Skip to content
site banner

IPSASB Tangible Natural Resources Exposure Draft Survey

Maximum 255 characters

0/255

Maximum 255 characters

0/255

Maximum 255 characters

0/255

EXPOSURE DRAFT 92, TANGIBLE NATURAL RESOURCES

Specific Matter for Comment 1: Scope (paragraphs 3-5)

This Exposure Draft is broadly applicable to all tangible natural resources which are not within the scope of any other existing IPSAS. (See paragraphs 3-4, BC7, and BC34.)  


4.  

Do you agree with the proposed scope?

Specific Matter for Comment 2: Definition (paragraph 6)

This Exposure Draft defines a tangible natural resource as an item which is naturally occurring and embodies service potential, or the capability to generate economic benefits, or both, and a tangible natural resource as a natural resource with physical substance.

7.  

Do you agree with the proposed definition? If not, why not?

Specific Matter for Comment 3: Depreciation (paragraph 24)

This Exposure Draft includes a rebuttable presumption that the tangible natural resources recognized within the scope of this [draft] IPSAS have indefinite useful lives on the basis that they are generally not used or consumed in the same manner as tangible assets within the scope of other IPSAS. Therefore, these tangible natural resources are not depreciated.

9.  

Do you agree with the proposed rebuttable presumption that tangible natural resources should not be depreciated? If not, why not?

Specific Matter for Comment 4: Exemption from Certain Disclosures (paragraph 52)

As explained in paragraph BC31, this Exposure Draft exempts an entity from disclosing certain information which may lead to further degradation of tangible natural resources which are rare or endangered.


11.  

Do you agree with the proposed disclosure exemption? If not, why not?

Specific Matter for Comment 5: Cross-references to IPSAS 45, Property, Plant, and Equipment (paragraphs 15 and 54)

This Exposure Draft includes cross-references to the guidance in IPSAS 45 on the determination of cost in an exchange transaction and the disclosure requirements for current value. This guidance was incorporated by cross-reference as the acquisition of tangible natural resources is expected to be rare in the public sector, and there is familiarity with the principles on the determination of cost, which are consistent with those found in IPSAS 45.

13.  

Do you agree that these cross-references are sufficiently clear? If not, how should the above guidance be incorporated into the Final Standard?

Specific Matter for Comment 6: Transition (paragraph 60)

This Exposure Draft allows the application of its requirements on a modified retrospective approach, by recognizing tangible natural resources that meet the recognition criteria on the date of initial application at their deemed cost, or on a full retrospective basis in accordance with IPSAS 3, Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors.


15.  

Do you agree that the option to apply the proposed guidance on a moderate retrospective basis will result in useful information?

Specific Matter for Comment 7: Amendment to the Description of ‘Heritage Asset’ in IPSAS 45, Property, Plant, and Equipment (Appendix B)

The IPSASB proposes to amend the description of ‘heritage assets’ in IPSAS 45 so heritage assets which are also tangible natural resources are accounted for within the scope of this [draft] Standard.

17.  

Do you agree with the proposed amendment? If not, why not?

Specific Matter for Comment 8: Sufficiency of Proposed Implementation Guidance and Illustrative Examples

The non-authoritative guidance in this [draft] Standard was developed for topics that are potentially complex and difficult to apply in practice, are areas of concern for constituents, or where additional non-authoritative guidance could be useful.

19.  

Do you agree that the proposed implementation guidance and illustrative examples are sufficient? If not, what other topics would be helpful?