A move from group depreciation methods or depreciation pools under previous GAAP to
component depreciation under IFRS could require significant effort
Component accounting
Depreciation method
Commencement of
depreciation/amortisation
Available for use
Depreciation or amortisation starts
when an asset is available for use. For
assets in the development stage there
may be pilot testing phases prior to
the start of full production. Whether
incidental production arising during
any such phases triggers depreciation
depends on the assessment of whether
the asset is available for use.
Some E&E assets (e.g. a drilling rig)
may be available for use immediately
and so could be depreciated/amortised
during the E&E phase. Other assets will
not be available for use until the whole
field is ready to commence operations.
In our view, there are two reasonable
approaches to determining when
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Discussion
Paper Extractive
Activities
The scope of the discussion paper
did not specifically include DD&A
The discussion paper did not propose
to change the basis for calculating
depreciation, although it highlighted
some issues related to the application
of the unit-of-production method. One
issue is whether such a method should
be based on revenues or physical units.
Another issue is whether the unit-ofproduction method should be based on
proved reserves, proved and probable
reserves or another unit basis. The project
team proposed that these issues be addressed
in any future standard.
Some respondents noted that they would like
additional issues such as depreciation/depletion to
be addressed if this project is added to the active
agenda of the IASB.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Annual impairment testing for intangible assets that are not yet available for use is relaxed
for E&E assets
E&E assets
E&E assets are exempt from certain
impairment testing requirements
IFRS 6 requires E&E assets to be
assessed for impairment in two
circumstances.
When facts and circumstances
suggest that the carrying amount
of an E&E asset may exceed its
recoverable amount.
When E&E activities have been
completed, i.e. when the commercial
viability and technical feasibility of that
asset have been determined and prior
to reclassification to development
assets.
The standard provides the following
examples of trigger events that
indicate that an E&E asset should be
tested for impairment:
expiration of the right to explore;
substantive expenditure on further
exploration for and evaluation of
mineral resources in the specific area
is neither budgeted nor planned;
commercially viable reserves have
not been discovered and the company
plans to discontinue activities in the
specific area; and
data exists to show that while
development activity will proceed,
the carrying amount of the E&E asset
will not be recovered in full through
such activity.
This provides relief from the general
requirements of IFRS, which require
annual impairment testing for intangible
assets that are not yet available for use.
Impairment testing calculations
are performed in line with general
impairment requirements and take into
account the time value of money.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
Goodwill
Impairment testing at least annually
Under IFRS, oil and gas companies
are required to test goodwill (and
intangible assets with indefinite useful
lives) for impairment at least annually,
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Impairment reversals
Reversal of impairment losses
restricted
Impairment losses related to goodwill
cannot be reversed. However, for
other assets companies assess
whether there is an indication that
a previously recognised impairment
loss has reversed. If there is such an
indication, then impairment losses are
reversed if the recoverable amount
has increased,subject to certain
restrictions.
Discussion Paper
Extractive Activities
Proposals maintain the exemption from applying
all requirements of IAS 36 to E&E assets
The project teams proposals relating to impairment
included the following.
l
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
IFRS may result in the earlier recognition of provisions than many national GAAPs
Oil and gas companies often are
exposed to legal, contractual and
constructive obligations to meet
the costs of decommissioning and
dismantling assets at the end of their
production life and to restore the site.
These costs are likely to be a significant
item of expenditure for most oil and
gascompanies.
Timing of recognition
A present obligation that is more
likely than not
Decommissioning and environmental
provisions are covered by IAS 37
Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and
Contingent Assets. Recognition of a
provision is required when there is
a present obligation and an outflow
of resources is probable. Probable is
defined as more likely than not.
A present obligation can be legal or
constructive in nature. For oil and
gas companies a legal obligation for
decommissioning and remediation
often is contained in the licence
agreement and related contracts, or in
legislation. However, in some countries
environmental legislation may be less
developed and it may be difficult to
determine the extent of the obligation.
A constructive obligation may arise
from a companys published policies
about environmental clean-up or from
pastpractices.
An obligation to make good damage or
dismantle equipment is provided for in
full when the damage is caused or the
asset installed. This may result in the
recognition of additional amounts or
earlier recognition of such amounts in
IFRS financial statements compared to
previous GAAP.
When the provision arises on
initial recognition of an asset, the
corresponding debit is treated as part of
the cost of the related asset and is not
recognised immediately in profit or loss.
Measurement
Judgement is required to arrive at the
best estimate
The provision is measured at the best
estimate of costs to be incurred. This
takes the time value of money into
account, if material. The best estimate
may be based on the single most likely
cost of decommissioning and takes
uncertainties into account in either
the cash flows or discount rate used in
measuring the provision. The discount
rate should reflect the risks specific to
the liability and adjusting the discount
rate for risk often is complex and
involves a high degree of judgement.
2010 the IASB issued a limited reexposure of the 2005 proposals, which
included a focus on the measurement
of provisions involving services, e.g.
decommissioning. The project currently
is inactive, and the IASB will decide
whether or how to progress the project
when it considers responses to its
Agenda Consultation 2011, which are
due by 30November 2011.
Future developments
The IASB is reviewing accounting for
provisions
In 2005 the IASB began reviewing
the accounting for provisions and an
exposure draft was issued, which
would have resulted in changes to
both the timing of recognition and
the measurement of provisions. In
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Joint arrangements
The term joint venture is a widely used operational term, although not all such arrangements
are joint ventures for accounting purposes. A recently issued standard could significantly
impact the accounting
Determining whether an
arrangement is a joint
arrangement
Companies need to review their
arrangements to determine whether
they should be accounted for as a
joint arrangement
Joint arrangements are a common
way for oil and gas companies to share
the risks and costs of exploration and
production activities, and come in a
variety of forms. Within the sector,
the term joint venture is used widely
as an all-encompassing operational
expression to describe shared working
arrangements. However, under IFRS
there are strict criteria that must be
met in order for joint arrangement
accounting to be applied.
For an arrangement to be a joint
arrangement for accounting
purposes there must be a contractual
arrangement that gives joint control.
Joint control is not determined by
economic interest. Control is based
on the contractual arrangements
and exists when decisions about the
relevant activities require the unanimous
consent of more than one party to
the arrangement. Companies must
review their arrangements to determine
whether joint control exists. When the
company does not have joint control,
the arrangement likely will be accounted
for as an investment, subsidiary or
associate.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Discussion Paper
Extractive Activities
Joint arrangements were not in the scope of
the discussion paper
In commenting on the proposed scope of any
future project by the IASB, some respondents
requested that the IASB consider other issues
that were not specifically covered in the
discussion paper.
These included risk-sharing agreements
such as farm-in/ farm-outs, productionsharing agreements and carried
interests. These issues are routinely
encountered in the oil and gas sector.
Some respondents indicated that they
considered addressing these, and
other additional areas, to be a high
priority in the absence of specific
guidance in IFRS.
These comments underline the
importance and accounting
complexities of risk-sharing
arrangements in the extractive
industries.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Revenue recognition
Oil and gas companies face challenges when applying the revenue recognition
requirements under IFRS due to common industry arrangements that can give rise to
complex revenue issues
Oil and gas companies reporting under
IFRS need to assess whether the risks
and rewards of ownership have been
transferred in order to determine when
to recognise revenue. The determination
of when this occurs can present
challenges for oil and gas companies.
The individual facts and circumstances
will need careful consideration as they
may vary between contracts.
Timing of revenue recognition
There is no industry standard as to the
timing of the transfer of ownership in
oil and gas transactions. The revenue
arising from each transaction is
recognised based on the terms of the
underlying sales agreement.
For most transactions involving the sale
of physical oil and gas, the contractual
terms for the transfer of ownership
will be based on the delivery or lifting
of production. For example, for crude
oil sales generally there are two points
at which title could pass from seller to
buyer: when the crude oil is lifted from
the site of production; or when the
crude oil is delivered to the refinery/
storage depot. For petroleum products
sold to retail distribution networks,
generally revenue is recognised on
delivery to service stations.
Physical exchange of products
The physical exchange of products is
common within the oil and gas industry.
For example, under crude oil buy/sell
arrangements a company agrees to
buy a specified quantity and grade of oil
to be delivered at a specified location,
while simultaneously agreeing to sell
a specified quantity and grade of oil
at a different location with the same
counterparty, generally to facilitate
operational requirements.
In accordance with IAS 18 Revenue,
the swapping of goods or services
that are of a similar nature and value is
Future developments
A new standard on revenue
recognition is expected
The IASB and the US Financial
Accounting Standards Board are
working on a joint project to develop
a comprehensive set of principles for
revenue recognition. An exposure draft
published in 2010 proposed a single
revenue recognition model in which
an entity would recognise revenue as
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Reserves reporting
There is no specific IFRS reporting requirement on reserves, although many oil and gas
companies include an accounting policy for reserves or a commentary in the critical estimates
and judgements note, or in the management discussion and analysis section of the annual report
Oil and gas reserve estimates are
critical information in the evaluation of
oil and gas companies, and reserves
disclosure is an important component
of annual reports in the sector. The
purpose of reserves reporting is to
make available information about the
oil and gas reserves controlled by
companies in the sector. This is vital in
assessing their current performance
and future prospects. Despite their
importance to both the company and
the financial statements, there are no
explicit requirements for the disclosure
of reserve information in IFRS.
Disclosures
In the absence of specific guidance,
oil and gas companies tend to refer
to other requirements, such as those
in the US, Canada, Australia and the
UK. The nature of reserves estimates
is such that, even if all companies
provided disclosure based on a single
classification, meaningful comparison
between companies would be difficult
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Discussion
Paper Extractive
Activities
Significant disclosure requirements
proposed
The project teams proposals relating
to reserves reporting included
thefollowing.
Use of Petroleum Resource
Management System (PRMS)
definitions for reserves
andresources.
The discussion paper noted that
the PRMS is used by many oil
and gas companies for internal
resource management and it also
corresponds closely to market
regulator disclosure requirements
in most jurisdictions that have
formalised reserve disclosure
requirements.
Significant disclosure requirements
relating to reserves and resources,
including:
quantities of proved reserves and
proved plus probable reserves,
with reserve quantities presented
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Financial instruments
The conversion process must include a review of the existence, classification and accounting
for financial instruments, including derivatives. Future changes in the accounting are expected
Oil and gas companies generally have
financial instrument accounting issues
owing to the significant commodity
price risk that they face and the
structures in place to manage this
and other exposures such as currency
fluctuations. A thorough review of the
existence, classification and accounting
for financial instruments will be required
on conversion.
Current requirements
Accounting and disclosure
requirements may be significantly
different from national GAAP
Contracts to buy and sell oil and gas
and other non-financial items may be
included in the scope of the financial
instruments standards. There is an
exemption for contracts that are held
for physical delivery or receipt for
the companys expected purchase,
sale or usage requirements (the own
use exemption). However, specific
conditions must be met to apply this
exemption, and its applicability should
be reviewed carefully.
Specific types of oil and gas contracts
also commonly contain embedded
derivatives that may need to be
accounted for separately. For example,
gas contracts that are not derivatives
themselves may contain embedded
derivatives as a result of a pricing
mechanism linked to an index other than
a gas pricing index.
As it currently stands, IAS 39
Financial Instruments: Recognition
and Measurement requires financial
assets to be classified into one of four
categories: at fair value through profit
or loss; loans and receivables; held to
maturity; and available for sale. Financial
liabilities are categorised as either
financial liabilities at fair value through
profit or loss or other liabilities.
Forthcoming requirements/
Future developments
Simplified classifications
In November 2009 the IASB published
the first chapters of IFRS 9 Financial
Instruments, which will supersede
the requirements of IAS39 Financial
Instruments: Recognition and
Measurement on the classification
and measurement of financial assets.
In October 2010 requirements with
respect to the classification and
measurement of financial liabilities and
the derecognition of financial assets and
financial liabilities were added to IFRS 9.
Most of these requirements have been
carried forward without substantive
amendment from IAS 39. However,
to address the issue of own credit
risk some changes were made to the
fair value option for financial liabilities.
The effective date of IFRS 9 is periods
beginning on or after 1January 2013 but
an exposure draft, open for comment
until 21October 2011, requests views
on whether the effective date should be
pushed back to 1January 2015.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Action
Modify:
general ledger and other reporting systems to capture
new or changed data; and
work procedure documents.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Change
Action
Consolidation of entities
Under IFRS, there is the potential for changes to the
number and type of entities that need to be included in the
groups consolidated financial statements. For example,
the application of the concept of control may be different
under IFRS (based on IFRS10 Consolidated Financial
Statements from 1 January 2013) and previous GAAP.
Reporting packages
Reporting packages may need to be modified to:
gather additional disclosures in the information from
branches or subsidiaries operating on a standard general
ledger package; or
collect information from subsidiaries that use different
financial accounting packages.
Financial reporting tools
Reporting tools can be used to:
perform the consolidation and prepare the financial
statements based on data transferred from the general
ledger; or
prepare only the financial statements based on receipt of
consolidated information from the general ledger.
Modify:
reporting tools used by subsidiaries and branches to
provide financial information;
mappings and interfaces from the general ledger; and
consolidation systems based on additional requirements
such as segment reporting in some cases.
Exploration and
evaluation costs
Interaction between technical E&E processes and accounting systems to clearly identify
milestones such as licence acquisition and determination of commercial reserves.
Impact on master data settings to reflect changes in E&E capitalisation policies.
Impact on general capitalisation process and systems settings based on differences in
eligible costs for capitalisation, e.g. unsuccessful drilling, seismic, pre-feasibility costs.
Allocation of assets to CGUs and depletion units of account.
Depletion,
depreciation &
amortisation
Impact of changes to depreciation methods and useful lives on the posting specifications of
the fixed assets sub-system.
Impact on master data settings and structure based on a component approach to asset
depreciation.
Impact on transition to IFRS of data conversion.
Decommissioning
and environmental
provisions
Impact on the interface with E&E and development assets to reflect work progress and
changes in estimates as extraction occurs.
Accounting systems need to identify discount rates specific to each liability and this may
lead to changes in the sub-ledger and provision calculation models as well as the general
ledger.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Accounting differences
Joint arrangements
Revenue recognition
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Parallel reporting: Timing the changeover from local GAAP to IFRS reporting
Conversion from local GAAP to IFRS will require parallel accounting for a certain period of time. At a minimum, this will happen
for one year as local GAAP continues to be reported, but IFRS comparatives are prepared prior to the go-live date of IFRS.
Parallel reporting may be created either in the real-time collection of information through the accounting source systems to the
general ledger or through top-side adjustments posted as an overlay to the local GAAP reporting system.
The manner and timing of processing information for the comparative periods in real-time or through top-side adjustments will
be based on a number of considerations:
Parallel accounting option in
comparative year
Effect
Considerations
No real-time adjustments to
systems and processes will be
required for comparative period.
Local GAAP reporting will flow
through sub-systems to the general
ledger, i.e. business as usual.
Comparative period will need to be
recast in accordance with IFRS, but
can be achieved off-line.
Migration of local GAAP to IFRS
happens on first day of the year in
which IFRS reporting commences.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Most major ERP systems (e.g. SAP, Oracle, Peoplesoft) are able to handle parallel accounting in their accounting systems.
The two common solutions implemented are the Account solution or the Ledger solution.
Depending on the release of the respective ERP systems, one or both options are available for the general ledger solution.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Benefits of IFRS
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Contact us
Global Energy & Natural Resources
Practice
Global Chairman
Michiel Soeting
KPMG in the UK
T: +44 20 7694 3052
E: michiel.soeting@kpmg.co.uk
Global Head of Audit for ENR
Jimmy Daboo
KPMG in the UK
T: +44 20 7311 8350
E: jimmy.daboo@kpmg.co.uk
Global Head of Oil and Gas
Wayne Chodzicki
KPMG in Canada
T: +1 403 691 8004
E: wchodzicki@kpmg.ca
Regional Oil & Gas Leaders
Australia
Brent Steedman
KPMG in Australia
T: +61 8 9263 7184
E: bsteedman@kpmg.com.au
Brazil
Manuel Fernandes
KPMG in Brazil
T: +55 (21) 3515 9412
E: mfernandes@kpmg.com.br
Canada
Michael McKerracher
KPMG in Canada
T: +1 403 691 8056
E: mmckerracher@kpmg.ca
Chile
Patrick Hanley
KPMG in Chile
T: +56 (2) 798 1230
E: phanley@kpmg.com
China
Peter Fung
KPMG in China
T: +861085087017
E: peter.fung@kpmg.com
France
Oman
Jacques-Francois Lethu
KPMG in France
T: +33 1 5568 7037
E: jlethu@kpmg.fr
Michael Armstrong
KPMG in Oman
T: +968 (24) 709181
E: marmstrong@kpmg.com
India
Qatar
Kaushal Kishore
KPMG in India
T: +91 1243074205
E: kaushalkishore@kpmg.com
Gopal Balasubramaniam
KPMG in Qatar
T: +974 432 9698
E: gopalbala@kpmg.com
Italy
Russia
Massimo Maffeis
KPMG in Italy
T: +39 02 6763 2464
E: mmaffeis@kpmg.it
Boris Lvov
KPMG in Russia
T: +7 (495) 937 2979
E: blvov@kpmg.ru
Japan
Saudi Arabia
Masahiro Mekada
KPMG in Japan
T: +81 (6) 7731 6801
E: mmekada@kpmg.com
Peter Hynes
KPMG in Saudi Arabia
T: +966 (3) 887 7241
E: phynes@kpmg.com
Kazakhstan
South Africa
Asel Khairova
KPMG in Kazakhstan
T: +7 (727) 3200 157
E: akhairova@kpmg.kz
Kuwait
Charles Milner
KPMG in Kuwait
T: +965 247 5090
E: cjmilner@kpmg.com
Sharad Bhandari
KPMG in the U.A.E.
T: +971 (2) 632 3476
E: sbhandari@kpmg.com
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Ruben Rog
KPMG in The Netherlands
T: +31 206 568830
E: rog.ruben@kpmg.nl
Anthony Lobo
KPMG in the UK
T: +44 (0) 20 7311 8482
E: anthony.lobo@kpmg.co.uk
Norway
United States
Mona Larsen
KPMG in Norway
T: +47 4063 9181
E: mona.larsen@kpmg.no
Regina Mayor
KPMG in the US
T: +1 713 319 3137
E: rmayor@kpmg.com
2011 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated.
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the authors and reviewers of this publication,
including:
Pamela Taylor
KPMG in Canada
KPMG in Australia
www.kpmg.com/ifrs
The information contained herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual
or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is
accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information
without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation.
2011 KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International), a Swiss entity. Member firms of the KPMG network of independent
firms are affiliated with KPMG International. KPMG International provides no client services. No member firm has any authority to
obligate or bind KPMG International or any other member firm vis--vis third parties, nor does KPMG International have any such
authority to obligate or bind any member firm. All rights reserved.
The KPMG name, logo and cutting through complexity are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International.
Publication name: Impact of IFRS: Oil and Gas
Publication number: 314698
Publication date: September 2011