Description
In 2016, IASB published a new lease accounting standard, IFRS 16, to replace the older standard, IAS 7. IFRS 16 came into effect from January 1, 2019.
Required:
Discuss the classification, recognition and measurement provisions of IAS 17 for finance and accounting leases. (650 words)
IAS 17 had been criticized for a long time in particular by the airline industry. Discuss the criticism on IAS 17 using the example of an airline. Your answer must clearly discuss the measurement and recognition issues pertaining to IAS 17. (650 marks)
Discuss, in detail, the new rules for lease classification, recognition, measurement and disclosure as per IFRS 16. (875 words)
Discuss the impact of IFRS 16 application on lessee’s statement of financial position, income statement, cashflows and financial ratios. Answers must be supported by actual examples from companies which have transitioned from IAS 17 to IFRS 16. (1325)
Your work should be in a logical and cohesive essay with a brief introduction and conclusion. Please clearly make headings for each task. Place the company financial statement extracts as appendix or as images clearly labelled in your work.
Please do not cite Investopedia, Wikipedia and other unreliable websites. Please research from published academic journals and textbooks the access of which is available to you.
Proper intext citation and bibliography must be done using Harvard style.
General Instructions & Format:
1) This is an individual assignment that you should be writing on your own.
2) The word limit for this assignment is 3,500 words (+/- 10%); excluding graphs, tables, bibliography and table of contents.
3) You are expected to support your work with sources from the literature and use Harvard referencing style as appropriate, in text and in the list of references at the end of your assignment.
Primary Marking Criteria
Comprehensive knowledge
• Detailed understanding of the subject area
• Extensive background study
• Highly focussed answer and well structured
• Logically presented and defended arguments
• No factual/computational errors
• Original interpretation
• New links between topics are developed
• New approach to a problem
• Excellent presentation with very accurate communication
Secondary Marking Criteria
• Exceeds expectations for most primary criteria
• Complete command of subject and other relevant areas
• Ideas/arguments are highly original