ACCOUNTING PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS OF FAIR VALUE APPLICATION IN RUSSIAN AND INTERNATIONAL ACCOUNTING

E.S. DRUZHILOVSKAYA,

Candidate of Economic Sciences, Lecturer, Department of Accounting, Economic Analysis and Audit, Faculty of Finance E-mail: [email protected] Nizhny Novgorod State University

named after N.I. Lobachevsky (National Research University)

The article explores the problems of using one of the most controversial types of estimates in accounting - fair value. The author analyzes the objects and situations of applying fair value in Russian and international accounting. Based on the research, the article makes proposals for expanding the scope of this type of assessment and making appropriate changes to domestic and international accounting standards. The author critically examines the regulations of international standards in relation to the definition and methodology for calculating fair value. Based on the analysis, the article identifies problematic issues in this area and provides recommendations for their solution in order to form reliable values ​​of fair value, both in international and in Russian accounting.

Key words: fair value, Russian accounting standards,

International Financial Reporting Standards

Despite the rather long history of its existence, this type of assessment, such as fair value, still causes heated discussions among domestic and foreign experts. At the same time, this type of assessment continues to be actively used both in international and in foreign national accounting standards. A study of the history of accounting development allows us to conclude that the scope of fair value in the above standards is steadily expanding. Fair value does not yet appear in Russian accounting regulations. But,

as noted by the author earlier, the study of the regulations of these documents, as well as drafts of new domestic accounting standards, suggests that they contain indirect indications of the use of this type of assessment. In addition, draft federal accounting standards for the general government sector1 contain a direct indication of the use of fair value for estimating most reporting indicators. The main situations for the application of this type of assessment in the current international and Russian accounting standards, as well as in draft new domestic standards, are systematized in the table.

As can be seen from the analysis of the data in the table, almost every international standard contains regulations on the use of fair value. This type of assessment also appears in draft Russian accounting standards for the public administration sector. Domestic regulations of the private sector and draft new documents for this sector so far provide only indirect use of fair value. At the same time, we believe that the new federal standards of the private sector, by analogy with the standards of the public administration sector, will introduce regulations on the use of this type of assessment.

As the author substantiated earlier, by now the conditions for using fair value in Russian accounting standards have already taken shape. Thus, today one of the most important tasks of reforming domestic accounting is the development of an appropriate regulatory framework for the application of this type of assessment. It is necessary to define a list of situations where fair value is used, introduce appropriate regulations into domestic accounting standards that establish the rules for accounting for individual items, and develop a special standard containing the definition and methodology for calculating fair value. As a basis

1 Federal standards for the public sector // Ministry of Finance of Russia: official website. URL: http://www.mmfm. ru/ru/budget/sfo/fsfo.

you in this case will serve International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).

However, as noted earlier, the requirements of IFRS themselves are not ideal and in some cases require significant improvement. We critically examine the main regulations of international standards in relation to fair value and, on the basis of the analysis, determine in which situations and for which accounting objects it is advisable to use this type of assessment, and which international rules for calculating this assessment need to be changed to form reliable information in the accounting and reporting of organizations.

First of all, let's turn to the objects and situations of applying fair value. The main situations of using this type of assessment in international and Russian accounting standards are listed in the table. It seems appropriate to correct this list, both in IFRS and in the development of the relevant regulations of domestic standards.

As can be seen from the analysis of the data in the table, IFRS provides only certain situations of using fair value to evaluate accounting items. For property, plant and equipment in IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment, investment property in IAS 40 Investment Property and intangible assets in IAS 38 Intangible Assets, this type of valuation is used only to determine the cost of listed items acquired in exchange for non-monetary assets, and for their revaluation. Fair value is not actually used to measure inventories in IAS 2 Share-based Payment.

According to the author, the list of situations for applying this assessment for these objects can be much wider. For example, such an assessment should be used to form the initial value of the above assets received free of charge, on account of the contribution to the authorized capital, identified during the inventory, transferred when the participant left the organization as payment for his share in the authorized capital of this organization. It has

The main situations of using fair value in international and Russian accounting standards

International Financial Reporting Standards: IFRS IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment Initial measurement of property, plant and equipment acquired in exchange for non-monetary assets; subsequent valuation of fixed assets during revaluation

IAS 17 Leases Valuation of assets at initial recognition by a lessee

IAS 18 Revenue Estimation of revenue

IAS 19 Employee Benefits Valuation of Plan Assets

IAS 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance Cost of assets received as a government grant

IAS 26 Accounting for Pension Plans Valuation of Plan Assets

IAS 36 Impairment of Assets One of two values ​​in determining recoverable amount

IAS 38 Intangible Assets Initial measurement of intangible assets acquired in exchange for non-monetary assets; subsequent valuation of intangible assets during revaluation

IAS 40 Investment Property Initial measurement of investment property acquired in exchange for non-cash assets; subsequent measurement of the property using the fair value model

IAS 41 Agriculture Valuation of biological assets and agricultural products

IFRS 1 First-time Adoption of IFRS Cost of property, plant and equipment, investment property, intangible assets

IFRS 2 Share-based Payment Measuring the goods or services received and the corresponding increase in equity for equity-based payment transactions; valuation of goods or services purchased and liability assumed for cash-settled equity transactions

IFRS 9 Financial Instruments Initial and subsequent measurement of financial instruments

IFRS 13 Fair Value Measurement Initial and subsequent measurement of assets and liabilities

International Public Sector Accounting Standards: IPSAS IPSAS 9 Exchange Revenue Estimating Revenue

IPSAS 12 Inventories Valuation of inventories acquired through non-exchange transactions

IPSAS 13 Leases Measurement of assets and liabilities on initial recognition by a lessee

IPSAS 16 Investment Property Cost of investment property acquired through a non-exchange transaction; subsequent measurement of the property using the fair value model

Table continuation

Type or group of accounting standards (normative documents) Number and name of the standard Regulation of the standard on the use of fair value

IPSAS 17 Property, Plant and Equipment The cost of property, plant and equipment acquired through a non-exchange transaction; subsequent valuation of property, plant and equipment when applying the revaluation model

IPSAS 21 Impairment of Non-Cash-Generating Assets and IPSAS 26 Impairment of Cash-Generating Assets One of two values ​​in determining the recoverable amount

IPSAS 25 Employee Benefits Valuation of plan assets

IPSAS 27 Agriculture Valuation of biological assets and agricultural products

IPSAS 28 Financial Instruments: Presentation, IPSAS 29 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement and IPSAS 30 Financial Instruments: Disclosures Valuation of Financial Instruments

IPSAS 31 Intangible Assets The cost of intangible assets acquired through non-exchange transactions and by exchange for a non-monetary asset or assets, or a combination of monetary and non-monetary assets; subsequent valuation of intangible assets when applying the revalued cost accounting model

Russian Accounting Standards: current regulatory documents Federal Law No. 208-FZ dated July 27, 2010 “On Consolidated Financial Statements” and Order No. 160n of the Russian Ministry of Finance dated November 25, 2011 “On the Enactment of IFRS and IFRS Interpretations in the Russian Federation” Consolidated financial statements of Russian organizations is compiled in accordance with IFRS, in which, as noted earlier, fair value is widely used to measure reporting indicators

Accounting regulation “Accounting for intangible assets” (PBU 14/2007) Indirect permission to use fair value for the subsequent assessment of intangible assets (permission to record the impairment of intangible assets in accordance with IFRS, which require the use of fair value to determine the impairment of assets. Thus, Russian organizations that reflect the impairment of intangible assets under RAS 14/2007 must use fair value)

Draft Russian Accounting Standards for the Private Sector Draft RAS “Fixed Assets” Similar to RAS 14/2007: Allowing impairment of property, plant and equipment to be recorded in accordance with the procedure contained in IFRS, which leads to the use of fair value in the subsequent valuation of these assets

Draft Russian General Government Accounting Standards Draft document “Conceptual Framework for Accounting and Reporting in the General Government Sector” free of charge or for a nominal fee

End of table

Type or group of accounting standards (normative documents) Number and name of the standard Regulation of the standard on the use of fair value

Draft Fixed Assets Cost of property, plant and equipment and investment property acquired through a non-exchange transaction and in exchange for a combination of financial and non-financial assets; subsequent measurement of these assets when applying the fair value model

Draft standard "Leases" Measurement of assets and liabilities at initial recognition by the lessee

Draft standard “Impairment of Assets” One of two values ​​in determining the recoverable amount

it makes sense to apply fair value also for the initial measurement of inventories received in exchange for non-cash assets and received as a balance from the disposal of property, plant and equipment and other assets.

In IAS 17 Leases, fair value is used only to measure assets on initial recognition by a lessee. Based on this type of valuation, it also makes sense to determine the valuation of assets returned to the lessor by the lessee under a finance lease.

According to the author, the lack of regulations in international standards on the formation of the valuation of the above-mentioned assets in practice can lead to discrepancies and, as a result, to incomparability of information in the financial statements of different organizations. Based on this, it is advisable to include in the above IFRS regulations, according to which the initial cost of fixed assets, investment property, intangible assets and inventories received free of charge, as a contribution to the authorized capital, identified during the inventory and transferred upon the participant’s exit from the organization as payment for its share in the authorized capital is determined on the basis of fair value. IAS 2 should also state that the initial measurement of inventories received in exchange for non-cash assets and received as a balance from the disposal of property, plant and equipment and other assets is based on fair value. And in IAS 17 it is appropriate to indicate that the assessment

assets returned to the lessor by the lessee under a finance lease is determined using fair value.

It makes sense to introduce similar regulations into the new federal accounting standards "Fixed Assets", "Intangible Assets", "Inventory", "Investment Property" and "Rent", some of which are currently under development, some -. under discussion. In the author's opinion, it is expedient to include in these standards the requirements for the use of fair value for the valuation of these assets, which exist in IFRS. In the above-mentioned domestic standards, according to the author, it makes sense to establish requirements according to which the initial cost of fixed assets, intangible assets, stocks and investment property received free of charge, during inventory, in exchange for non-monetary assets, on account of a contribution to the authorized capital, transferred during withdrawal of a participant from an organization as payment for its share in the authorized capital of this organization, is determined on the basis of fair value. In the developed federal standard "Inventories" it is also advisable to indicate that the initial assessment of inventories received as a balance from the disposal of fixed assets and other assets is formed using fair value. The author proposes to include in the federal standard "Rent" being developed the regulations according to which the valuation of assets received under a leasing agreement (in

IFRS terminology - leases), as well as assets that were on the balance sheet of the lessee and returned to the lessor (in IFRS terminology - returned to the lessor by the lessee during a financial lease), is determined on the basis of fair value.

With regard to the use of this type of assessment in Russian accounting standards for other accounting objects, it seems appropriate to use regulations identical to international ones. In other words, the author proposes to develop domestic federal standards "Impairment of assets", "Employee benefits", "Accounting and reporting on pension plans", "Payments based on equity instruments", "Income of the organization", "Financial instruments", "Accounting for state subsidies and disclosure of information on government assistance” and “Agriculture” and include requirements for the use of fair value in these standards, similar to the regulations of the corresponding IFRS.

In order to reliably determine the fair value of the above accounting items, it is necessary to include a standard in the system of Russian accounting standards that contains the definition and rules for calculating this type of assessment. It is advisable to form this document on the basis of IFRS 13 “Fair Value Measurement”. At the same time, as it was justified earlier, the regulations of this standard contain a lot of open and debatable issues and need to be improved. This circumstance, of course, should be taken into account when creating a domestic standard. Let us examine in detail which IFRS regulations need to be changed in order to form reliable values ​​of fair value both in international and in Russian accounting.

Let's start with determining fair value. According to the author, the definition of this type of assessment, enshrined in IFRS 13, seems to be controversial. Under this standard2, fair value is the price that

2 "On the Enactment of International Financial Reporting Standards and Interpretations of International Financial Reporting Standards in the Russian Federation": Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated November 25, 2011 No. 160n.

would have been received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. This definition is incomplete as it does not make it clear who the market participants are and what is meant by the valuation date. Of course, in Appendix A of IFRS 13 the concept of “market participants” appears, but there is no reference to it in the definition of fair value itself. The concept of "assessment date" in the list of terms used is not disclosed at all.

The very interpretation of the concept of “market participants” in IFRS 13 is debatable. According to Appendix A of this standard, only buyers and sellers are understood as the specified participants. At the same time, the parties to a transaction with an object, the assessment of which is determined on the basis of fair value, can be not only buyers and sellers, but also creditors, lenders, employees and other persons. Of course, you can assume that the terms "buyers" and "sellers" are applied in a broad sense -. as persons providing and consuming certain services. However, one cannot but agree that these terms are not used in such a broad sense in the financial statements.

Following further in paragraphs. “a”, “b”, “c” and Annex A of IFRS 13, the characteristics of market participants are similar, in essence, to the characteristics that were contained in the definition of fair value given earlier in the IFRS system: good knowledge, willingness to enter into a transaction and independence . Thus, the previous definition of fair value in relation to the characteristics of the participants in the transaction was more precise and concise.

When analyzing the interpretation of the concept of “fair value” in IFRS 13, it is necessary to pay attention to the contradictions contained in this standard regarding the correlation between fair and market values. In the interpretation of fair value in paragraph 2 of this document, emphasis is placed on the fact that fair value is a market estimate. This formulation leads, as a result, to the identification of fair and market values. However, in accordance with paragraphs. 62, B5-B11 IFRS

(IFRS) 13, fair value can be calculated using market, replacement and discounted values. These requirements, in contrast to the regulations of clause 2 of IFRS 13, indicate that fair and market values ​​are not synonymous.

The question of the relationship between the categories "fair value" and "market value" still does not have an unambiguous answer in the educational and scientific literature. Some authors identify these categories, others differentiate them. According to the author, fair and market values ​​are two different types of valuations. In this case, the fair value may be equal to the market value, but only if there is an active market. In the absence of an active market, market value cannot be measured reliably, but fair value can be estimated under certain conditions.

Thus, the above-mentioned regulations of clause 2 of IFRS 13, according to the author, need to be changed. The requirements of this paragraph (“fair value is a market estimate”) should be understood not as an identification of fair and market values, but as an indication of the objectivity (and not subjectivity) of fair value. In order to avoid inconsistencies in the wording of paragraph 2 of IFRS 13, it is advisable to replace the term "market valuation" with the term "objective valuation".

Concluding the study of the interpretation of the concept of "fair value" in international standards, one should pay attention to the lack of a single definition of this type of assessment in the IFRS system. For example, IFRS 13, IFRS (LA^) ​​16, IFRS (LA^) ​​38, IFRS (LA^) ​​2 and many other standards apply a new definition of fair value, and in IFRS (LA^) ​​17 and IFRS ( IFRS) 2 - old (the amount for which an asset could be exchanged or a liability settled in a transaction between knowledgeable, willing, unrelated parties). Given this fact, it is necessary to establish a single definition in the IFRS system.

The methodology for calculating fair value, according to the author, is presented in IFRS

13 is quite general. The document only states that the fair value measurement methods are the market approach, the cost approach and the income approach. However, IFRS 13 does not provide a detailed description of the listed approaches and the specifics of their application in certain situations. This standard does not provide references to sources from which you can get the necessary detailed information. So, for example, paragraph 63 of IFRS 13 states that one or multiple valuation methods can be used to calculate fair value. However, the criteria for choosing methods for determining fair value are not presented in the above-mentioned standard. When characterizing multiple fair value measurement methods, IFRS 13 indicates that the relevant fair value measures should be measured by considering the appropriateness of the range of values ​​indicated by these indicators. And the fair value measurement should be that value within that range that most accurately represents fair value in the circumstances. Such regulation raises the question: how to calculate the required range used in multiple valuation methods, based on the most accurate value of the required fair value value - after all, it is the last value that is unknown.

Another example of the lack of comprehensive guidance on the methods for calculating fair value is the regulation of paragraphs. B6 and B7 of IFRS 13 on the use of market multiples and matrix pricing when using a market approach to measure fair value. Paragraph B6 provides rather general guidance on the possibility of using market multiples that arise from a set of comparables, but does not provide specific guidance on how those multiples can be used to calculate fair value. Paragraph B7 refers to the possibility of using such a method as matrix pricing. At the same time, matrix pricing is a mathematical method, the application of which requires

additional knowledge and skills. However, IFRS 13 does not provide guidance on the use of this method, nor does it indicate where the mathematical method used can be found.

Examples to support the conclusion that the fair value methodology is set out in IFRS 13 in a sufficiently generalized form can be given further. All of them indicate that the application of the regulations of this standard in practice can raise many questions. Obviously, the IFRS 13 regulations need to be specified. Particularly close attention to this problem should be paid when creating a Russian analogue of this international standard, since domestic organizations are much less ready to make independent decisions within the framework of these issues compared to foreign ones. At the same time, it seems appropriate to develop not only the Russian federal standard on the methodology for calculating fair value, but also recommendations for the formation of this type of assessment, containing a fairly detailed description and examples of methods for determining this assessment. Such recommendations will comply with the accounting regulation documents stipulated by Federal Law No. 402-FZ of 06.12.2011 “On Accounting”, namely, they will fall under the category of recommendations in the field of accounting.

Analyzing the methodology for calculating fair value, the author also draws attention to a number of debatable issues arising from the requirements of IFRS 13. Paragraph 17 of this standard allows an organization not to conduct an exhausting search for all possible markets to identify the market, according to which fair value should be determined. However, in doing so, the organization should take into account all information that is reasonably available. In the absence of evidence to the contrary

The market in which an entity would enter into a transaction to sell an asset or transfer a liability is considered to be the market from which fair value is calculated. Of course, the listed regulations are due to the need for rational accounting. At the same time, such rules, from the author's point of view, lead to subjectivity in determining fair value, since different organizations can enter into a transaction in different markets. Consequently, the fair value of the same accounting item, formed by these organizations, may differ significantly.

In addition, it is not clear from the above IFRS requirements how exactly to strike a balance between using all reasonably available information and conducting an exhaustive search of all possible markets to calculate fair value. As a result, entities may not take into account all available data, which will not allow a reliable assessment of fair value. Given the desire of entities to reduce the cost of maintaining records, it can be assumed that there will be a deliberate omission of all reasonably available information, which will lead to a misstatement of fair value. Moreover, the listed rules of IFRS 13 open the possibility for organizations to use only the information that is beneficial to them. As a result, fair value may be deliberately misrepresented in order to achieve the intended result.

Another controversial issue in IFRS 13 is the regulation on determining the fair value of non-financial assets. Paragraph 30 of this Standard requires an entity to measure the fair value of those assets assuming their highest and best use by market participants, even though the entity itself may not use those assets to its highest and best use. The highest and best use, as defined in IFRS 13 Appendix A, is the use by market participants of a non-financial asset that is capable of maximizing the value of the asset or a group of assets and liabilities (for example,

business) in which the asset would be used. According to the author, such rules can lead to an overestimation of the above-mentioned assets, and, consequently, to a violation of the prudence principle.

We also note some of the contradictions arising from the regulations of IFRS 13. Paragraph 19 of this standard states that since organizations engaged in different activities may have access to different markets, the markets on which fair value is determined for one and the same the same asset or liability may be different for different entities. Therefore, the market from which fair value is calculated, and therefore the market participants, needs to be considered from the entity's point of view, given the differences between entities engaged in different activities. According to the author, these requirements are contrary to the regulations of clause 2 of IFRS 13, according to which fair value is not an assessment formed taking into account the specifics of the organization. The rules listed in this International Standard need to be aligned with each other.

When examining the methodology for calculating fair value in international standards, it is necessary to pay attention to the absence in the IFRS system of uniform regulations for the formation of this type of assessment. Indeed, IFRS 13 does not apply to lease transactions and share-based payment transactions that fall within the scope of IAS 17 and IFRS 2, respectively. As a result, international standards contain different rules for calculating one and the same type of evaluation. To solve this problem, it seems appropriate to establish a unified methodology for the formation of fair value in the IFRS system.

Analyzing the requirements for calculating the above type of assessment, it should be noted that IFRS does not say who should determine the fair value: an accountant or an appraiser (or both). Relevant regulations should be included in international standards.

Referring to the activities of professional appraisers, we would like to draw your attention to the fact that the approaches to the calculation of fair value (market, cost and income) provided for by IFRS 13 fully coincide with the approaches to determining the market value contained in international valuation standards. But one cannot but admit that International Valuation Standards (IVS) and International Financial Reporting Standards use different concepts to refer to the same valuation, determined on the basis of market, cost and income approaches: in IVS it is “market value”, in IFRS it is “ fair value". As argued above, fair value and market value are not synonymous. According to the author, the technique under consideration refers specifically to fair value. This suggests that the “fair value” category should also be introduced into the International Valuation Standards, bringing it in line with the IFRS regulations.

All of the above, of course, should be taken into account when developing the Russian federal standard “Fair Value Measurement”, as well as when improving the requirements of domestic valuation standards. For the above reasons, we believe that the requirements of this federal standard should be more detailed in comparison with the regulations of IFRS 13.

Bibliography

1. Getman V.G. Urgent issues of improving the accounting of fixed assets // International Accounting. 2013. No. 14. S. 2-13.

2. Druzhilovskaya T.Yu., Druzhilovskaya E.S. New requirements for the composition of financial statements and the formation of the balance sheet of non-profit organizations: their possible changes // Accounting in budgetary and non-profit organizations. 2013. No. 7. S. 19-27.

3. Druzhilovskaya T.Yu., Igonina T.V. Directions for convergence of accounting of pay obligations in Russia with the requirements of IFRS // International Accounting. 2012. No. 6. S. 2-11.

4. Druzhilovskaya E.S. Methodology for estimating stocks in accounting // International Accounting. 2012. No. 7. S. 16-25.

5. Druzhilovskaya E.S. Improving the methodology for assessing intangible assets in accounting // International Accounting. 2012. No. 16. S. 7-15.

6. Druzhilovskaya E.S. Modern problems of reserves assessment in RAS and IFRS and ways to solve them // International Accounting. 2013. No. 38. S. 42-54.

7. Plotnikov V.S., Plotnikova O.V. Analysis of fair value assessment in accordance with the draft concept of international integrated reporting // International accounting. 2014. No. 9. P. 9-18.

8. Rozhnova O.V. Topical issues of assessment at the fair value of assets and liabilities // International Accounting.

2013. No. 23. S. 2-8.

9. Cantrell B.W., McInnis J.M., Yust C.G. Predicting Credit Losses: Loan Fair Values ​​versus Historical Costs // The Accounting Review. January.

2014. Vol. 89. No. 1.Pp. 147-176.

10. Guthrie K., Irving J.H., Sokolowsky J. Accounting Choice and the Fair Value Option // Accounting Horizons. September. 2011 Vol. 25. No. 3. Pp.487-510.

11. Valencia A., Smith T.J., Ang J. The Effect of Noisy Fair Value Measures on Bank Capital Adequacy Ratios // Accounting Horizons. December. 2013. Vol. 27. No. 4.Pp. 693-710.

Issues on accounting

APPLICATION OF FAIR VALUE IN THE RUSSIAN AND INTERNATIONAL ACCOUNTING

Emiliia S. DRUZHILOVSKAIA

The article researches the problems of application in accounting of one of the most controversial types of evaluation - fair value The author analyzes the objects and situations of the fair value use in the Russian and international accounting Based on the conducted researches, the article makes an assumption on extension of the scope of application of this type of evaluation and seeks the appropriate changes in domestic and international accounting standards The author critically examines the international standards regulation in terms of definitions and methods of calculation of fair value . Based on the conducted analysis, the article identifies the problematic issues in this area and provides recommendations for their solution in order to form a reliable fair value, both in international and Russian accounting.

Keywords: fair value, Russian Accounting Standards, International Financial Reporting Standards

1. Get "man V.G. Nazrevshie voprosy sovershen-stvovaniia bukhgalterskogo ucheta osnovnykh sredstv

Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet-International accounting, 2013, no. 14, pp. 2-13.

2. Druzhilovskaia T.Iu., Druzhilovskaia E.S. Novye trebovaniia k sostavu bukhgalterskoi otch-etnosti i formirovaniiu bukhgalterskogo balansa nekommercheskikh organizatsii: ikh vozmozhnye izmeneniia. Bukhgalterskii uchetv biudzhetnykh i nekommercheskikh organizatsiiakh - Accounting in budgetary and non-commercial organizations, 2013, no. 7, pp. 19-27.

3. Druzhilovskaia T.Iu., Igonina T.V. Napravle-niia sblizheniia bukhgalterskogo ucheta obiazatel "stv po oplate truda v Rossii s trebovaniiami MSFO. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet - International accounting, 2012, no. 6, pp. 2-11.

4. Druzhilovskaia E.S. Metodika otsenki zapasov v bukhgalterskom uchete .Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet - International accounting, 2012, no. 7, pp.16-25.

5. Druzhilovskaia E.S. Sovershenstvovanie metodiki otsenki nematerial "nykh aktivov v bukhgal-terskom uchete. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet - International accounting,

2012, no. 16, pp.7-15.

6. Druzhilovskaia E.S. Modern problemy otsenki zapasov v RSBU i MSFO i puti ikh resheniia . Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet - International accounting,

2013, no.38, pp.42-54.

7. Plotnikov V.S., Plotnikova O.V. Analiz otsenki spravedlivoi stoimosti v sootvetstvii s proek-tom kontseptsii mezhdunarodnoi integrirovannoi otchetnosti . Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet - International accounting, 2014, no. 9, pp. 9-18.

8. Rozhnova O.V. Aktual "nye voprosy otsenki po spravedlivoi stoimosti aktivov i obiazatel" stv. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet - International accounting, 2013, no. 23, pp. 2-8.

9. Cantrell B.W., McInnis J.M., Yust C.G. Predicting Credit Losses: Loan Fair Values ​​versus Historical Costs. The Accounting Review, January, 2014, vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 147-176.

10. Guthrie K., Irving J.H., Sokolowsky J. Accounting Choice and the Fair Value Option. Accounting Horizons, September, 2011, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 487-510.

11. Valencia A., Smith T.J., Ang J. The Effect of Noisy Fair Value Measures on Bank Capital Adequacy Ratios. Accounting Horizons, December, 2013, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 693-710.

Emiliia S. DRUZHILOVSKAIA

Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod -National Research University, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation [email protected]. en

The article explores the problems of using one of the most controversial types of estimates in accounting - fair value. The author analyzes the objects and situations of applying fair value in Russian and international accounting. Based on the research, the article makes proposals for expanding the scope of this type of assessment and making appropriate changes to domestic and international accounting standards. The author critically examines the regulations of international standards in relation to the definition and methodology for calculating fair value. Based on the analysis, the article identifies problematic issues in this area and provides recommendations for their solution in order to form reliable values ​​of fair value, both in international and in Russian accounting.

Despite the rather long history of its existence, this type of assessment, such as fair value, still causes heated discussions among domestic and foreign experts. At the same time, this type of assessment continues to be actively used both in international and in foreign national accounting standards. A study of the history of accounting development allows us to conclude that the scope of fair value in the above standards is steadily expanding. Fair value does not yet appear in Russian accounting regulations. However, as noted by the author earlier, the study of the regulations of these documents, as well as drafts of new domestic accounting standards, suggests that they contain indirect indications of the use of this type of assessment. In addition, draft federal accounting standards for the general government sector contain a direct indication of the use of fair value for estimating most reporting indicators. The main situations for the application of this type of assessment in the current international and Russian accounting standards, as well as in draft new domestic standards, are systematized in the table.

The main situations of using fair value in international and Russian accounting standards

As can be seen from the analysis of the data in the table, almost every international standard contains regulations on the use of fair value. This type of assessment also appears in draft Russian accounting standards for the public administration sector. Domestic regulations of the private sector and draft new documents for this sector so far provide only indirect use of fair value. At the same time, we believe that the new federal standards of the private sector, by analogy with the standards of the public administration sector, will introduce regulations on the use of this type of assessment.

As the author substantiated earlier, by now the conditions for using fair value in Russian accounting standards have already taken shape. Thus, today one of the most important tasks of reforming domestic accounting is the development of an appropriate regulatory framework for the application of this type of assessment. It is necessary to define a list of situations where fair value is used, introduce appropriate regulations into domestic accounting standards that establish the rules for accounting for individual items, and develop a special standard containing the definition and methodology for calculating fair value. In this case, International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) will serve as the basis.

At the same time, as noted earlier, the requirements of IFRS themselves are not ideal and in some cases require significant improvement. We critically examine the main regulations of international standards in relation to fair value and, on the basis of the analysis, determine in which situations and for which accounting objects it is advisable to use this type of assessment, and which international rules for calculating this assessment need to be changed to form reliable information in the accounting and reporting of organizations.

First of all, let's turn to the objects and situations of applying fair value. The main situations of using this type of assessment in international and Russian accounting standards are listed in the table. It seems appropriate to correct this list, both in IFRS and in the development of the relevant regulations of domestic standards.

As can be seen from the analysis of the data in the table, IFRS provides only certain situations of using fair value to evaluate accounting items. For property, plant and equipment in IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment, investment property in IAS 40 Investment Property and intangible assets in IAS 38 Intangible Assets, this type of valuation is used only to determine the cost of listed items acquired in exchange for non-monetary assets, and for their revaluation. Fair value is not actually used to measure inventories in IAS 2 Share-based Payment.

According to the author, the list of situations for applying this assessment for these objects can be much wider. For example, such an assessment should be used to form the initial value of the above assets received free of charge, on account of the contribution to the authorized capital, identified during the inventory, transferred when the participant left the organization as payment for his share in the authorized capital of this organization. It makes sense to apply fair value to the initial measurement of inventories received in exchange for non-cash assets and received as a balance from the disposal of property, plant and equipment and other assets.

In IAS 17 Leases, fair value is used only to measure assets on initial recognition by a lessee. Based on this type of valuation, it also makes sense to determine the valuation of assets returned to the lessor by the lessee under a finance lease.

According to the author, the lack of regulations in international standards on the formation of the valuation of the above-mentioned assets in practice can lead to discrepancies and, as a result, to incomparability of information in the financial statements of different organizations. Based on this, it is advisable to include in the above IFRS regulations, according to which the initial cost of fixed assets, investment property, intangible assets and inventories received free of charge, as a contribution to the authorized capital, identified during the inventory and transferred upon the participant’s exit from the organization as payment for its share in the authorized capital is determined on the basis of fair value. IAS 2 should also state that the initial measurement of inventories received in exchange for non-cash assets and received as a balance from the disposal of property, plant and equipment and other assets is based on fair value. And in IAS 17, it is appropriate to specify that the valuation of assets returned to the lessor by the lessee under a finance lease is determined using fair value.

It makes sense to introduce similar regulations into the new federal accounting standards "Fixed Assets", "Intangible Assets", "Inventory", "Investment Property" and "Rent", some of which are currently under development, some are under discussion. In the author's opinion, it is expedient to include in these standards the requirements for the use of fair value for the valuation of these assets, which exist in IFRS. In the above-mentioned domestic standards, according to the author, it makes sense to establish requirements according to which the initial cost of fixed assets, intangible assets, stocks and investment property received free of charge, during inventory, in exchange for non-monetary assets, on account of a contribution to the authorized capital, transferred during withdrawal of a participant from an organization as payment for its share in the authorized capital of this organization, is determined on the basis of fair value. In the federal standard "Inventories" being developed, it is also advisable to indicate that the initial assessment of inventories received as a balance from the disposal of fixed assets and other assets is formed using fair value. The author proposes to include into the developed federal standard "Lease" the regulations according to which the valuation of assets received under a leasing agreement (in IFRS terminology - lease), as well as assets that were on the balance sheet of the lessee and returned to the lessor (in IFRS terminology - returned to the lessor by the lessee upon finance lease) is determined on a fair value basis.

With regard to the use of this type of assessment in Russian accounting standards for other accounting objects, it seems appropriate to use regulations identical to international ones. In other words, the author proposes to develop domestic federal standards "Impairment of assets", "Employee benefits", "Accounting and reporting on pension plans", "Payments based on equity instruments", "Income of the organization", "Financial instruments", "Accounting for state subsidies and disclosure of government assistance” and “Agriculture” and include in these standards requirements for the use of fair value, similar to the regulations of the corresponding IFRS.

In order to reliably determine the fair value of the above accounting items, it is necessary to include a standard in the system of Russian accounting standards that contains the definition and rules for calculating this type of assessment. It is advisable to form this document on the basis of IFRS 13 "Fair Value Measurement". At the same time, as it was justified earlier, the regulations of this standard contain a lot of open and debatable questions and need to be improved. This circumstance, of course, should be taken into account when creating a domestic standard. Let us examine in detail which IFRS regulations need to be changed in order to form reliable values ​​of fair value both in international and in Russian accounting.

Let's start with determining fair value. According to the author, the definition of this type of assessment, enshrined in IFRS 13, seems to be controversial. Under that standard, fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. This definition is incomplete as it does not make it clear who the market participants are and what is meant by the valuation date. Of course, IFRS 13 Appendix A contains the concept of "market participants", but there is no reference to it in the definition of fair value itself. The concept of "assessment date" in the list of terms used is not disclosed at all.

The interpretation of the concept of "market participants" in IFRS 13 is also debatable. According to Appendix A of this standard, only buyers and sellers are understood as the specified participants. At the same time, the parties to a transaction with an object, the assessment of which is determined on the basis of fair value, can be not only buyers and sellers, but also creditors, lenders, employees and other persons. Of course, we can assume that the terms "buyers" and "sellers" are used in a broad sense - as persons providing and consuming certain services. However, one cannot but agree that these terms are not used in such a broad sense in the financial statements.

Following further in paragraphs. "a", "b", "c" and "d" of Appendix A IFRS (IFRS) 13 characteristics of market participants are similar, in fact, to the characteristics that were contained in the definition of fair value given earlier in the IFRS system: good knowledge, willingness to deal and independence. Thus, the previous definition of fair value in relation to the characteristics of the participants in the transaction was more precise and concise.

Analyzing the interpretation of the concept of "fair value" in IFRS (IFRS) 13, it is necessary to pay attention to the contradictions contained in this standard regarding the correlation between fair and market values. In the interpretation of fair value in paragraph 2 of this document, emphasis is placed on the fact that fair value is a market estimate. This formulation leads, as a result, to the identification of fair and market values. However, in accordance with paragraphs. 62, B5-B11 of IFRS 13, market, replacement and present value can be used to calculate fair value. These requirements, in contrast to the regulations of clause 2 of IFRS 13, indicate that fair and market values ​​are not synonymous.

The question of the relationship between the categories "fair value" and "market value" still does not have an unambiguous answer in the educational and scientific literature. Some authors identify these categories, others distinguish them. According to the author, fair and market values ​​are two different types of valuations. In this case, the fair value may be equal to the market value, but only if there is an active market. In the absence of an active market, market value cannot be measured reliably, but fair value can be estimated under certain conditions.

Thus, the above-mentioned regulations of clause 2 of IFRS 13, according to the author, need to be changed. The requirements of this paragraph (“fair value is a market estimate”) should be understood not as an identification of fair and market values, but as an indication of the objectivity (rather than subjectivity) of fair value. In order to avoid inconsistencies in the wording of paragraph 2 of IFRS 13, it is advisable to replace the term "market valuation" with the term "objective valuation".

Concluding the study of the interpretation of the concept of "fair value" in international standards, one should pay attention to the lack of a single definition of this type of assessment in the IFRS system. For example, IFRS 13, IAS 16, IAS 38, IAS 2 and many other standards apply a new definition of fair value, while IAS 17 and IFRS 2 apply a new definition of fair value. old (the amount for which an asset could be exchanged or a liability settled in a transaction between knowledgeable, willing, unrelated parties). Given this fact, it is necessary to establish a single definition in the IFRS system.

The fair value calculation methodology, according to the author, is presented in IFRS 13 rather generally. The document only states that the fair value measurement methods are the market approach, the cost approach and the income approach. However, IFRS 13 does not provide a detailed description of the listed approaches and the specifics of their application in certain situations. This standard does not provide references to sources from which you can get the necessary detailed information. So, for example, paragraph 63 of IFRS 13 states that one or multiple valuation methods can be used to calculate fair value. However, the criteria for choosing methods for determining fair value are not presented in the above-mentioned standard. When characterizing multiple fair value measurement methods, IFRS 13 indicates that the relevant fair value measures should be measured by considering the appropriateness of the range of values ​​indicated by these indicators. And the fair value measurement should be that value within that range that most accurately represents fair value in the circumstances. Such regulation raises the question: how to calculate the required range used in multiple valuation methods, based on the most accurate value of the desired value of fair value - after all, it is the last value that is unknown.

Another example of the lack of comprehensive guidance on the methods for calculating fair value is the regulation of paragraphs. B6 and B7 of IFRS 13 on the use of market multiples and matrix pricing when using a market approach to measure fair value. Paragraph B6 provides rather general guidance on the possibility of using market multiples that arise from a set of comparables, but does not provide specific guidance on how those multiples can be used to calculate fair value. Paragraph B7 refers to the possibility of using such a method as matrix pricing. At the same time, matrix pricing is a mathematical method, the application of which requires additional knowledge and skills. However, IFRS 13 does not provide guidance on the use of this method, nor does it indicate where the mathematical method used can be found.

Examples to support the conclusion that the fair value methodology is set out in IFRS 13 in a sufficiently generalized form can be given further. All of them indicate that the application of the regulations of this standard in practice can raise many questions. Obviously, the IFRS 13 regulations need to be specified. Particularly close attention to this problem should be paid when creating a Russian analogue of this international standard, since domestic organizations are much less ready to make independent decisions within the framework of these issues compared to foreign ones. At the same time, it seems appropriate to develop not only the Russian federal standard on the methodology for calculating fair value, but also recommendations for the formation of this type of assessment, containing a fairly detailed description and examples of methods for determining this assessment. Such recommendations will comply with the accounting regulation documents stipulated by Federal Law No. 402-FZ of 06.12.2011 "On Accounting", namely, they will fall into the category of recommendations in the field of accounting.

Analyzing the methodology for calculating fair value, the author also draws attention to a number of debatable issues arising from the requirements of IFRS 13. Paragraph 17 of this standard allows an organization not to conduct an exhausting search for all possible markets to identify the market, according to which fair value should be determined. However, in doing so, the organization should take into account all information that is reasonably available. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the market in which an entity would enter into a transaction to sell an asset or transfer a liability is considered to be the market from which fair value is calculated. Of course, the listed regulations are due to the need for rational accounting. At the same time, such rules, from the author's point of view, lead to subjectivity in determining fair value, since different organizations can enter into a transaction in different markets. Consequently, the fair value of the same accounting item, formed by these organizations, may differ significantly.

In addition, it is not clear from the above IFRS requirements how exactly to strike a balance between using all reasonably available information and conducting an exhaustive search of all possible markets to calculate fair value. As a result, entities may not take into account all available data, which will not allow a reliable assessment of fair value. Given the desire of entities to reduce the cost of maintaining records, it can be assumed that there will be a deliberate omission of all reasonably available information, which will lead to a misstatement of fair value. Moreover, the listed rules of IFRS 13 open the possibility for organizations to use only the information that is beneficial to them. As a result, fair value may be deliberately misrepresented in order to achieve the intended result.

Another controversial issue in IFRS 13 is the regulation on determining the fair value of non-financial assets. Paragraph 30 of this Standard requires an entity to measure the fair value of those assets assuming their highest and best use by market participants, even though the entity itself may not use those assets to its highest and best use. The highest and best use, as defined in IFRS 13 Appendix A, is the use by market participants of a non-financial asset that is capable of maximizing the value of the asset or group of assets and liabilities (for example, a business) in which the asset would be used. According to the author, such rules can lead to an overestimation of the above-mentioned assets, and, consequently, to a violation of the prudence principle.

We also note some of the contradictions arising from the regulations of IFRS 13. Paragraph 19 of this standard states that since organizations engaged in different activities may have access to different markets, the markets on which fair value is determined for one and the same the same asset or liability may be different for different entities. Therefore, the market from which fair value is calculated, and therefore the market participants, needs to be considered from the entity's point of view, given the differences between entities engaged in different activities. According to the author, these requirements are contrary to the regulations of clause 2 of IFRS 13, according to which fair value is not an assessment formed taking into account the specifics of the organization. The rules listed in this International Standard need to be aligned with each other.

When examining the methodology for calculating fair value in international standards, it is necessary to pay attention to the absence in the IFRS system of uniform regulations for the formation of this type of assessment. Indeed, IFRS 13 does not apply to lease transactions and share-based payment transactions that fall within the scope of IAS 17 and IFRS 2, respectively. As a result, international standards contain different rules for calculating one and the same type of evaluation. To solve this problem, it seems appropriate to establish a unified methodology for the formation of fair value in the IFRS system.

Analyzing the requirements for calculating the above type of assessment, it should be noted that IFRS does not say who should determine the fair value: an accountant or an appraiser (or both). Relevant regulations should be included in international standards.

Referring to the activities of professional appraisers, we would like to draw your attention to the fact that the approaches to the calculation of fair value (market, cost and income) provided for by IFRS 13 fully coincide with the approaches to determining the market value contained in international valuation standards. But it is impossible not to recognize that International Valuation Standards (IVS) and International Financial Reporting Standards use different concepts to refer to the same valuation, determined on the basis of market, cost and income approaches: in IVS it is "market value", in IFRS it is " fair value". As argued above, fair value and market value are not synonymous. According to the author, the technique under consideration refers specifically to fair value. This suggests that the category "fair value" should be introduced into the International Valuation Standards, bringing it into line with the IFRS regulations.

All of the above, of course, should be taken into account when developing the Russian federal standard "Fair Value Valuation", as well as when improving the requirements of domestic valuation standards. For the above reasons, we believe that the requirements of this federal standard should be more detailed in comparison with the regulations of IFRS 13.

Problems of application of fair value in Russian and international accounting

IFRS 13 is the result of an attempt to bring IFRS and US GAAP closer together. Let's consider what this standard is and what requirements it imposes on fair value measurement under IFRS.

Many IFRS standards require you to estimate the fair value of certain items. Let's just give examples: financial instruments; biological assets; assets held for sale; and many others.

In the past, standards have provided limited guidance on how to determine fair value. The rules applied to all standards and their application was often highly controversial.

Finally, IFRS 13 Fair Value Measurement was published. Among other things, IFRS 13 is the result of an attempt to converge IFRS and US GAAP, and at present, the rules for measuring fair value in IFRS and US GAAP are practically the same.

So, let's see what this standard is.

What is IFRS 13?

The objectives of IFRS 13 are:

• determination of fair value;
• formation of a unified IFRS concept for measuring fair value; as well as
• requirement to disclose information on fair value measurements.

Fair value is a market indicator, and not the result of the valuation of specific objects.

This means that the company:

• should be based on how market participants will value assets or liabilities;
• should not take into account its own approach to evaluation.

What is fair value?

Fair value (FV, from the English "fair value") is the selling price of an asset or settlement of a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.

Fair value corresponds to the market concept exit prices.

When an entity performs a fair value measurement, it must determine all of the following:

• specific asset or liability, which needs to be estimated (according to its unit of account);
• for a non-financial asset - justification for the estimate(i.e. justification for the best and most efficient use of the asset);
• main (or most profitable) market for that asset or liability;
• suitable evaluation methods, Considering:
  • data availability to develop the assumptions that market participants use in determining the price of an asset or liability; as well as
  • level fair value hierarchy, within which the source data are classified.

asset or liability.

An asset or liability measured at fair value may be:

• separate an asset or liability (for example, a security or a pizza oven)
• group assets, a group of liabilities, or a group of assets and liabilities. For example, a majority stake with more than 50% of the voting power in a company, or a cash generating unit (CGU) that is a pizzeria.

An asset or liability (whether individual or group) depends on its unit of account. The unit of account is determined in accordance with another IFRS that requires or permits fair value measurement (for example, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets).

When measuring fair value, an entity considers the characteristics of the asset or liability that a market participant would take into account when pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date.

These characteristics include, for example:

• the condition and location of the asset;
• restrictions on the sale or use of the asset.

The concept of a deal.

Fair value measurement assumes that the asset or liability is subject to orderly transaction between market participants as of the valuation date under current market conditions.

Regular deal.

A deal is considered normal when it has 2 key components:

• market participants have the opportunity to obtain sufficient information about the assets or liabilities necessary to complete the transaction;
• market participants are motivated to trade assets or liabilities (not forced).

Market participants.

Market participants are buyers and sellers in the principal or most advantageous market for an asset or liability with the following characteristics:

• independent;
• knowledgeable;
• capable of entering into transactions;
• willing to make deals.

The main or most profitable market.

A fair value measurement assumes that a transaction to sell an asset or transfer a liability takes place either:

• in the main market for that asset or liability; or
• in the absence of a main market - in the best market for an asset or a liability.

Main market ("principal market") is the market with the highest volume and level of activity for the asset or liability. Different organizations may have different primary markets, as a company's access to a particular market may be limited.

most advantageous market") is the market that maximizes the amount to be received from the sale of an asset, or minimizes the amount to be paid on the transfer of a liability, after accounting for transaction and transportation costs.

Application of the standard to non-financial assets.

The fair value of a non-financial asset is measured based on its most efficient and best use from a market participant's point of view.

Highest and best use means the use of an asset that:

• physically possible- it takes into account the physical characteristics that market participants will take into account (for example, the location or size of the property);
• legally admissible- it takes into account legal restrictions on the use of the asset, which market participants take into account (for example, zoning rules); or
• financially feasible- it considers whether the use of the asset results in income or cash flows that allow for an adequate investment return from the point of view of market participants.

The best use of a non-financial asset may be to use it alone or in combination with other assets and/or liabilities (as a group).

When the highest and best use relates to a group of assets/liabilities, synergies associated with that group may be reflected in the fair value of an individual asset in several ways, for example, by adjusting valuation techniques.

Application of the standard to financial liabilities and own equity instruments.

The fair value measurement of a financial or non-financial liability or an entity's own equity instrument assumes that the asset or instrument is transferred to a market participant on the measurement date, without settlement or cancellation.

An entity determines the fair value of a liability or equity instrument based on market price of an identical instrument, if any.

If a quoted market price for an identical instrument is not available, the fair value measurement depends on whether whether the liability or equity instrument is held (accounted for) by the other party as an asset or not:

• If the liability or equity instrument is accounted for by the other party as an asset, then:
  • if there is a quoted price in an active market for an identical instrument held by another party, then that is used (adjustments are possible for asset-specific factors, but not for liability/equity instrument);
  • if there is no quoted price in an active market for an identical instrument held by the other party, then other valuation methods are used.
• if the liability or equity instrument is not accounted for as an asset by another party, then the valuation method applicable from the market participant's point of view is used;

This confusing algorithm can be illustrated with the following simplified diagram:

The fair value of the liability reflects the impact non-performance risk. Those. it is the risk that the company will default on its obligation.

The risk of default includes own credit risk, but is not limited to them.

For example, default risk may be reflected in different interest rates for different borrowers due to their different credit ratings. As a result, they will have to discount the same liability at a different discount rate, so the present value of the liability will be different.

Restrictions on the transfer of a liability or equity instrument.

An entity shall not include a separate input or adjustment to other inputs that is associated with a potential limitation that prevents the liability or equity instrument from being transferred to someone else.

Repayment on demand.

The fair value of the liability since redemption on demand ("demand feature") must not be less than the amount payable on demand, discounted from the first date payment can be called.

Application of the standard to financial assets and financial liabilities with offsetting positions.

IFRS 13 requires an entity to make market valuations rather than valuations based on the entity's own data. However, there exception to this rule:

If an entity manages a group of financial assets and financial liabilities on the basis of their NET exposure to market or credit risks, an entity may measure the fair value of that group on a net basis, as follows:

• The price that will be received from the sale of a net long position (asset) for a particular risk, or
• The price that will be paid to transfer a net short position (liability) for a particular risk.

This is an arbitrary assessment option, and the company does not have to follow it. To apply this exemption, a company must meet the following conditions:

• It must manage a group of financial assets/liabilities based on their net exposure to market/credit risk in accordance with a documented risk management or investment strategy,
• It provides information about a group of financial assets/liabilities to key management personnel,
• It measures these financial assets and liabilities at fair value on the statement of financial position at the end of each reporting period (but not at amortized cost or on any other basis of measurement).

Fair value at initial recognition.

When an entity acquires an asset or incurs a liability, the price paid/received or the transaction price is entry price.

However, IFRS 13 defines fair value as the price to be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability, and this exit price.

In most cases, the transaction (entry) price is equal to the exit price or fair value. But there are situations where the transaction price is not necessarily the same as the exit price or fair value:

• the transaction takes place between affiliated parties;
• the transaction occurs under pressure or the seller is forced to accept the price of the transaction;
• the unit of account represented by the transaction price is different from the unit of account for the asset or liability measured at fair value;
• the market in which the transaction takes place is different from the main or most profitable market.

If the transaction price differs from fair value, the entity must recognize the resulting gain or loss, unless another IFRS specifies otherwise.

Methods for estimating fair value.

When determining fair value, an entity should use valuation techniques:

• appropriate in the circumstances;
• for which there are sufficient data necessary to measure the fair value;
• that make the most of the observed input data;
• that make minimal use of unobservable input data.

The valuation techniques used to measure fair value are applied consistently from period to period.

However, the company can change the valuation method or its application if, in the circumstances, the change results in the same or a more representative fair value.

An entity accounts for a change in valuation method in accordance with IAS 8 in respect of a change in accounting estimate.

IFRS 13 allows for three measurement approaches:

• Market approach ("market approach"): it uses prices and other significant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable (i.e. similar) assets, liabilities, or a group of assets and liabilities;
  [cm.

  IFRS 13 defines fair value hierarchy, which classifies the input data for estimation methods into 3 levels. The highest priority is given to the level 1 source data, and the lowest priority is given to the level 3 source data.

  The company should maximize the use of Tier 1 inputs and minimize the use of Tier 3 inputs.

  Level 1

  Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities to which the entity has access at the measurement date.

  The company should not make adjustments to market prices. An exception is allowed only in certain circumstances, for example, when the quoted price does not reflect fair value (ie, when a significant event occurs between the valuation date and the quoted date).

  Level 2

  Level 2 inputs differ from the quoted prices included in Level 1. However, they remain observable - they can be observed directly or indirectly in relation to the asset or liability.

  Level 3

  Level 3 inputs are unobservable for the asset or liability.

  An entity shall use Level 3 data to measure fair value only when relevant observable data is not available.

  The following diagram describes the fair value hierarchy, along with examples of inputs to valuation techniques:

  Fair value disclosure.

  IFRS 13 requires wide disclosure enough information about:

  • valuation methods and inputs used to measure fair value both on a recurring (periodic) basis and for a one-time valuation;
  • the effect on profit or loss or other comprehensive income of periodic fair value measurements using significant Level 3 inputs.

  Recurring fair value measurements reflected in the statement of financial position at the end of each reporting period (for example, financial instruments).

  Non-recurring fair value measurements recognized in the statement of financial position in certain circumstances (for example, an asset held for sale in accordance with IFRS 5).

  Since the disclosures are indeed extensive, here are examples of minimum disclosure requirements:

  • fair value estimate at the end of the reporting period;
  • reasons for the assessment (for a one-time assessment);
  • the level of classification in the fair value hierarchy,
  • description of the assessment methods used and input data;
  • and many others.

The concept of "fair market value" is known to domestic accountants from international theory and practice. In Russian accounting regulations, a term similar in meaning is used. PBU contains the concept of "current market value". However, the rules do not contain a clear definition of it. Moreover, there are no recommendations for its evaluation. In this issue, foreign theory and practice of accounting is significantly ahead of the domestic one. In IFRS, the IFRS 13 standard was relatively recently introduced. It defines . Let's consider some provisions of the standard.

Definition

Fair value is the amount that can be received when selling fixed assets or paid when transferring obligations in ordinary transactions between participants in the turnover at the measurement date. It is worth saying that earlier in the standard there was a different definition. This is not to say that the new section has completely changed it. However, in IFRS 13 the concept is significantly expanded and clarified. From the previous definition, it was not clearly clear - the amount of purchase or sale. Questions arose during the preparation of IFRS 3. During the process, it became clear that under US GAAP, fair value is the amount of the exit (sale), while in IFRS it was an indicator of the exchange - purchase (entry). Another ambiguity was related to the date on which the measurement is taken.

exit price

According to IFRS 13, fair value is exit amount. That is, it is an indicator of demand, not supply. Exit price - the amount that the seller will be able to receive, and not the amount at which he would like to sell something. Price and value- different indicators. And the latter is of practical importance. The same rule applies to obligations. What is cost in this case? It is the amount that the creditors expect to accept as repayment, and not the amount that the debtor would like to pay for getting rid of the obligation. As part of the active turnover may differ. This is especially true for operations with exchange-traded securities and other financial instruments.

Nuances

Fair value is the amount that is determined by the expectations of future cash flows (outflow and inflow) associated with property or liabilities from the point of view of the participants in the turnover who own them at the measurement date. There are two ways to get finance. An asset or liability can be used or sold. Even if the participant will operate the property, the exit price will be determined by the expected flow from the sale of it to the subjects who, after the acquisition, will receive money from the use. In other words, any person, when acquiring an asset, will pay only for those benefits that he expects to receive later. Exit price is thus always the relevant definition of fair value. It does not matter whether the company intends to use the property or sell it.

SFO 16

In this standard, it is allowed to use 2 models of accounting for fixed assets: at cost and operating cost. The first is considered traditional. It is used in asset accounting in all national systems. The second model assumes the reflection of objects at a revalued cost. The corresponding procedures should be carried out with such frequency, which is sufficient to ensure that at any time the OS does not differ much from the exit price. This model has a rationale. In developed countries, the annual rate of inflation is insignificant. In this regard, its impact on the value of assets can be neglected. However, for fixed assets with a long period of use, the inflationary effect will accumulate over time. objects at cost will lead to the fact that the balance sheet will contain a lot of "heterogeneous indicators". Regular inventory of fixed assets will bring their cost to the same denominator. It is believed that this will give greater reliability to the reflection of objects in the reporting.

IAS 38

These standards also allow the use of 2 accounting models. However, unlike OS, there is one condition under which an intangible asset can be applied fair value. This active turnover. This is due to the following. The cost of intangible assets in an active market will be fair - the one that is used for accounting purposes. This means the recognition of unrealized losses or gains from a decrease / increase in the property's value. They are included in other general income. These amounts do not appear in the income statement. Upon disposal of revalued assets, the entire revaluation accumulated on them is written off to retained earnings.

IAS 41

This standard defines the recognition of a special type - biological. Their feature is the process of transformation - growth, reproduction, degeneration. These phenomena cause quantitative or qualitative changes. The standard requires biological assets and agricultural produce to be accounted for at fair value, less costs to sell at the harvest date. Thus, the results of the transformation are reflected from the moment they appear. In accordance with the traditional model, changes in such assets are shown not when they occur, but when they are realized. This period for some types of products can last up to several years or decades. If revenue is recognized at the moment of completion of the biotransformation, and expenses arise evenly throughout its entire period, then the principle of correlation of income and costs will be violated. Consequently, the financial result is also distorted. The IASB notes that biotransformation is a unique and fundamental feature of bioassets. In this regard, reporting should be carried out as soon as it occurs. Only in this case will it allow users to best analyze the financial results and future prospects of an enterprise engaged in agricultural production.

Investment property

IAS 40 is dedicated to it. Such real estate is objects that are held to receive rental payments from them or capital gains (not for sale or use for production purposes). The standard states that such property should be carried at fair value at each reporting date, with changes in value for the period recognized in the income statement. It should be taken into account that in a number of states the turnover of real estate is not very active. Accordingly, the valuation of assets is significantly more difficult. For such cases, the Board provides an opportunity to choose an accounting model, as in IAS 16.

Exceptions

IFRS 13 is used when other standards allow or require fair value measurements. However, there are exceptions. These include:

The latter, in particular, include net realizable value, in accordance with IFRS 2, as well as value in use, according to standard 36. Net realizable value is the amount that an enterprise expects to receive from the sale of its inventories in the ordinary course of business.

Fairness in pricing is a somewhat ambiguous term. The correct valuation of the company's assets is very important for many aspects of its activities. It is important that the assessment is not only correct, but also meets the requirements for a particular asset, because they can be different. Each method of determining the cost has its own characteristics and scope, which does not always allow making an unambiguous conclusion for those interested in this information. The way out of the situation may be a fair assessment.

How this type of asset valuation differs from others, what are its characteristic features and, in general, how to deal with fair value, we analyze in this article.

Fair value as an economic concept

Asset valuation is needed in many business situations. It should reliably reflect the state of affairs at the current time, although the market situation is constantly changing. The results of the assessment should be easily interpreted in relation to the interests of different categories of persons. There are different types of assets that can be valued:

• separate objects;
• assets;
• obligations.

IMPORTANT! Determination of fair value is not related to the mandatory valuation required by law and regulations in certain cases, such as, for example, privatization or non-cash contribution to the share capital. The state does not regulate fair assessment procedures.

fair value(English “fair value”) is the amount that theoretically interested parties can pay for assets or liabilities (13 IFRS Standard).

Fair value characteristics:

• a specific object is being evaluated;
• the categories of this object that are important for market participants are taken into account (for example, the place, time of the transaction, the state of the asset, the debtor's credit risks for the obligation);
• a fair estimate is affected by possible restrictions on the sale or purchase of an asset or its use.

Purpose of applying fair value

Reflection in reporting according to international standards (IFRS) of the actual current price of assets and liabilities of the company is necessary for:

• activities in international markets;
• attraction of foreign investors;
• lending in foreign banks;
• creation of joint ventures;
• acquisitions and mergers;
• an increase in the company's cost of capital.

When Fair Value Applies

P. 1, Art. 11 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation dated November 21, 1996 No. 129-FZ “On Accounting”, as amended on March 28, 2002, approves the parameters for assessing assets for entering them into the balance sheet separately for each type. For assets acquired for a fee, you need to apply:

• measurement at fair value, if the asset was paid for in non-cash form;
• market valuation - with a standard sale.

A more accurate translation from the IFRS Standard from English into Russian would be the use of the word “measurement” instead of “estimate”, since we are originally talking about non-financial assets.

IMPORTANT! If the value of the non-monetary funds given in exchange for an asset cannot be measured, a fair valuation will become difficult, and then they will have to be measured at current market value.

Fair value or market value?

These concepts are largely similar, sometimes a fair assessment coincides with the market one (for example, for real estate, land plots, equipment). market value most often they consider the most expected price that would be paid for it in the presence of free competition.

However, there are significant differences between these concepts. Let's compare the fair and market values ​​for different indicators in the table. In this case, the other default conditions will be considered equal:

• awareness of the seller and buyer of the asset;
• they make a deal of their own free will, without coercion;
• their positions in the market are approximately equal.

Fair value calculation

The fair value standard divides the information from which it is derived into three levels.

Level 1, market. The most reliable and obvious. A non-financial asset is valued at the cost of the same in an active market at a given point in time (valuation point).

Level 2, corrective. When an asset or liability is not permanent, but relates to a certain period, then its value can only be determined in this period, compared with quotes at the moment. Therefore, the fair value will no longer be unconditional, but adjusted for the time, place, condition of the asset and market features.

Level 3, unobservable. Sometimes the data to determine the value of an asset or liability cannot be directly determined (they are unobservable), in which case it is necessary to analyze the maximum amount of information available about the asset.

A fair valuation of an asset would be at one of these levels:

• the first level determines the undoubted assessment;
• the second and third require additional methods of evaluation and choice conditioning;
• at the third level, it is necessary to provide information related to the assessment: changes in the reporting period, the amount of costs and profits for this asset for the period under assessment, a description of the assessment process.

Choice of Approach to Measuring Fair Value

1. Comparison with similar assets on the market according to the defining indicators: in the period under evaluation, in the same volume, etc.
2. – finding out the ability to make a stable profit from the asset in the forecast for the estimated period.
3. Cost method– based on an analysis of the latest balance sheet values.

Examples of application of fair value

Example 1 The woodworking company currently has boards in abundance. She is in dire need of milling equipment and has agreed to exchange it for a surplus of raw materials. How to determine the amount to be transferred in payment for the machine? To do this, you need to "add up the price" of this asset. This is just his fair assessment. For evaluation, it is necessary to take into account the cost of raw materials for this particular company. If the company has regular suppliers, then the fair value will be the sum of the cost of purchasing a lot of boards of the same volume from these suppliers. In fact, this will be the amount that the owner of the milling equipment will agree to accept in exchange.

Example 2 Company 1 has a stake in company 2, which is currently dormant. Previously, they were highly quoted in the market. At what price can the company sell them now? A fair assessment does not depend on the previous, no longer relevant quotes (market valuation), but on other factors, in particular, whether firm 2 is going to resume its activity and how successful the forecasts are.

Example 3 The company is going to conclude a deal with specialized property - part of the company's property complex. On the market, such property is almost never sold separately, so the fair value will have to be determined differently than the market value.